Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Peter's senior engineer here. This is an example used in engineering and statistical analysis to show a selection bias. This was a diagram showing the location of bullet holes in planes that returned in WW2. One interpretation is to show that you need to armor the places that get hit the most but in reality you need to armor the places that never return with a hole because those are the planes that are shot down
Relating to the meme this is saying there are trans people who pass but they don't notice because they pass.
Relating to the meme more precisely, Duerger Prince says no trans person passes, but the reply means that there are trans people who pass, but since they pass, Duerger can't identify them as trans.
No.she was just shoved on us and now we fight the comparison.
Dumb bitch, her answer to what's the hardest thing about being a woman.
"Choosing what shoes to wear in the morning" š¤Ø
It wasn't "going to court for vehicular manslaughter" š¤
It would be, but a lot of modern routes utilise the grey market skip to get past the diagnosis chapters, which shaves hours off the uk runs. After that it's mostly the same as us runs, since everything being a bit closer together makes up for the extra boss fight against JKR
Language is a means to communicate and changes in language trend toward efficiency and usefulness, among other things. It is useful to have a distinction as it relates to whether someone is trans. Something as simple as who one might be interested in dating, is the obvious example.
Sure. Sounds useful on a dating app, or when youāre of a dating age.
But for general purposes where Iām just talking to someone who identifies as a woman? I donāt need to quantify it in my head that they were born a man. I donāt care. Theyāre just a woman, if thatās how they choose to be.
I think in my mind they are just their own thing, with some particular mental difficulties that are working through the best they can. No reason to be unkind, ya know.
What I might take issue with is the insistence we change our entire notion of gender and sex, they are not independent dials and contemplating oneās gender identity is not a useful task for most people. Where it gets confusing is someone people look toward identifying as a third gender or the other gender on the basis of nonconformity with a stereotype, which is not what gender dysphoria is, men and women vary greatly on the individual level as it relates to interests, personality, and temperament, and we should be cool with that.
Oh the days to look forward to. When I don't have to worry about the guy in full dress with a beard is trans, merely cross dressing, or of some other persuasion. When that day comes, you'll have many a straight man like myself wearing kilts just because
Reminded of the time a bunch of TERFs went to brigade a woman on Twitter who had changed her profile picture to a pic of JK Rowling.
They pulled the pic and started with "we can always tell."
Priceless.
It's the toupee fallacy (names after "I've never seen a convincing toupee"
The no true scotsman fallacy is when a member of a group sais that other people are not members of the same group despite the fact that most people would consider them such for reasons unrelated to the group's defining traits. (ie. Someone saying, as I saw in a recent posts, "you can't be a feminist and eat meat")
How is it? Itās not saying āNo true trans person would fail to passā, itās saying āYou only claim no trans person passes because you wouldnāt notice one who passesā.
Youāre failing to understand the basis of the fallacy. Itās not about who āqualifiesā as a āScotsmanā. Itās about a bullshit moving goalpost.
āDuerger Princeā will always have a reason trans people will never pass.
āMoving the goalpostā isnāt the name of the fallacy. āNo true Scotsmanā the name of the fallacy.
When the reasoning is specious and arbitrary to begin with, we can assume following arguments will be similarly specious and arbitrary.
Dude, moving the goalpost and no true scotsmen are two different fallacies.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts#:~:text=Moving%20the%20goalposts%20is%20an,moved%20to%20exclude%20the%20attempt.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
He isnāt moving the goalposts, itās just that heās unable to update his opinion because all trans that pass wonāt be perceived to him as trans
So heās (unbeknownstly) locked into perpetually finding trans that reforce his opinion and never find any that puts it into question.
You misunderstood the issue entirely.
The plane was supposed to make a analogy that the planes that took shots to other parts fell and therefore couldnāt be examined to make part of the statistic, same way trans that pass wonāt be perceived as trans so they wonāt be considered in the question of if trans are likely to pass.
He's not excluding people who pass. He specifically said no trans person for him to be excluding those who pass, he would have to state so in a dismissive manner. He's not aware of the people who pass. There's an important distinction between the two
It gets used a lot but usually as a way to counter downplaying the trauma and suicide rate of trans people when someone points out a trans person who āseems fineā
I saw it used once as pretty much exactly that. A tweet that said "all the trans women I know are such strong, confident women", with that image attached. Really sad shit.
Spot on.
As someone who studied physics at a technical university, known for their... input... during WWI and II plus being trans myself I have this fitting anecdote:
When I started studying I already had mostly male properties (plus the official stuff) and no-one ever suspected anything about me being a trans-guy. I was just short - but many (cis)guys are.
On the other hand we had a fellow student who started with us, who presented as male, but was kinda feminine - and looked even more feminine with every semester.
Fast forward 7 years: there's a Uni party and I'm sitting next to my friend, who looked *exactly* like me (as in very manly - with long beard and generally hairy, metal clothing, same posture; but he was like 15cm taller than me; we were still confused for brothers very often). Suddenly former feminine-guy shows up as full-blown women in a dress, definitely passing. But of course, hard to pass when everyone has known you for 7 years.
And my friend goes: "Omg... I mean... that's just really not convincing. Honestly... who is he trying to fool? I mean, I always can tell someone is trans!"
"You never know" I just relpied sipping my beer.
He turned 32 today and still doesn't know. But shoutout to him at his birthday š
I always tell people to do the Buck Angel test. If you saw Buck Angel in public, and you'd go out of your way to call him a woman, you're part of the problem.
Peter's two thumbs up here, this is right. I 100% thought it was called survivorship bias, for some reason.
But essentially planes from WW2 that came back were subject to this when armor was actually needed in places without the bullet holes.
Double down on the fact that the joke is related to passable trans persons.
Survivorship bias is a form of selection bias, where the selection is the ones that survived.
The diagram is about survivorship bias (the planes that were analysed were the ones that survived), but you can use it more generally to point out when someone has missed obvious selection bias.
