dad4 you made my day. Now you are the one challenging the bias in the studies. I love it. Thank God this day has come.
I love it crush! You made me laugh our loud! That was very funny.
I love making people laugh. Thanks for dopamine. I was running low. If I get "likes" and "laughs" it keeps me going.
Back to the Nazis. Yes, those assholes treated homosexuals like shit. These dudes are not gay. You did see Shawshank Redemption, right? Poor Andy had to dea with those animals for years and it wasn't pretty. Sometimes Andy would get the upper hand and at other times he had to take it. We're talking Bogs and Rooster here in scientist suites doing experiments on humans. These are wild animals that are not 100% human. Half wolf and half human. Deep shit but were waking up to these monsters. These same liars came over to America after WW2 as scientists that started NASA among other things and helped with big pharma and their big experiments on us. Admiral Byrd went hunting for them and was killed for it.
stanmed.stanford.edu
BTW the way I'm so happy this day has finally come and you get hoisted on you own petard. Thank you God! Owe you one!How men's and women's brains are different
The cognitive differences between men and women
O.k. I'll have to do the remedial and walk you through the socratic dialogue. See above. It's pretty well established that there are observable, physiological differences in the brains between men and women. That's fact is beyond debate at this point. Setting aside the open question as to which differences are relevant and why which for our purposes are beside the point.
The studies which have been done on trans brains are observational. Why are they observational? For the same reason that the studies between mens and womens brains are observational. Because there isn't a blind RCT you can do here. The function of the study is to determine if they are different. That's all. Not the degree or significance of those difference.
Have they detected a difference? Yes. Is it measurable? Yes. How broad is it...for example do we have a No True Scotsman problem that this person is trans and therefore different but this person is not really trans? Yes. But is there a correlation, so that unusually, the brains of MTF trans seem to have female structures? Yes, and vice versa BTW. Would doing a RCT come to a different conclusion? No because the only thing we are doing is observing to see if there's a correlation and then saying "my that's interesting". Is it possible that because of the particular research that only those with an axe to grind are doing it? Yes, but here's the thing...the trans activist community hates this and has actually been working to not do the research. Why? Because it would bolster the case that it's under the disability rubric, and more scarily, might open the door to the same conclusions being drawn for gay individuals.
Furthermore, what other link are people now suggesting (but reluctant to explore) about trans individuals? Autism. Is the trans community happy with that possible link? No...the school shooting thing scares the bejeezus out of them. Why? Because then this isn't a trans issue but instead becomes an autism issue, again putting it under the disability rubric. Do you need a RCT to determine this? No because again it's an observational study in which we are trying to see if there is some correlation, nothing more.
Now take COVID. For your mask argument, an observational study in fact doesn't do it. Why? Because we want to see whether or not there is in fact a noticeable effect from the intervention, yet you and others were quick to trot out all those mannequin studies, despite other observational studies that showed the mask wasn't very effective unless it was an N95. So what's the difference? The difference is you believed in one issue and not another, and that's not science, but religion.
Help me out translator.
Me: "if it's a highly political topic and they didn't blind the researchers, it goes into the dust bin"
My handydandy dad4 translator: "If it's something I disagree with, I'll find the excuse to put it into the dust bin."
Me: "Ah. Thanks translator."
p.p.s. progressive BTW also HATE HATE these studies, as outlined in the Stanford article because it undermines the entire notion that the differences between gay/straight; classes; races; and gender (see what happened to Summers and women with math) are biological rather than cultural. The right hates it because it has nasty implications for genetic determinency and that precious meritocracy that Rawls criticized. The answer is yah both wrong...and that has profound implications from everything from politics, to sports, to economics to philosophy to jurisprudence. Which is why they are terrified of it.How men's and women's brains are different
The cognitive differences between men and women
O.k. I'll have to do the remedial and walk you through the socratic dialogue. See above. It's pretty well established that there are observable, physiological differences in the brains between men and women. That's fact is beyond debate at this point. Setting aside the open question as to which differences are relevant and why which for our purposes are beside the point.
The studies which have been done on trans brains are observational. Why are they observational? For the same reason that the studies between mens and womens brains are observational. Because there isn't a blind RCT you can do here. The function of the study is to determine if they are different. That's all. Not the degree or significance of those difference.
Have they detected a difference? Yes. Is it measurable? Yes. How broad is it...for example do we have a No True Scotsman problem that this person is trans and therefore different but this person is not really trans? Yes. But is there a correlation, so that unusually, the brains of MTF trans seem to have female structures? Yes, and vice versa BTW. Would doing a RCT come to a different conclusion? No because the only thing we are doing is observing to see if there's a correlation and then saying "my that's interesting". Is it possible that because of the particular research that only those with an axe to grind are doing it? Yes, but here's the thing...the trans activist community hates this and has actually been working to not do the research. Why? Because it would bolster the case that it's under the disability rubric, and more scarily, might open the door to the same conclusions being drawn for gay individuals.
Furthermore, what other link are people now suggesting (but reluctant to explore) about trans individuals? Autism. Is the trans community happy with that possible link? No...the school shooting thing scares the bejeezus out of them. Why? Because then this isn't a trans issue but instead becomes an autism issue, again putting it under the disability rubric. Do you need a RCT to determine this? No because again it's an observational study in which we are trying to see if there is some correlation, nothing more.
