this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
-16 points (26.5% liked)

Skeptic

1358 readers
46 users here now

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Things we don't like:

Other communities of interest:

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
acosmichippo
kabe
-16
Are trans women actually as scary as cis men? (aella.substack.com)
submitted 2 months ago by BitSound to c/skeptic
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Fairly simple post, just a few statistics/charts from a single survey. Anyone have an opinion on this?

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FlyingSquid 13 points 2 months ago

It's a bad question.

Have you ever had a sexual experience with someone else who did not want the experience?

And you knew that they didn't want it? This doesn't include consensual nonconsent, such as roleplaying an abduction.

People have consensual sex with their partners even if they aren't interested because their partner wants to and even though they don't want to, they're okay with their partner getting off. That is not sexual assault, that is just how some relationships go.

"Didn't want it" is not the same as "didn't consent."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Needed a follow up for people that answered yes, "did you realize it before, during, or later? If later, how much later?" Young people are oblivious to their own feelings and the feelings of others. According to the down-votes, are trans women supposed to be the exception or something?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

aella?

Isn’t she an only fans person who went on Lex Fridmann podcast (the dude who is now a right wing nutjob friends with Rogan Trump and Musk).

Her “data science” has always been shit lol she never even accounts for response bias.

[–] acosmichippo 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

firstly, I did get a report to remove this post (which I understand and considered), but I think it's worthwhile to point out to people why you have to think critically about articles like this.

Substack really isn't the venue for such controversial and possibly damaging work to be done. This desperately needs peer review to examine the survey methodology and data interpretation before we draw any conclusions like the author did.

Surveys are extremely complicated because it's so easy to bias with the selection of the respondents, how you phrase the questions, and all kinds of other things. While the author clearly did put some effort into that, we don't know their qualifications (as far as I can tell "Aella" is a pseudonym), and even if we did sometimes qualified people make mistakes. That's the value of peer review - other experts can examine the process and offer feedback before it gets published.

Publishing such conclusions all on your own is (at best) unintentional fear mongering that can hurt real people.

[–] BitSound -1 points 2 months ago

Thanks. I'm not intending to push anything here. She has some other interesting articles and I came across this one on her blog while I was reading those. Didn't really see any discussion online about it, and thought this would be a good community for evaluating the claims. I'm coming from a place where I think stuff like this that tries to make concrete claims from data is best discussed and picked apart, especially since it didn't come across as bad faith to me, but I can understand that might not be a view shared by everyone.