That Futurity article threw an infuriating curve ball. That 39% chance of disability is thought to be from discrimination and victimization? Uh huh. it couldn’t be from surgery complications, could it? Or puberty blockers or HRT? Hmmmm..... What in the ever loving actual fuuuuuck.
Absolutely. Thank you for pointing out the bad assumptions in the article. One of the reasons I included it is that the disparity seems, on the face of it, at least as likely to be a consequence of the medical treatments received as any kind of victimization. That seems so blindingly self-evident that ignoring it would be comical, if it wasn't so tragic.
That, and that we are never told what the actual data base is. How very convenient... And never mind that this doesn't seem to be a demographic who particularly avoids health care either. Spoiler: The only way the author could have identified people as "trans" in relevant statistics is when the were labelled "trans" in a statistic, i. e. are people with the medical diagnosis "Gender Dysphoria". Now, those are by definition people who have sought medical treatment...
Btw, this is the only way the author could have even gotten relevant data at all. To put it scientifically, here we have a strong selection bias. We have no idea if the group she labels as "trans" is in any way representative, and neither does the author of the study. She just claims that is the case, and a lot of people buy the sob story.
Now they're mind readers. Do people have any privacy left? The answer is, no Sir. They are telling us, grosso modo, that they infiltrate our thoughts and feelings wherever we are, whenever.
That Futurity article threw an infuriating curve ball. That 39% chance of disability is thought to be from discrimination and victimization? Uh huh. it couldn’t be from surgery complications, could it? Or puberty blockers or HRT? Hmmmm..... What in the ever loving actual fuuuuuck.
Absolutely. Thank you for pointing out the bad assumptions in the article. One of the reasons I included it is that the disparity seems, on the face of it, at least as likely to be a consequence of the medical treatments received as any kind of victimization. That seems so blindingly self-evident that ignoring it would be comical, if it wasn't so tragic.
That, and that we are never told what the actual data base is. How very convenient... And never mind that this doesn't seem to be a demographic who particularly avoids health care either. Spoiler: The only way the author could have identified people as "trans" in relevant statistics is when the were labelled "trans" in a statistic, i. e. are people with the medical diagnosis "Gender Dysphoria". Now, those are by definition people who have sought medical treatment...
Btw, this is the only way the author could have even gotten relevant data at all. To put it scientifically, here we have a strong selection bias. We have no idea if the group she labels as "trans" is in any way representative, and neither does the author of the study. She just claims that is the case, and a lot of people buy the sob story.
This is rapey. This is really rapey.
Now they're mind readers. Do people have any privacy left? The answer is, no Sir. They are telling us, grosso modo, that they infiltrate our thoughts and feelings wherever we are, whenever.