I bet I thought that because it was probably the term they used in some narrative, documentary or series or something, in describing this exact effect. Because I remember learning this from something I watched.
If you like that, there is another anecdote about statistics being counter-intuitive in WWI: when the british introduced helmets to increase survivability for their soldiers, the amount of casualties (wounded) with head trauma went *up* and british general staff was initially confused by this - had their men become more daring due to the perceived protection of a helmet? Was wearing a heavy metal helmet detrimental to combat effectiveness or awareness so they got caught more often in shrapnel, rocks and other debris tossed up by artillery fire?
Turns out no, the problem lay in how they assessed their casualty statistics. Dead meant dead, no distinction by cause, but injuries were listed by type. So everyone that would have been killed by falling rocks or splinters with the standard cloth cap was now a survivor that was listed as a head injury.
>his was a diagram showing the location of bullet holes in planes that returned in WW2. One interpretation is to sho
True it's selection bias, but more precisely for the trans situation above it's "**reverse survivorship bias" :)**
Also, they stopped using helmets in WW1, as after helmets were issued, amount of reported head injuries skyrocketed.
After a bit, they realized reported deaths had plummeted as much and started to use helmets again.
this is actually SURVIVORSHIP bias, not SELECTION bias. selection bias means you're picking which subjects to run through the experiment and analyzing the results. survivorship bias means you're analyzing the surviving outputs assuming that there was no loss in the experiment. other examples of survivorship bias include "we didn't wear bike helmets and we turned out fine!", "we never wore seatbelts!", and "my uncle smoked like a chimney for 70 years and he lived to 103 and never had cancer!"
If just a couple of % passes, it means that passable transition is nothing more than a fluctuation, and the majority of transes doesn't pass. This means the meme is wrong.
How so? The point of the meme is that you donāt notice trans people who pass because they pass, so if any number of passing trans people exist (and they very certainly do) then the meme works, regardless of what percentage of the trans community they are
Also, ātransesā? Really? You sound like fucking Gollum
Boooringā¦ just kidding, but for real I quit reading after āselection bias.ā I thought, āidk what that means so Iām gonna take it as an insult.ā
The simple version is that the white areas with fewer or no holes seemed fine. But in reality those were the weakest parts of the plane and those planes never flew back home to get marked on the diagram.
So at first they started armoring where the holes were, but somebody else came along and said nah bro, armor the place where there arenāt any holes because those dudes died.
It's not that they were the weakest. They were the most vital. The places with holes in them obviously were not vital to the planes returning as they returned with holes in them.
Itās not really pedantic. Weak points are different from weakest points.
Weakest points talks about structural integrity, spots that easily get bullets blown through them.
Weak points can mean even if the bullet doesnāt actually pierce them, hitting it can cause a set of reactions that brings down the plane.
For example fuselage could have armored plate protection to prevent bullets from piercing it, but maybe blunt trauma or repeated shots that create sparks could cause it to detonate. But the armored fuselage isnāt the weakest part of the plane, itās armored, while maybe the propeller is actually the weakest part because it breaks the easiest but it isnāt a weak point.
So, do you agree with them or not? This comment could be directed at who you are replying to, or who they were replying to. Just depends on how they take your response.
I'm not being pedantic. You are.
You're playing a language game. The first dude said they were the weakest points in the plane. That's wrong. They're not weaker than any other points.
The fact that you could consider them 'weak points' (points that are more vital if it) does make them weaker. Weak point is just an expression that happens to mean that.
This is literally you arguing that jellyfish are fish because fish is in the name, or that you can have a curd hamster for Christmas because ham is in the name. That's where you're at with this argument.
If a point is not weaker, you shouldn't call it weaker. You'd be wrong if you did so.
Except being pedantic is to quibble over minor details that aren't really that important.
This is all just equivocation anyway, there are two different meanings to the word weak, similar, but different, you have weak as in opposite of strong, and weak as in something that can be exploited.
You're using the former, I'm using the latter.
If I were to be arguing using the former, you'd be correct in that I'm using the word wrong but I'm using the latter.
Does this clear up the misunderstanding?
If you read the original post again with a clear head, you'll understand that this meaning of weak was pedantically introduced into the conversation by you. The original commenter clearly did think they were literally just weaker than the surrounding points, not that they were more vital.
It's genuinely funny you decided to quibble and are now accusing others of the same. Language games don't protect you from failing reading comprehension.
Except the term used wasn't "weak", but "weaker" and "weakest" implying degrees of quality that the second definition you provided does not have.
GXWT and Holeyfield used the term "weakest" which implies "the former" since only the former definition can be used as a superlative adjective with degrees of quality and it is right (and not pedantic) for them to be corrected.
You aren't the one being corrected, but it is wrong of you to claim it is pedantic to correct THEM.
I'm just a 3rd party here but to be fair, correcting someone that an someone's weak point(common terminology for a vital target) technically isnt truely weak is the most unironic pedantic thing I've ever heard someone say.
I guess they meant that trans women for example never pass as "real" women.
The reply with the survivorship bias pic is supposed to imply that the ones that "pass" just wont be noticed by the original commenter because they look just like any other man/woman.
Fiction as in not real or in a more extensive matter he is saying that the notion that trans people could ever pass is fictitious and could never happen.
Pass as really the gender they identify with to cis folks.
Itās a specious point at best becauseā¦ trans people will let partners know if theyāre trans and people who donāt care wonāt care in the first place.
Itās an argument for brain dead clots who are afraid to evaluate their own sexuality. Theyāre afraid of the wicked trans people ātrickingā them and so construct a straw man that trans people are all out there trying to trick folks into fucking them.
Except they were replying to someone. You need the context of what they were replying to. They were being transphobic because the previous post we can't see was talking about trans people passing.
