• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    306 months ago

    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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        106 months ago

        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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        66 months ago

        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.