Now take COVID. For your mask argument, an observational study in fact doesn't do it. Why? Because we want to see whether or not there is in fact a noticeable effect from the intervention, yet you and others were quick to trot out all those mannequin studies, despite other observational studies that showed the mask wasn't very effective unless it was an N95. So what's the difference? The difference is you believed in one issue and not another, and that's not science, but religion.
Help me out translator.
Me: "if it's a highly political topic and they didn't blind the researchers, it goes into the dust bin"
My handydandy dad4 translator: "If it's something I disagree with, I'll find the excuse to put it into the dust bin."
Me: "Ah. Thanks translator."
Who is laughing at bullying? And when did African American players parachute into this conversation?
You used the specific words "target". Your word. Not mine. Assuming your daughter is a minor, it's disgusting. Not only that, if intentional and results in harm, even possibly criminal.
Who are you talking to with these replies... besides yourself?
Athletes hurting each other in competition is rarely ever criminal. Second, if a male hurts a female because he's wearing pink cleats and pretending to be female, he's as deliberate as anyone. Males don't have any business in female sports. Finally, who was trying to be funny about that? You don't know me from any parties. You're going off the rails again, making assumptions and putting words in people's mouths. I did say a man walking into a female restroom with my daughter in it is going to have problems if he doesn't immediately walk out. That's just a fact.
You used the word “target”. Your word not mine.
How men's and women's brains are different
The cognitive differences between men and women
O.k. I'll have to do the remedial and walk you through the socratic dialogue. See above. It's pretty well established that there are observable, physiological differences in the brains between men and women. That's fact is beyond debate at this point. Setting aside the open question as to which differences are relevant and why which for our purposes are beside the point.
The studies which have been done on trans brains are observational. Why are they observational? For the same reason that the studies between mens and womens brains are observational. Because there isn't a blind RCT you can do here. The function of the study is to determine if they are different. That's all. Not the degree or significance of those difference.
Have they detected a difference? Yes. Is it measurable? Yes. How broad is it...for example do we have a No True Scotsman problem that this person is trans and therefore different but this person is not really trans? Yes. But is there a correlation, so that unusually, the brains of MTF trans seem to have female structures? Yes, and vice versa BTW. Would doing a RCT come to a different conclusion? No because the only thing we are doing is observing to see if there's a correlation and then saying "my that's interesting". Is it possible that because of the particular research that only those with an axe to grind are doing it? Yes, but here's the thing...the trans activist community hates this and has actually been working to not do the research. Why? Because it would bolster the case that it's under the disability rubric, and more scarily, might open the door to the same conclusions being drawn for gay individuals.
Furthermore, what other link are people now suggesting (but reluctant to explore) about trans individuals? Autism. Is the trans community happy with that possible link? No...the school shooting thing scares the bejeezus out of them. Why? Because then this isn't a trans issue but instead becomes an autism issue, again putting it under the disability rubric. Do you need a RCT to determine this? No because again it's an observational study in which we are trying to see if there is some correlation, nothing more.
Now take COVID. For your mask argument, an observational study in fact doesn't do it. Why? Because we want to see whether or not there is in fact a noticeable effect from the intervention, yet you and others were quick to trot out all those mannequin studies, despite other observational studies that showed the mask wasn't very effective unless it was an N95. So what's the difference? The difference is you believed in one issue and not another, and that's not science, but religion.
Help me out translator.
Me: "if it's a highly political topic and they didn't blind the researchers, it goes into the dust bin"
My handydandy dad4 translator: "If it's something I disagree with, I'll find the excuse to put it into the dust bin."
Me: "Ah. Thanks translator."
1. Observable differences: from an observable study it would be sufficient to conclude men are generally taller than women.
Btw my younger bro (who looked at these in depth for a case he handled a while back) points out that 2018-2020 was the time period in which gender fluidity came to the forefront…the notion that gender is a spectrum instead of poles. These studies put a dagger through gender fluidity, hence why they fell out of fashion in the lgbtq+ community around said time period.
You vomited that already. You're the one that implied I planned to target some sub 18-year old boy in lipstick. That's your imagination.
So when my son's FTM friend has to use women's bathroom (as an adult) because you believe it should be based on biological sex, are you going to beat the shit out of him? Because he looks like a dude and you'd have no clue he is female unless he provided a genetic test to you. Is that the new standard for using a bathroom, carrying a genetic test to show to guys like you so don't beat the shit out of a woman who looks like a man?
Oh please. I have a question. Why is the "B" in LBGQT identified as Bi? Bi to me means, I like to be with two genders because their are only two bro. T should just mean Tri, right? I actually know a guy that has a Three's Company relationship with two Bi girls. He's straight as an arrow but loves his set up.
What do you suggest that's a better alternative? If you're a FTM, go use the men's bathroom. You aren't fooling anybody but good luck getting that one stall. That's why you need a stall... because you're not a male. And my daughter isn't in that bathroom anyway. You want to lift your leg in the boy's urinal, have at it, because I'll be in there with my son.