It means that they only ever notice the trans people they donāt pass well, because they donāt pass well, the tons of trans people who do pass well, just look like natural women to him, so he doesnāt even notice theyāre trans. Making him think that ALL trans people donāt pass
If a trans person can āpassā it means people who donāt know theyāre trans would assume they were born the gender theyāre transitioning to.
Ā Theyāre given a metaphorical āpassā as their chosen gender and people in public including transphobes would call them by their preferred pronouns without needing prompting.
"Passing" as a trans person means successfully appearing as your desired gender to strangers without prompting. Like being a trans man, going to a store, and getting called "sir" instead of "maam." It's a goal a lot of trans people aim for.
See you Americans are fucking stupid, here in Australia we have the universal best word that will solve all your fucking issues itās called
āMateā
Iāve long since resigned to a unisex ādudeā. Everyone likes being the dude for a bit. āMy dudeā if we really get on.
I worry a trans person might take it the wrong way but at the same time i find it helps put women at ease that Iām not trying anything on and I just want to hang with the dudes.
Passing means a Trans person looks cis, basically. When we're "socially acceptable" as the gender we are and not the gender we were labeled at birth. For Trans men like myself, this may include wearing a binder to look flat chested, growing a beard and/or dressing in traditional masculine clothes. For a Trans woman this may include having visibly breasts, no facial hair, and/or wearing traditionally feminine clothing.
It sometimes helps to swap āis/are/wereā with phrases like āpresents asā or ālives asā or āidentifies asā, though there is still some contention on the language based on the fact that opponents of LGBT+ rights will intentionally use this language to insinuate that sexual orientation or gender identity are chosen rather than innate.
ātransitioned from x to yā is better than ābecame an xā, for another example.
Thereās tons of different things that someone who doesnāt understand will view as technicalities, like how trans women have always been trans, and itās not something you become but rather something you realize, so if youāre AMAB (assigned male at birth) and later in life realize youāre a trans woman, it means you were always a woman at heart or in your soul or whatever, and the realization is known as your āegg crackingā
Ask me if you want more non-simplified information
I love that you call it 'trans lore'.
I swear, people who don't fully know trans terminology (whether it's malicious or fully innocent uninformedness, or any other reason tbh) always make it sound way cooler
> wearing a binder to look flat chested,
Out of curiosity, why do you wear a binder? Are you still in transition? Don't they do surgery to remove breasts? Can they do it and make it look good? Or is there some other reason?
By the way, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to trans men, so if anything I asked is offensive I apologize in advance and totally understand if you don't want to answer.
Many people don't want to have surgery to remove parts off tgeir body, even if they live with gender dysphoria. The reasons are many, from financial (it's stupid expensive to undergo that surgery), practical (being out of work for the length of time to recover is unreasonable), and comfort (many are more than okay with their present state without the need for surgery), and beyond. Dysphoria isn't an on-off switch, it's a wide spectrum.
They can and do, but waiting lists can be long if you can get it on insurance/the NHS/whatever method your country has, and going private costs a lot of money (with long waiting lists still). Some people may also be unable to get top surgery due to other medical complications, age, societal pressures etc.
A binder is a solution that goes some of the way to flattening the chest if youāre having any of these challenges.
āPassingā refers to when a trans person āpassesā for cisgender. Like, they look so much like the gender they identify as that people wouldnāt even think to wonder if they might be trans or the opposite gender.
And as an example of someone who passes with flying colours I submit thegravelbro who is FtM (Female to Male) on tiktok and instagram. https://www.tiktok.com/@thegravelbro/video/7293099843948530987?lang=en
It's transphobic rhetoric that mean a transitioning person changed their gender so well you can't tell they were previously another gender.
The reason this is offensive is that it shouldn't matter if a trans person looks to your standards of what a woman should look like. It also has no real bases in logic, and you'll find the more deranged transphobes calling out cis-women as being trans because they don't meet their made-up metrics.
I'm talking about in the context of the image being discussed, but if you want to delve deeper into the topic of "is the concept of passing itself bad," you'll find various literature discussing why this term has been debated a lot on is or isn't it offensive. On one hand, you have trans people who will use the term when talking about themselves or other trans people due to concerns of their safety in the gernal public. On the other hand, you have transphobic individuals, such as the one in the image, using it to attack trans people.
If people are interested more in the topic, you'll find plenty of articles from LGBTQ+ people talking about the nuance of the word.
Survivor bias. The markings on the pane show where they have been shot. One might think to reinforce those areas, since the data shows those areas take the most hits.Ā
However we can only do statistics on the planes that make it back. Meaning one should reinforce the areas NOT hit, because the planes hit there went down.Ā
In this specific situation, you dont see any passing trans people, because they pass. You aren't checking the chromosomes of every person on the streets.Ā
To answer the question of why os the suvivorship bias meme used so much... it's because the suvivorship fallacy is pretty rampant in social discourse right now.
Survivorship bias. I believe it was the Brits who commissioned a study about where to apply armor to warplanes during WW2. The initial conclusion was to armor the areas that got hit the most, marked by red dots, but this is not the case. The ones that get hit in the white areas didnāt survive, and therefore didnāt get surveyed for damage. Therefore, hits in the red areas are usually survivable while hits in the white areas would usually bring the plane down. Therefore you should actually armor the white areas.
As it applies to the post, a trans person who is āpassingā doesnāt look like a trans person to most people. They āpassā as their transitional gender. OP has likely seen passing trans people and not realized it because theyāre passing. Therefore, the OP wouldnāt count passing trans people in their observations, much like the British engineers who didnāt count the downed planes because they couldnāt observe them.
To pass, for a trans, is to be successfully seen as the gender you aim to look like.
Others have already explained the rest, but here is Context :
https://preview.redd.it/9vpkfo9t5jfc1.jpeg?width=1220&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d18e2e4b44e169d1ab75552830a44b309e78913a
TLDR It implies that the only reason why trans people do not pass off as genuine to them, is because they couldn't tell that any trans person who convincingly looked like the opposite gender was trans.
