When two worldviews collide.

[Ana the Ist]

This just isn't true.

Here are several sources that show that trans kids have higher rates of deporession and suicide risk.

LGBTQ+ youth over 3 times more likely to attempt suicide due to trauma

The newest report by the Trevor Project links high levels of trauma to an increased risk of suicide among LGBTQ youth by over three times.

www.medicalnewstoday.com

Transgender youth on puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones have lower rates of depression and suicidal thoughts, a new study finds

A wealth of evidence supports the protective mental health effects of gender-affirming care, despite ongoing legislation that asserts otherwise.

theconversation.com

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/28/health/transgender-suicide-risk/index.html

Suicide Risk Reduces 73% in Transgender, Nonbinary Youths with Gender-Affirming Care

Transgender and nonbinary youths, a population with an exceptional risk of suicide and poor mental health outcomes, were found to have 60% lower odds of depression after receiving gender-affirming intervention.

www.hcplive.com

Transgender teens have high rates of depression, suicidal thoughts

Two-thirds of transgender teens have depression, and many also have suicidal thoughts and self-injuring behavior, according to research being presented Sunday at ENDO 2020, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting in San Francisco, Calif.

www.endocrine.org

More than 50% of trans and non-binary youth in US considered suicide this year, survey says

The alarmingly high rates of depression, anxiety and suicide attempts are spread across liberal and conservative regions

www.theguardian.com

Suicidality Among Transgender Youth: Elucidating the Role of Interpersonal Risk Factors - PubMed

Data indicate that 82% of transgender individuals have considered killing themselves and 40% have attempted suicide, with suicidality highest among transgender youth. Using minority stress theory and the interpersonal theory of suicide, this study aims to better understand suicide risk among...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Mental health and suicide risk in trans and gender-diverse young people

Trans and gender-diverse young people have elevated rates of psychological distress, mental ill-health, and suicide risk when compared with their cisgender counterparts.

www.orygen.org.au

If we were to go by indicators such as these...

Women indicate suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, and have more suicide attempts than men. By those indicators, women are more at risk for suicide.

However, when we look at who commits suicide more often....it's men. Suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, or even suicide attempts don't actually indicate who is most at risk of suicide. Suicide rates do.

So unless you have the trans suicide rate...we can just dismiss all you posted.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's two separate things. I agree that women effectively exercise informal leadership. But you claim that the absence of women from formal leadership means they're worse at it.

Right.

They explain why it can be more difficult for women to rise above it.

They claim. I'm not seeing evidence.

I'm arguing for egalitarian gender roles - in any nation - out of a sense of justice.

No...lol just no. You aren't arguing women should be 50% of janitors. That would be egalitarian. You aren't demanding women take all the menial, dirty, labor intensive, low paying, undesirable jobs at 50%. If they did so then demanded power....that would be just.

This is just a selfish power grab. It's motivated by spite, avarice, greed, pride and foolishness.

No. The problem is that the ideals of masculinity held up to young men are harmful to them.

I disagree.

Peer pressure is clearly a driver for young women, too, but the animating reasons seem to be different. Weight control is often cited as a motivating reason for smoking. So we would have to unpack questions of health, diet, exercise, body image and so on for them; and while body image and sexual objectification are related to patriarchal norms, it seems to me to be less direct.

Called it. When men smoke....it's men's fault. When women smoke....it's also men's fault. Feminism in a nutshell? It's men's fault.

We average a weekly attendance of about seventy people or so.

Just checking into the Anglican church's percentage of the religious population....seems like over the church's percentage of the religious population is down to 9% or so from 33% in the early 1900s. Obviously, you aren't entirely to blame for that....just the years you've been a leader.

Would you describe this as failure?

Ana, this is nonsense. Women have only been able to graduate from university in Australia since 1883.

Gasp.

The first woman wasn't elected to the Australian parliament until 1943 (and at that point, she literally had to go home to use the toilet, since there were no facilities for women in parliament house!)

Well it would be weird if they had one and no women to use it, so I'm not going to fault them for that.

Equal opportunity acts were only put in place in the late 70s for employment. And in faith communities, we are still routinely excluded.

