So the one percent of people who are trans are going to fuck up medical statistics? That’s your pathetic excuse for these comments? The most generous one can possibly be with you here is to say that’s a huge stretch. It’s certainly a weird thing to focus on.
For not caring about what somebody identifies as you sure seem to care quite a bit. Your reasoning seems to be a bit obtuse. It sounds like concern trolling more than anything.
People lying on surveys and to doctors about a million other things has impacted medical data 37648383773838273738% more than this ever possibly could. I suppose you’re trying to do something about those people right? Hmm weird how that never once occurred to you. It’s almost like you’re looking for a justification for spreading subtle hatred.
You’re being rude. All the guy is saying is that it might affect data.
Does that make them a transphobe to say that male genetics has a higher chance for colon cancer and having it be tracked as a woman would dilute/fog up the data?
Science and data are objective. This guy just cares about numbers, not your sex and gender. Just the numbers of it.
Ironic that you’re defending a transphobe from that lemmy instance.
Yes, they are a transphobe. I read a dozen of their comments before making that conclusion. They are hiding behind a lie, it doesn’t fool me. I suspect you’re seeing what you want to see because you too are obsessed with strangers birth genitals
I’d argue it simply makes them a bad data scientist. Biology cares not for the categories we create to explain it, and the purpose of categorization is to make sense of what’s already in the world, not to prescribe how it should be. Exceptions exist everywhere, not just in trans people. If your modeling of the data is inaccurate because you only have a binary categorization of sex, that categorization is to blame, not the people who the data represents.
So ultimately, in medical studies, perhaps it’s important to note how you categorized your subjects’ sex, how that relates to the mechanisms of what you’re studying, and perhaps studying trans people’s data further can provide more insights e.g. how hormones affect a condition. Science and data is reliant on the narratives we use to inspect and describe it, and the less of our societal baggage we impose on that process, the better.
So the one percent of people who are trans are going to fuck up medical statistics? That’s your pathetic excuse for these comments? The most generous one can possibly be with you here is to say that’s a huge stretch. It’s certainly a weird thing to focus on.
deleted by creator
For not caring about what somebody identifies as you sure seem to care quite a bit. Your reasoning seems to be a bit obtuse. It sounds like concern trolling more than anything.
deleted by creator
People lying on surveys and to doctors about a million other things has impacted medical data 37648383773838273738% more than this ever possibly could. I suppose you’re trying to do something about those people right? Hmm weird how that never once occurred to you. It’s almost like you’re looking for a justification for spreading subtle hatred.
You’re being rude. All the guy is saying is that it might affect data.
Does that make them a transphobe to say that male genetics has a higher chance for colon cancer and having it be tracked as a woman would dilute/fog up the data?
Science and data are objective. This guy just cares about numbers, not your sex and gender. Just the numbers of it.
Ironic that you’re defending a transphobe from that lemmy instance.
Yes, they are a transphobe. I read a dozen of their comments before making that conclusion. They are hiding behind a lie, it doesn’t fool me. I suspect you’re seeing what you want to see because you too are obsessed with strangers birth genitals
Not anymore they’re not.
Did they get the ban hammer? ❤️
Big time!
Thanks for all you do!
De nada
I’d argue it simply makes them a bad data scientist. Biology cares not for the categories we create to explain it, and the purpose of categorization is to make sense of what’s already in the world, not to prescribe how it should be. Exceptions exist everywhere, not just in trans people. If your modeling of the data is inaccurate because you only have a binary categorization of sex, that categorization is to blame, not the people who the data represents.
So ultimately, in medical studies, perhaps it’s important to note how you categorized your subjects’ sex, how that relates to the mechanisms of what you’re studying, and perhaps studying trans people’s data further can provide more insights e.g. how hormones affect a condition. Science and data is reliant on the narratives we use to inspect and describe it, and the less of our societal baggage we impose on that process, the better.