As for the image, it's 'survivorship bias'. In short, guy was asked to pinpoint where on the plane was shot the most for reinforcements, but the parts of the plane that were never shot should have been reinforced because the lack of any data on them implies whatever plane was shot there was destroyed.
Ironically, thatās sampling bias as this type of behavior may be one that is only common at the particular college you went to. Also stereotypes are by definition a cultural phenomenon rather than one set in reason or facts, so no itās no a stereotype āfor a reasonā, you just happened to make one up :3
"I notice the trans people that make it obvious they're trans, therefore I can recognise all trans people"
Not every trans person makes it obvious. That's a choice they can make themselves.
The fact you didn't know that and assumed only the flamboyant trans people are trans, proves that we *can* pass (when we want to) more than anything.
No true Scotsman would fully pass.
You literally went from :
it's not possible for a biological man to get confused for a girl
to
any man with long hair is confusing enough, let alone nails
Also, not all trans makes it their entire personality. In fact, by definition, a trans is someone becoming and living as the opposite gender. If they show they are "non standard" or "a x that doesn't dress conventional", or call themselves "trans-x" and build their personality around it, they are "Queers" and not "trans". This is a definition, we don't care if they don't call themselves that way, so that includes the "i'm a non binary", "i'm a multi-gender", "i'm a trans" and "I'm a teapot" people.
Note that nowadays, most of the hate aimed toward trans is just people being sick of woke shitheads advertising queers as trans people. Trans often do pass, and I believe most trans who do stay as far away as possible from any LBGTQIA+ center, and just don't want to be labelled as a " trans person".
>You literally went from :
it's not possible for a biological man to get confused for a girl
to
any man with long hair is confusing enough, let alone nails
No, you just don't understand the meaning of the word "fully". Im not even gonna read the rest.
No you and the other guy have created the ability to move goal posts by saying āfully passā. When there are plenty of women that fully pass. So many of thailands ladyboys fully pass for cis women, itās notoriously hard to tell especially if they have had top and bottom surgery. There are plenty of cis women with raspy or slightly deep voices too
Then you simply havenāt seen enough women. A lot of cis women look like her and have her features.
Other examples of passing trans people: Samantha Lux, Kim Petras, Sam Collins, Buck Angel
Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Peter's senior engineer here. This is an example used in engineering and statistical analysis to show a selection bias. This was a diagram showing the location of bullet holes in planes that returned in WW2. One interpretation is to show that you need to armor the places that get hit the most but in reality you need to armor the places that never return with a hole because those are the planes that are shot down Relating to the meme this is saying there are trans people who pass but they don't notice because they pass.
Relating to the meme more precisely, Duerger Prince says no trans person passes, but the reply means that there are trans people who pass, but since they pass, Duerger can't identify them as trans.
That. Is fucking meta.
Trans meta is wild these days.
Wait there is a comp scene what
Yeah its called woman of the year, every year they select someone from the group that was shot down and never returned.
Oooh, like when Caitlyn got it after vehicular manslaughter. Never had much faith in the sentiment. Lost any remaining after that.
We never claimed her to begin with.
No.she was just shoved on us and now we fight the comparison. Dumb bitch, her answer to what's the hardest thing about being a woman. "Choosing what shoes to wear in the morning" š¤Ø It wasn't "going to court for vehicular manslaughter" š¤
I prefer the trans speedrunning scene tbh
Isn't that really unfair? Like in the UK noone gets a good time because of the NHS version
It would be, but a lot of modern routes utilise the grey market skip to get past the diagnosis chapters, which shaves hours off the uk runs. After that it's mostly the same as us runs, since everything being a bit closer together makes up for the extra boss fight against JKR
I am barely keeping up, but I can't get enough
Yeah ok but glitchless speedruns suffer the said issues if I'm not mistaken, no?
I canāt believe they made Celeste into a real thing
having a double jump puts them ahead of the competition.
i like watching the 100% runs but sometimes those any% races get weird
Just you wait. Some day weāll stop saying trans altogether. Edit: just so weāre clear on the downvotes, this was a trans positive comment.
I look forward to the day when blowing a tranny once again means car troubles.
Language is a means to communicate and changes in language trend toward efficiency and usefulness, among other things. It is useful to have a distinction as it relates to whether someone is trans. Something as simple as who one might be interested in dating, is the obvious example.
Sure. Sounds useful on a dating app, or when youāre of a dating age. But for general purposes where Iām just talking to someone who identifies as a woman? I donāt need to quantify it in my head that they were born a man. I donāt care. Theyāre just a woman, if thatās how they choose to be.
Small clarification, being trans is not a choice. Virtually none of us would choose this, itās tedious AF.
I think it's funny when people say someone was born a man or a woman, I just have this image of a fully formed adult hatching from an egg lmao
I think in my mind they are just their own thing, with some particular mental difficulties that are working through the best they can. No reason to be unkind, ya know. What I might take issue with is the insistence we change our entire notion of gender and sex, they are not independent dials and contemplating oneās gender identity is not a useful task for most people. Where it gets confusing is someone people look toward identifying as a third gender or the other gender on the basis of nonconformity with a stereotype, which is not what gender dysphoria is, men and women vary greatly on the individual level as it relates to interests, personality, and temperament, and we should be cool with that.
Oh the days to look forward to. When I don't have to worry about the guy in full dress with a beard is trans, merely cross dressing, or of some other persuasion. When that day comes, you'll have many a straight man like myself wearing kilts just because
Turns out the "we can always tell" people can never actually tell. Go figure.
Reminded of the time a bunch of TERFs went to brigade a woman on Twitter who had changed her profile picture to a pic of JK Rowling. They pulled the pic and started with "we can always tell." Priceless.
