Transsurdity of the Day: Vagina is for Trans; Front Hole, Cis

[CaptainCourtesy]

As usual you miss the point of the article. The author is mocking her stated regret by clearly pointing out her implied regret. Duh.

No, calamity, YOU missed the point of what Richards said. Just as you did when you lied about this the last time you posted it. I'm curious, calamity. You seem to be reposting stuff that I already decimated the last time you posted it. Do you actually think I'll forget?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I'd say it's more laughing. Laughing at the ridiculous arguments you and William are making and the hardcore confirmation biases the two of you are addicted to.

Nothing ever written here in DP, at least while I've been here, has been more ridiculous to see than watching the two of you arguing that projecting 90% satisfaction rates onto the 70% who dropped out of the study is somehow more rational than me calling that particular bait and switch routine bunk.

Since that's not what's happening, you must be laughing at yourself and your dishonest/stupid arguments. You've created the strawman and ignored the actual argument. Probably because you lost the actual argument months ago.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Nope. The article clearly shows the lady's regret. The fact that she twists herself sideways to deny saying she regrets the SRS, even though she has a long list of complaints with it, is only proof that the subjective studies you hang your hat on are total bull****.

The author of the article makes this perfectly clear. But, of course, that you would twist the reality of it to interpret the piece into saying what confirms your bias is not a surprise. Not at all.

I do understand that, because of your uneducated bias on this issue, you are incapable of reading an article like that one, honestly. Of course you completely missed what she said, what she regrets, why, and what she doesn't regret and why. I'd explain it to you, but you have no interest in listening or being honest about it, so I have no intention of doing anything other than reminding you of your dishonesty.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Yes you did. Here's what you wrote.



How would you conclude that >90% of all SRS have positive outcomes when 70% didn't answer the goddamned question? Oh, wait, I know how. You get there by...

As usual, you are being dishonest, calamity. In that post, William was responding to your inaccurate qualifier of "some". 90% is not "some". His response did not reference the study that you seem to be married to at all. You are also being dishonest because no one, other than you, has placed their position solely on that study. Contrarily, I... and William also, have placed our position on OTHER studies, studies that I have posted in the past. Studies that you have been unable to refute. Now, I challenge you to support some of the comments you have made in this thread. You have claimed that other studies have used biased questions in order to get the results that they did. PROVE IT. You have claimed that other studies have large drop out rates. PROVE IT. You substantiate nothing, calamity. You just make up lies. So, put your money where the foot in your mouth is. PROVE your claims.

 

[calamity]

Since that's not what's happening, you must be laughing at yourself and your dishonest/stupid arguments. You've created the strawman and ignored the actual argument. Probably because you lost the actual argument months ago.

Nonsense. Only 30 of 100 people remained in the study to the end. You can not take a small sampling of subjective responses to a series of questions and project that result to the whole. It's not like flipping a coin, where we can safely project the objective results from 30 flips to the 70 we did not count.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Nonsense. Only 30 of 100 people remained in the study to the end. You can not take a small sampling of subjective responses to a series of questions and project that result to the whole. It's not like flipping a coin, where we can safely project the objective results from 30 flips to the 70 we did not count.

More strawman arguments.

 

[calamity]

More strawman arguments.

More bias on your part. Face it--you do not know the satisfaction rate of the 70% who dropped out of the study.

Or, are you going to pretend that you know how they feel? Do tell.

 

[calamity]

I do understand that, because of your uneducated bias on this issue, you are incapable of reading an article like that one, honestly. Of course you completely missed what she said, what she regrets, why, and what she doesn't regret and why. I'd explain it to you, but you have no interest in listening or being honest about it, so I have no intention of doing anything other than reminding you of your dishonesty.

Hogwash.

I posted that article because you quote-mined it in the past. You dug up words you wanted to hear while ignoring the entire gist of the article. It was funny to see.

Richards is basically saying, "I still have a ****-ton of problems. But, since there was no other option, I can't say I have regrets." It's a bit like coming home at 2 AM, starving and half drunk, to see that all there is in the fridge is a week-old slice of pizza. You may not necessarily regret eating it because, after all, you were hungry as hell and had no better food options to choose from, but you sure as hell wish you didn't now have that stomach ache.

In a perfect world, the question to ask Renee would have been: If another option was available, would you have still had the SRS? And, to that question, she sort of did give an answer. And, that answer was "No."

 

[calamity]

As usual, you are being dishonest, calamity. In that post, William was responding to your inaccurate qualifier of "some". 90% is not "some". His response did not reference the study that you seem to be married to at all. You are also being dishonest because no one, other than you, has placed their position solely on that study. Contrarily, I... and William also, have placed our position on OTHER studies, studies that I have posted in the past. Studies that you have been unable to refute. Now, I challenge you to support some of the comments you have made in this thread. You have claimed that other studies have used biased questions in order to get the results that they did. PROVE IT. You have claimed that other studies have large drop out rates. PROVE IT. You substantiate nothing, calamity. You just make up lies. So, put your money where the foot in your mouth is. PROVE your claims.