My word....

Let's look at some of the titans of industry back then.

Andrew Carnegie - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So poor immigrant child with no formal education...working 6 days a week 12 hours a day when he was 12.

John D. Rockefeller - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Dirt poor, fatherless, and working from the day he could walk and talk. Though I suppose we'll have to ding him for a brief public school education and a 10 week business school education.

What are these barriers you keep talking about?

Not having experienced something personally, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Well perhaps you're just an outlier.

 

[Paidiske]

No...lol just no. You aren't arguing women should be 50% of janitors. That would be egalitarian. You aren't demanding women take all the menial, dirty, labor intensive, low paying, undesirable jobs at 50%.

I'm not arguing that women should be 50% of anything. I'm arguing that women should face no barriers to pursuing whatever path they wish, simply because they're women. If a woman wants to be a janitor, she shouldn't be denied it because she's a woman.

The reason people don't want menial, dirty, labour intensive, low paying jobs isn't gender. (That said, the gender split on janitors is actually pretty close to equal. In Australia we don't tend to use the same word, but there are actually more women in what I would think of as an equivalent role). The key's mostly in the "low paying" bit, really. If you want people to do something menial and dirty, perhaps you ought to be willing to pay them enough to make it desirable.

This is just a selfish power grab.

This is an interestingly loaded term. Would we accuse any other group seeking equality of "selfishness"? Why do we expect women to accept lack of equality out of selflessness? Do you really think women exist only to serve the needs and purposes of others?

I disagree.

What reasons would you ascribe to young men taking up smoking at higher rates than young women?

Called it. When men smoke....it's men's fault. When women smoke....it's also men's fault. Feminism in a nutshell? It's men's fault.

Again, recognising a patriarchal system is not blaming the men caught up in that system.

That said, I pointed out that it is more complex and indirect for young women. I would say it's one factor in a complexity of other factors.

Just checking into the Anglican church's percentage of the religious population....seems like over the church's percentage of the religious population is down to 9% or so from 33% in the early 1900s. Obviously, you aren't entirely to blame for that....just the years you've been a leader.

Would you describe this as failure?

No. Because numbers are not the point. We aren't here to build empires. Failure would be if we had stopped being faithful in mission no matter what numbers or proportion of the population participated in our church communities.

What are these barriers you keep talking about?

And we could point to women like Oprah and J. K. Rowling who came from poverty to enormous success. But men or women, these people are exceptions. By definition, most people don't get to be exceptions. For all of us who aren't Rockefeller or Rowling, we shouldn't face barriers (to education, employment, or social involvement) because of our gender.

 

[Bradskii]

I've already addressed that. Your not paying attention.

Yeah, you said it's a law. Thou shall not steal. It's also a moral position. Either way, that stone tablet wasn't the first example of the idea that it's not in everyone's best interests to go around stealing things. It really came as no surprise when Moses showed everyone.

Now if you have any moral position that didn't exist before Christianity, then let's hear about it. We haven't had any yet, so you can be the first.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm not arguing that women should be 50% of anything.

Then we're done. Your own website listed percentages of female governors, judges, parliamentarians, etc

Clearly there's no barriers so what are you talking about?

This is an interestingly loaded term. Would we accuse any other group seeking equality of "selfishness"?

Yeah....except when you do it, you call it a patriarchy.

Why do we expect women to accept lack of equality out of selflessness?

What lack of equality? What rights does a man have that you don't?

What reasons would you ascribe to young men taking up smoking at higher rates than young women?

Perhaps because they've been denied higher educational opportunities in favor of Australian women and they're stressed lol.

Again, recognising a patriarchal system is not blaming the men caught up in that system.

You can say that....but it doesn't mean anything when your explanation for every imaginary problem is "its men's fault".

No. Because numbers are not the point.

I'll go back and read those mission points, but I swear I saw the word convert.

Edit- To teach, baptise and nurture new believers

And we could point to women like Oprah and J. K. Rowling who came from poverty to enormous success.

Right....it's as if feminism is no longer even needed and mostly just a pile of lies.

But men or women, these people are exceptions.