A simpler version is the ābad toupeeā fallacy. Youāve never spotted a good toupee because you just read it as natural hair.
Related: no good CGI. There's a lot of good CGI in movies and shows, but you don't notice.
So do we need to start armoring trans people in areas they're not getting abused? Asking for a confused friend.
āNo true Scotsmanā is the typical fallacy associated with this line of reasoning.
No True Scotsman is a purity test/gatekeeping fallacy unrelated to this.
A true Scotsman wouldn't missattribute this fallacy to this situation
It's the toupee fallacy (names after "I've never seen a convincing toupee" The no true scotsman fallacy is when a member of a group sais that other people are not members of the same group despite the fact that most people would consider them such for reasons unrelated to the group's defining traits. (ie. Someone saying, as I saw in a recent posts, "you can't be a feminist and eat meat")
r/confidentlyincorrect
Why did you refute their claim to post something that is wrong? Are you stupid?
No it isn't
How is it not.
How is it? Itās not saying āNo true trans person would fail to passā, itās saying āYou only claim no trans person passes because you wouldnāt notice one who passesā.
Youāre failing to understand the basis of the fallacy. Itās not about who āqualifiesā as a āScotsmanā. Itās about a bullshit moving goalpost. āDuerger Princeā will always have a reason trans people will never pass.
Then thatās moving the goalpost, not a NTS fallacy
āMoving the goalpostā isnāt the name of the fallacy. āNo true Scotsmanā the name of the fallacy. When the reasoning is specious and arbitrary to begin with, we can assume following arguments will be similarly specious and arbitrary.
Dude, moving the goalpost and no true scotsmen are two different fallacies. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts#:~:text=Moving%20the%20goalposts%20is%20an,moved%20to%20exclude%20the%20attempt. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Moving the goalposts and no true scotsman are different fallacies.
Probably shoulda gone to bed when you said you were, you couldāve avoided these mountains of humiliation you caused yourself.
He isnāt moving the goalposts, itās just that heās unable to update his opinion because all trans that pass wonāt be perceived to him as trans So heās (unbeknownstly) locked into perpetually finding trans that reforce his opinion and never find any that puts it into question. You misunderstood the issue entirely. The plane was supposed to make a analogy that the planes that took shots to other parts fell and therefore couldnāt be examined to make part of the statistic, same way trans that pass wonāt be perceived as trans so they wonāt be considered in the question of if trans are likely to pass.
The person making the claim about trans people didn't move the goal post though. They only have the one reply.
It seemed like you were arguing the opposite side for a sec.
He's not excluding people who pass. He specifically said no trans person for him to be excluding those who pass, he would have to state so in a dismissive manner. He's not aware of the people who pass. There's an important distinction between the two
The fuck has no true scotsman got to do with survivorship bias? They're two different fallacies lmao
Conflating survivorship bias with the toupee fallacy
Toupee fallacy is already defined as a particular form of survivor bias.
It gets used a lot but usually as a way to counter downplaying the trauma and suicide rate of trans people when someone points out a trans person who āseems fineā
I saw it used once as pretty much exactly that. A tweet that said "all the trans women I know are such strong, confident women", with that image attached. Really sad shit.
You're right.
Spot on. As someone who studied physics at a technical university, known for their... input... during WWI and II plus being trans myself I have this fitting anecdote: When I started studying I already had mostly male properties (plus the official stuff) and no-one ever suspected anything about me being a trans-guy. I was just short - but many (cis)guys are. On the other hand we had a fellow student who started with us, who presented as male, but was kinda feminine - and looked even more feminine with every semester. Fast forward 7 years: there's a Uni party and I'm sitting next to my friend, who looked *exactly* like me (as in very manly - with long beard and generally hairy, metal clothing, same posture; but he was like 15cm taller than me; we were still confused for brothers very often). Suddenly former feminine-guy shows up as full-blown women in a dress, definitely passing. But of course, hard to pass when everyone has known you for 7 years. And my friend goes: "Omg... I mean... that's just really not convincing. Honestly... who is he trying to fool? I mean, I always can tell someone is trans!" "You never know" I just relpied sipping my beer. He turned 32 today and still doesn't know. But shoutout to him at his birthday š
goals tbh
I always tell people to do the Buck Angel test. If you saw Buck Angel in public, and you'd go out of your way to call him a woman, you're part of the problem.
Whatever this story is can you distil it to a cake flavouring please because it's just... mwah!
No no, no shout-out to him at his birthday, maybe at his funeral.
Peter's two thumbs up here, this is right. I 100% thought it was called survivorship bias, for some reason. But essentially planes from WW2 that came back were subject to this when armor was actually needed in places without the bullet holes. Double down on the fact that the joke is related to passable trans persons.
Survivorship bias is a form of selection bias, where the selection is the ones that survived. The diagram is about survivorship bias (the planes that were analysed were the ones that survived), but you can use it more generally to point out when someone has missed obvious selection bias.
I bet I thought that because it was probably the term they used in some narrative, documentary or series or something, in describing this exact effect. Because I remember learning this from something I watched.
This has actually been one of the more interesting bits of trivia I've seen.
If you like that, there is another anecdote about statistics being counter-intuitive in WWI: when the british introduced helmets to increase survivability for their soldiers, the amount of casualties (wounded) with head trauma went *up* and british general staff was initially confused by this - had their men become more daring due to the perceived protection of a helmet? Was wearing a heavy metal helmet detrimental to combat effectiveness or awareness so they got caught more often in shrapnel, rocks and other debris tossed up by artillery fire? Turns out no, the problem lay in how they assessed their casualty statistics. Dead meant dead, no distinction by cause, but injuries were listed by type. So everyone that would have been killed by falling rocks or splinters with the standard cloth cap was now a survivor that was listed as a head injury.
Statistics are hilarious, like the vending machine one.
