If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m an asshole, it’s pretty much what I’m best at being.
“Transgender people have a 1-in-12 chance of being murdered, compared to the 1-in-18,000 chance faced by average Americans (Human Rights Campaign, 2009).”
just let that sink in for a second.
This is misleading, for starters there is a small population of transgendered people, meaning it is much easier to get a higher per capita number.
Also how do you define average? Has this research been done by the author of the article/paper? A better representation would have been to include more than two groups, for instance, the same chances for homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, and asexuals, instead you have one minority being compared to the collective whole, assuming this research was done properly and the “average” Americans don’t actually include transgendered people as well (a common mistake in statistical analysis, which leads to data manipulation). To give an example of what I mean, it’s similar to saying the chances of being murdered if you’re African-American are 1-in-15 (made up statistic for arguments sake) and the chances of being murdered if you’re an “average” (meanly any other ethnicity, I’m assuming) American is 1-in-550000. Do you see the issue with grouping data in such an improper way?
Furthering the point of definition, how is the act of murder being defined? Is it a violent murder, that may suggest sexism (unsure if this is the proper word, certainly wasn’t the word I was looking for) or are they defining murder as the act of one person causing the death of another (such as a car accident, or even a mugging with no motive)?
People need to realise that data can be manipulated to convey whatever message the researcher wants it to, and I’d bet my bottom dollar on the fact that statistics used by these (for lack of a better word) human-interest groups (such as LGBT rights, animal rights, gender equality, etc.) that are profiting off their supporters are manipulating the data as much as they possibly can.
I’m not trying to belittle any causes or attack anyone, but using manipulated data to prove your point is ridiculous. Using these “facts” actually takes away from the cause itself to people who can recognise when it is happening.
The point of this I’m trying to get at, I guess, is that yes this is a terrible issue that needs to be resolved however it can be, but why do you need to compare tragic events as if to say one is worse than the other because of who it is happening to? Why not just say 1-in-12 transgender people will be murdered? That statistic within itself is shocking enough, that statistic within itself is powerful enough to cause action.
Another bonus of simply using relevant facts, like only saying the 1-in-12 statistic, will more than likely keep douchebags like myself from creating replies like this. I can’t really speak for others, but I would definitely had not felt the need to comment if it didn’t include the “average” Americans.
Evil Spirits Vodka by Saint Bernadine Mission Communications Inc.
This is pretty damn cool.
Russell Brand Destroys MSNBC Talk Show Host for Treating Him Like Shit
“Casual objectification” is an excellent term for not only what these people were doing to him, but for pretty much the entire institution of “celebrity.”
Also, Russell Brand is very funny. These people have no idea how to handle intelligent discourse blended with humor. They are speaking very different cultural languages. It’s a fascinating thing to watch.
Apparently in the wizarding world dying is not the worst thing you can do