:spin:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

More bias on your part. Face it--you do not know the satisfaction rate of the 70% who dropped out of the study.

Or, are you going to pretend that you know how they feel? Do tell.

calamity's dishonesty on full display in this thread. Constantly attacking a study that HE posted, ignoring all other information. True conspiracy theorist.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hogwash.

I posted that article because you quote-mined it in the past. You dug up words you wanted to hear while ignoring the entire gist of the article. It was funny to see.

Richards is basically saying, "I still have a ****-ton of problems. But, since there was no other option, I can't say I have regrets." It's a bit like coming home at 2 AM, starving and half drunk, to see that all there is in the fridge is a week-old slice of pizza. You may not necessarily regret eating it because, after all, you were hungry as hell and had no better food options to choose from, but you sure as hell wish you didn't now have that stomach ache.

In a perfect world, the question to ask Renee would have been: If another option was available, would you have still had the SRS? And, to that question, she sort of did give an answer. And, that answer was "No."

And yet, since there is no other option available... since this is reality we are discussing, not calamity's conspriracy tin foil hat world, she does NOT regret having SRS. If you recall, the LAST time you tried this, you got your ass handed to you. Apparently you enjoy having that happen, since you went and had it happen again.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

:spin:

So, as usual, you refuse to prove your claims. This is why you always get humiliated.

 

[calamity]

calamity's dishonesty on full display in this thread. Constantly attacking a study that HE posted, ignoring all other information. True conspiracy theorist.

Yeah, imagine that. I'm attacking the validity of a study that shows the 90% result you hold dear. Shocking :roll:

 

[calamity]

So, as usual, you refuse to prove your claims. This is why you always get humiliated.

Nonsense. My point in Post 1450 is clear as day. Anything else is spin.

 

[calamity]

And yet, since there is no other option available... since this is reality we are discussing, not calamity's conspriracy tin foil hat world, she does NOT regret having SRS. If you recall, the LAST time you tried this, you got your ass handed to you. Apparently you enjoy having that happen, since you went and had it happen again.

She certainly does not sound "satisfied." So, it goes to show that the sat rates you push are dubious at best. And, it goes a long way in backing up my argument on why people drop out of studies which try to extract yes-no answers out of them that they do not really feel comfortable giving.

 

[X Factor]

Thread's still going huh? Pretty impressive.

 

[TheGoverness]

Thread's still going huh? Pretty impressive.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Yeah, imagine that. I'm attacking the validity of a study that shows the 90% result you hold dear. Shocking :roll:

And you are overgeneralizing from it... and doing so while REFUSING to prove your claims. Just like a conspiracy theorist.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Nonsense. My point in Post 1450 is clear as day. Anything else is spin.

Post #1450 was classic calamity dishonesty. I dismantled it in post #1454. Post #1450 is worthless.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

She certainly does not sound "satisfied." So, it goes to show that the sat rates you push are dubious at best. And, it goes a long way in backing up my argument on why people drop out of studies which try to extract yes-no answers out of them that they do not really feel comfortable giving.

Prove any of those things. Oh, and since you are research disabled, here's how you must do it. You must find out EXACTLY why people dropped out of studies... by finding them and asking them. You also need to examine the exact questions from those studies. Looks like you've got a lot of wprk ahead of you, calamity. Better get moving.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Thread's still going huh? Pretty impressive.

When one of the participants involved is me, this is not surprising. I once argued with another poster about the meaning of ONE word (in context) for 3 months straight. No one can outlast me.

 

[calamity]

And you are overgeneralizing from it... and doing so while REFUSING to prove your claims. Just like a conspiracy theorist.

No. I pointed to a study in which 70% of the participants dropped out which showed a 90% satisfaction rate for those remaining. There is no way that such a study can be used to assert 90% of all SRS are satisfied. Pretty clear cut, IMO.

 

[calamity]

When one of the participants involved is me, this is not surprising. I once argued with another poster about the meaning of ONE word (in context) for 3 months straight. No one can outlast me.

You may have met your match. I'm a cyclist. Suffering endlessly for hours and hours, day after day, with very little gain to show for it, is what I do.

 

[calamity]

Post #1450 was classic calamity dishonesty. I dismantled it in post #1454. Post #1450 is worthless.

Nonsense. He made a claim. I shot it down. Decisively.

 

[calamity]

Prove any of those things. Oh, and since you are research disabled, here's how you must do it. You must find out EXACTLY why people dropped out of studies... by finding them and asking them. You also need to examine the exact questions from those studies. Looks like you've got a lot of wprk ahead of you, calamity. Better get moving.

No I do not. All I have to show is that 70% of the people did not say they were satisfied to prove that a claim stating that 90% of all SRS are satisfied is false. You know--since 70% quit the study, they clearly did not say they were satisfied. See how that works?

All you know for sure is that 90% who remained said they are satisfied, 10% said the opposite and that 70% of the total have unknown satisfaction rates.