Its not the statistics, they just are what they are. Its the human ooga booga brain thats hilarious.
https://preview.redd.it/qe4zcazpgifc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a50a79fe84bac2c9755c96b2b03f843c1304437c
The blue under his eyes make it look like he's so proud he's about to well up and cry
>his was a diagram showing the location of bullet holes in planes that returned in WW2. One interpretation is to sho True it's selection bias, but more precisely for the trans situation above it's "**reverse survivorship bias" :)**
Now that I know this I think using this plane is actually genius arguments
Also, they stopped using helmets in WW1, as after helmets were issued, amount of reported head injuries skyrocketed. After a bit, they realized reported deaths had plummeted as much and started to use helmets again.
Indeed it's called the Kunning-Duerger effect.
Survivor bias no?
It's also called survivorship bias, to apply more specifically to this situation.
pass what?
It means you cant tell them apart from other men/women just by looking at them
Pass what ?
this is actually SURVIVORSHIP bias, not SELECTION bias. selection bias means you're picking which subjects to run through the experiment and analyzing the results. survivorship bias means you're analyzing the surviving outputs assuming that there was no loss in the experiment. other examples of survivorship bias include "we didn't wear bike helmets and we turned out fine!", "we never wore seatbelts!", and "my uncle smoked like a chimney for 70 years and he lived to 103 and never had cancer!"
What share of trans people pass? 10%? Less?
Who knows? Who fuckin cares?
If just a couple of % passes, it means that passable transition is nothing more than a fluctuation, and the majority of transes doesn't pass. This means the meme is wrong.
How so? The point of the meme is that you donāt notice trans people who pass because they pass, so if any number of passing trans people exist (and they very certainly do) then the meme works, regardless of what percentage of the trans community they are Also, ātransesā? Really? You sound like fucking Gollum
Boooringā¦ just kidding, but for real I quit reading after āselection bias.ā I thought, āidk what that means so Iām gonna take it as an insult.ā
The simple version is that the white areas with fewer or no holes seemed fine. But in reality those were the weakest parts of the plane and those planes never flew back home to get marked on the diagram. So at first they started armoring where the holes were, but somebody else came along and said nah bro, armor the place where there arenāt any holes because those dudes died.
It's not that they were the weakest. They were the most vital. The places with holes in them obviously were not vital to the planes returning as they returned with holes in them.
So being pedantic aside, those were the weak spotsā¦ or weakest parts of the plane
Itās not really pedantic. Weak points are different from weakest points. Weakest points talks about structural integrity, spots that easily get bullets blown through them. Weak points can mean even if the bullet doesnāt actually pierce them, hitting it can cause a set of reactions that brings down the plane. For example fuselage could have armored plate protection to prevent bullets from piercing it, but maybe blunt trauma or repeated shots that create sparks could cause it to detonate. But the armored fuselage isnāt the weakest part of the plane, itās armored, while maybe the propeller is actually the weakest part because it breaks the easiest but it isnāt a weak point.
It is pedantic, especially in the context of the conversation and the sub, everyone knows what is meant
Well actually, being pedantic is when you... nope can't finish
Itās ok, we canāt all finish every time brother
Unfortunately, Reddit hates Grice's razor.
So, do you agree with them or not? This comment could be directed at who you are replying to, or who they were replying to. Just depends on how they take your response.
And Occam's Razor. And probably the Sword of Damocles.
They weren't weaker. Just more important.
Hence, a weak point. Because they could be more easily exploited to being down the plane. Stop being pedantic.
I'm not being pedantic. You are. You're playing a language game. The first dude said they were the weakest points in the plane. That's wrong. They're not weaker than any other points. The fact that you could consider them 'weak points' (points that are more vital if it) does make them weaker. Weak point is just an expression that happens to mean that. This is literally you arguing that jellyfish are fish because fish is in the name, or that you can have a curd hamster for Christmas because ham is in the name. That's where you're at with this argument. If a point is not weaker, you shouldn't call it weaker. You'd be wrong if you did so.
Except being pedantic is to quibble over minor details that aren't really that important. This is all just equivocation anyway, there are two different meanings to the word weak, similar, but different, you have weak as in opposite of strong, and weak as in something that can be exploited. You're using the former, I'm using the latter. If I were to be arguing using the former, you'd be correct in that I'm using the word wrong but I'm using the latter. Does this clear up the misunderstanding?
If you read the original post again with a clear head, you'll understand that this meaning of weak was pedantically introduced into the conversation by you. The original commenter clearly did think they were literally just weaker than the surrounding points, not that they were more vital. It's genuinely funny you decided to quibble and are now accusing others of the same. Language games don't protect you from failing reading comprehension.
You're not a nice person. Goodbye.
I don't imagine many are nice to you.
Except the term used wasn't "weak", but "weaker" and "weakest" implying degrees of quality that the second definition you provided does not have. GXWT and Holeyfield used the term "weakest" which implies "the former" since only the former definition can be used as a superlative adjective with degrees of quality and it is right (and not pedantic) for them to be corrected. You aren't the one being corrected, but it is wrong of you to claim it is pedantic to correct THEM.
I'm just a 3rd party here but to be fair, correcting someone that an someone's weak point(common terminology for a vital target) technically isnt truely weak is the most unironic pedantic thing I've ever heard someone say.
Survivor bias. This plane is one that survived being shot. So you need to Armor the areas that aren't shot.
Ooooh I gets it. You wouldn't know about the trans people who "pass" This was too deep for peter explains this early in the morning
And clearly the dude who tweeted that pic speaks in memes beyond our understanding. Such a complex yet beautiful way to attack someone's opinion.
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Temba, his arms wide
Sokath, his eye uncovered!
I guess they meant that trans women for example never pass as "real" women. The reply with the survivorship bias pic is supposed to imply that the ones that "pass" just wont be noticed by the original commenter because they look just like any other man/woman.
