Ugh. This is the thing that motivates me to stop lurking and make an account. I resent that I am moved to interaction based on just the bad data aspect and statistics buffoonery that this particular bit of statistics chicanery caters to.
So alright. Here's the thing. Look at the data. Always when examining statistics, surveys, polls, whatever. Sample size. Look at the sample size.
Bam, 103 out of 30.4 million. Sample size total population of the sceptred island's wimmenz.
11,660 out of 29.5 million. Alright, good, this is parity. Population of men in the UK, etc.
Next sample? 92 out of 48,000. First red flag. Immensely different and more narrow sample size. I realize the definition can be jogged or massaged to say, 'no no, the sample sizes are all the same, self-declared people identifying by their genders.' But that is the chicanery that we decry from the left constantly. Do not fall for it.
Scroll down, another user, /M42D mentions it himself. He says, 'So 2,311 men per million then.' Which he keys in perhaps unknowingly onto the way to pitch this particular statistic and steal its thunder. We come at the numbers another way and we can say, 'Only 1 out of every 25 male sex offenders identifies as trans' maintaining and using our own definitions of what they are, just mentally ill men that robs this survey of its fangs.
I can go on but I've already written too much.
Guys don't fall for this stuff. We're better than it. This data can be used, but not like this.
Ugh. This is the thing that motivates me to stop lurking and make an account. I resent that I am moved to interaction based on just the bad data aspect and statistics buffoonery that this particular bit of statistics chicanery caters to.
So alright. Here's the thing. Look at the data. Always when examining statistics, surveys, polls, whatever. Sample size. Look at the sample size.
Bam, 103 out of 30.4 million. Sample size total population of the sceptred island's wimmenz.
11,660 out of 29.5 million. Alright, good, this is parity. Population of men in the UK, etc.
Next sample? 92 out of 48,000. First red flag. Immensely different and more narrow sample size. I realize the definition can be jogged or massaged to say, 'no no, the sample sizes are all the same, self-declared people identifying by their genders.' But that is the chicanery that we decry from the left constantly. Do not fall for it.
Scroll down, another user, /M42D mentions it himself. He says, 'So 2,311 men per million then.' Which he keys in perhaps unknowingly onto the way to pitch this particular statistic and steal its thunder. We come at the numbers another way and we can say, 'Only 1 out of every 25 male sex offenders identifies as trans' maintaining and using our own definitions of what they are, just mentally ill men that robs this survey of its fangs.
I can go on but I've already written too much.
Guys don't fall for this stuff. We're better than it. This data can be used, but not like this.