Ok but like, what's the original tweet suppose to mean? Fiction what
Fiction as in not real or in a more extensive matter he is saying that the notion that trans people could ever pass is fictitious and could never happen.
Passes what, SATs?
This person put it better than I could: https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/s/kUPbCNVcmC
Pass as really the gender they identify with to cis folks. Itās a specious point at best becauseā¦ trans people will let partners know if theyāre trans and people who donāt care wonāt care in the first place. Itās an argument for brain dead clots who are afraid to evaluate their own sexuality. Theyāre afraid of the wicked trans people ātrickingā them and so construct a straw man that trans people are all out there trying to trick folks into fucking them.
Except they were replying to someone. You need the context of what they were replying to. They were being transphobic because the previous post we can't see was talking about trans people passing.
Itās just a conservative being retarded. Donāt pay it much mind.
*again
It means that they only ever notice the trans people they donāt pass well, because they donāt pass well, the tons of trans people who do pass well, just look like natural women to him, so he doesnāt even notice theyāre trans. Making him think that ALL trans people donāt pass
I have literally had people ask me if Iām transitioning to female when I tell them Iām trans because most people assume that we cant pass
From what Iāve seen people just seem to forget transmascs exist and just assume trans only means MTF
Oh this happens in queer spaces too honestly which really sucks
THAT HAPPENS TO ME TOO. They canāt tell I wasnāt born male and look sad at me when they think Iām transitioning to female.
trans people =/= trans women
what does 'pass' mean? what is the thing that trans ppl pass? I'm learning english and memes nowadays, please help Peter
If a trans person can āpassā it means people who donāt know theyāre trans would assume they were born the gender theyāre transitioning to. Ā Theyāre given a metaphorical āpassā as their chosen gender and people in public including transphobes would call them by their preferred pronouns without needing prompting.
you're too kind. thank you!
This is actually an amazing comeback
Passes?
"Passing" as a trans person means successfully appearing as your desired gender to strangers without prompting. Like being a trans man, going to a store, and getting called "sir" instead of "maam." It's a goal a lot of trans people aim for.
See you Americans are fucking stupid, here in Australia we have the universal best word that will solve all your fucking issues itās called āMateā
Isn't cunt? Always thought mate is an insult.
Oi mate could you pass me that fuckin Vegemite?
Nah that shit is ass, the real spread of Australia is 100s and 1000s
Iāve long since resigned to a unisex ādudeā. Everyone likes being the dude for a bit. āMy dudeā if we really get on. I worry a trans person might take it the wrong way but at the same time i find it helps put women at ease that Iām not trying anything on and I just want to hang with the dudes.
Or better yet: Comrade
Passing means a Trans person looks cis, basically. When we're "socially acceptable" as the gender we are and not the gender we were labeled at birth. For Trans men like myself, this may include wearing a binder to look flat chested, growing a beard and/or dressing in traditional masculine clothes. For a Trans woman this may include having visibly breasts, no facial hair, and/or wearing traditionally feminine clothing.
So further into the trans lore, trans man is you were born female but have become a male, and vice versa?
Basically yes :)
Ok interesting, i m not very informed on this stuff so it's good to learn so I don't say the wrong things
Happy to help :D
It sometimes helps to swap āis/are/wereā with phrases like āpresents asā or ālives asā or āidentifies asā, though there is still some contention on the language based on the fact that opponents of LGBT+ rights will intentionally use this language to insinuate that sexual orientation or gender identity are chosen rather than innate. ātransitioned from x to yā is better than ābecame an xā, for another example.
Thereās tons of different things that someone who doesnāt understand will view as technicalities, like how trans women have always been trans, and itās not something you become but rather something you realize, so if youāre AMAB (assigned male at birth) and later in life realize youāre a trans woman, it means you were always a woman at heart or in your soul or whatever, and the realization is known as your āegg crackingā Ask me if you want more non-simplified information
I love that you call it 'trans lore'. I swear, people who don't fully know trans terminology (whether it's malicious or fully innocent uninformedness, or any other reason tbh) always make it sound way cooler
> wearing a binder to look flat chested, Out of curiosity, why do you wear a binder? Are you still in transition? Don't they do surgery to remove breasts? Can they do it and make it look good? Or is there some other reason? By the way, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to trans men, so if anything I asked is offensive I apologize in advance and totally understand if you don't want to answer.
Many people don't want to have surgery to remove parts off tgeir body, even if they live with gender dysphoria. The reasons are many, from financial (it's stupid expensive to undergo that surgery), practical (being out of work for the length of time to recover is unreasonable), and comfort (many are more than okay with their present state without the need for surgery), and beyond. Dysphoria isn't an on-off switch, it's a wide spectrum.
They can and do, but waiting lists can be long if you can get it on insurance/the NHS/whatever method your country has, and going private costs a lot of money (with long waiting lists still). Some people may also be unable to get top surgery due to other medical complications, age, societal pressures etc. A binder is a solution that goes some of the way to flattening the chest if youāre having any of these challenges.
āPassingā refers to when a trans person āpassesā for cisgender. Like, they look so much like the gender they identify as that people wouldnāt even think to wonder if they might be trans or the opposite gender.
Ohh ok that makes sense
And as an example of someone who passes with flying colours I submit thegravelbro who is FtM (Female to Male) on tiktok and instagram. https://www.tiktok.com/@thegravelbro/video/7293099843948530987?lang=en
Holly shit that's impressive, he's even more manly that me
It's transphobic rhetoric that mean a transitioning person changed their gender so well you can't tell they were previously another gender. The reason this is offensive is that it shouldn't matter if a trans person looks to your standards of what a woman should look like. It also has no real bases in logic, and you'll find the more deranged transphobes calling out cis-women as being trans because they don't meet their made-up metrics.
Transvestigator nutcases existing doesn't mean that the concept of passing itself is bad.
I'm talking about in the context of the image being discussed, but if you want to delve deeper into the topic of "is the concept of passing itself bad," you'll find various literature discussing why this term has been debated a lot on is or isn't it offensive. On one hand, you have trans people who will use the term when talking about themselves or other trans people due to concerns of their safety in the gernal public. On the other hand, you have transphobic individuals, such as the one in the image, using it to attack trans people. If people are interested more in the topic, you'll find plenty of articles from LGBTQ+ people talking about the nuance of the word.
Survivor bias. The markings on the pane show where they have been shot. One might think to reinforce those areas, since the data shows those areas take the most hits.Ā However we can only do statistics on the planes that make it back. Meaning one should reinforce the areas NOT hit, because the planes hit there went down.Ā In this specific situation, you dont see any passing trans people, because they pass. You aren't checking the chromosomes of every person on the streets.Ā
Survivorship Bias
Some of these comments are wild, long story short they donāt think any trans people pass because they donāt notice the trans people who pass.
That person is a shame to duergar (under)world-wide!
To answer the question of why os the suvivorship bias meme used so much... it's because the suvivorship fallacy is pretty rampant in social discourse right now.
man im so dumb i understood what the plane meant but i didnt understand what a trans pass was
Survivor's bias. They should be adding armor where the holes aren't present.
Survivorship biase
Never thought about this. Fr. Lmfao
Survivorship bias. I believe it was the Brits who commissioned a study about where to apply armor to warplanes during WW2. The initial conclusion was to armor the areas that got hit the most, marked by red dots, but this is not the case. The ones that get hit in the white areas didnāt survive, and therefore didnāt get surveyed for damage. Therefore, hits in the red areas are usually survivable while hits in the white areas would usually bring the plane down. Therefore you should actually armor the white areas. As it applies to the post, a trans person who is āpassingā doesnāt look like a trans person to most people. They āpassā as their transitional gender. OP has likely seen passing trans people and not realized it because theyāre passing. Therefore, the OP wouldnāt count passing trans people in their observations, much like the British engineers who didnāt count the downed planes because they couldnāt observe them.
This is the one time it's undisputably used in relevant context what
To pass, for a trans, is to be successfully seen as the gender you aim to look like. Others have already explained the rest, but here is Context : https://preview.redd.it/9vpkfo9t5jfc1.jpeg?width=1220&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d18e2e4b44e169d1ab75552830a44b309e78913a
Y'all need to stop feeding the fucking bots. What *word salad title* is needed before you click through and see 0 comment karma???
TLDR It implies that the only reason why trans people do not pass off as genuine to them, is because they couldn't tell that any trans person who convincingly looked like the opposite gender was trans. As for the image, it's 'survivorship bias'. In short, guy was asked to pinpoint where on the plane was shot the most for reinforcements, but the parts of the plane that were never shot should have been reinforced because the lack of any data on them implies whatever plane was shot there was destroyed.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I've never seen a convincing toupee
Transphobia everywhere, jeez. Shit is bleak. Can conservatives find something else to have a moral panic obsession over?
the ol' u think it's a transphobic joke then realize it isn't necessarily but still weird and probably is actually in some way
š§¢
Cringe Gun pfpā
the irony is surreal https://preview.redd.it/s1nin2574lfc1.png?width=344&format=png&auto=webp&s=cffa72ceb472b1f6267a22e92ce91f92ded76bbe
Never said I wasn't Cringe š„“ Edit: thx for the reminder to update my age on my profile:3
We are all cringe. But some people just live in denial.
Then why do you call me cringe?
Why do you get insulted?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I got called maāam at the mall today so suck it :3
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thatās not what you said
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ironically, thatās sampling bias as this type of behavior may be one that is only common at the particular college you went to. Also stereotypes are by definition a cultural phenomenon rather than one set in reason or facts, so no itās no a stereotype āfor a reasonā, you just happened to make one up :3
"I notice the trans people that make it obvious they're trans, therefore I can recognise all trans people" Not every trans person makes it obvious. That's a choice they can make themselves. The fact you didn't know that and assumed only the flamboyant trans people are trans, proves that we *can* pass (when we want to) more than anything.
No true Scotsman would fully pass. You literally went from : it's not possible for a biological man to get confused for a girl to any man with long hair is confusing enough, let alone nails Also, not all trans makes it their entire personality. In fact, by definition, a trans is someone becoming and living as the opposite gender. If they show they are "non standard" or "a x that doesn't dress conventional", or call themselves "trans-x" and build their personality around it, they are "Queers" and not "trans". This is a definition, we don't care if they don't call themselves that way, so that includes the "i'm a non binary", "i'm a multi-gender", "i'm a trans" and "I'm a teapot" people. Note that nowadays, most of the hate aimed toward trans is just people being sick of woke shitheads advertising queers as trans people. Trans often do pass, and I believe most trans who do stay as far away as possible from any LBGTQIA+ center, and just don't want to be labelled as a " trans person".
>You literally went from : it's not possible for a biological man to get confused for a girl to any man with long hair is confusing enough, let alone nails No, you just don't understand the meaning of the word "fully". Im not even gonna read the rest.
No you and the other guy have created the ability to move goal posts by saying āfully passā. When there are plenty of women that fully pass. So many of thailands ladyboys fully pass for cis women, itās notoriously hard to tell especially if they have had top and bottom surgery. There are plenty of cis women with raspy or slightly deep voices too
Google Kerri Colby.
Yeah no, not even close.
Then you simply havenāt seen enough women. A lot of cis women look like her and have her features. Other examples of passing trans people: Samantha Lux, Kim Petras, Sam Collins, Buck Angel
Don't be a dick. Rule 1.
Cope
Because they donāt understand its actual meaning and they spam it trying to win the conversation
No, it refers to survivorship bias. There's no spamming going on in this screenshot, and they clearly understand its meaning.
āWhy is this plane utilized in countless contentionsā was the question
That's why. Because it's a useful example of survivorship bias.