Talent, competence, ability....all on a bell curve.

By definition, most people don't get to be exceptions.

Right.

For all of us who aren't Rockefeller or Rowling, we shouldn't face barriers (to education, employment, or social involvement) because of our gender.

You don't. The most likely explanation is you're just average.

 

[Lukaris]

Re morality, natural law whatever, Paul explains that God has written into everyone’s heart an ability to know right from wrong ( see Romans 2:1-29). Discerning this among those who suffer greater mental or physical handicaps is probably beyond most of our comprehension. It is probably more important to help, as best we can, rather than play amateur psychology.

 

[Paidiske]

Clearly there's no barriers so what are you talking about?

Of course there are barriers. Eg. See here: The 10 barriers blocking female progression in your organisation In reference to this conversation, the "male competence assumptions" seem particularly pertinent.

What lack of equality? What rights does a man have that you don't?

On paper, in our respective countries, we might have the same rights. In practice those rights are often flouted and most of the time there is no way to hold people accountable.

I'll go back and read those mission points, but I swear I saw the word convert.

Edit- To teach, baptise and nurture new believers

We cannot make other people believe. We can share what we believe, and if it resonates we can invite people into a corporate life shaped by that belief, but actually making people believe is beyond human ability.

As for being "just average," that is no explanation for systemic trends.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Of course there are barriers. Eg. See here: The 10 barriers blocking female progression in your organisation

This is in reference to the "gender gap" of some sort. @Paidiske claims she isn't arguing for a certain percentage of leadership positions.

As such, the "gap" as it were, is of no consequence.

On paper, in our respective countries, we might have the same rights.

Right.

In practice those rights are often flouted and most of the time there is no way to hold people accountable.

I can't speak to that without hard data. Do you have any hard data showing women are being discriminated against?

We cannot make other people believe. We can share what we believe, and if it resonates we can invite people into a corporate life shaped by that belief, but actually making people believe is beyond human ability.

Not really spreading the word then huh?

As for being "just average," that is no explanation for systemic trends.

That's exactly what it is. When you're measuring the tail ends of that bell curve....guess where men tend to fall?

 

[Paidiske]

This is in reference to the "gender gap" of some sort. @Paidiske claims she isn't arguing for a certain percentage of leadership positions.

As such, the "gap" as it were, is of no consequence.

Yes and no. I am not aiming for a 50% split of men and women in every profession and role, as the ideal for which we're striving. However, the absence of women in leadership positions is evidence that women still face barriers in pursuing those positions.

I can't speak to that without hard data. Do you have any hard data showing women are being discriminated against?

As a matter of fact, I do. See here, for example. Notice how blind hiring improves outcomes for women.

Not really spreading the word then huh?

We proclaim the good news, but how people respond is up to them (and God).

That's exactly what it is. When you're measuring the tail ends of that bell curve....guess where men tend to fall?

While it's true that men have a wider variation for some traits, (their bell curve is wider and flatter), it's not so vastly different from the bell curve for women as to explain the disparity of outcome we see.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes and no. I am not aiming for a 50% split of men and women in every profession and role, as the ideal for which we're striving.

No kidding.

However, the absence of women in leadership positions is evidence that women still face barriers in pursuing those positions.

No it isn't. It could just as easily be an absence of talent.

As a matter of fact, I do. See here, for example. Notice how blind hiring improves outcomes for women.

I don't know where they're pulling that number from and the most famous blind hiring studies done have been debunked.

I mean something like this...

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Study is linked at the bottom, methodology is rather solid. 1 in 6 hiring managers literally admitting to either passing over qualified white men or completely deprioritizing against them.

See the difference? We don't have to do any mind reading. We don't have to guess if a woman got passed up because she's a woman or because she's just not very good. Do you have anything saying "we don't hire or promote women"?

We proclaim the good news, but how people respond is up to them (and God).

Uh huh...so if the Anglican church dies out completely (hypothetically of course) in Australia....you still succeeded? What does failure in your "leadership position" even look like?

While it's true that men have a wider variation for some traits, (their bell curve is wider and flatter), it's not so vastly different from the bell curve for women as to explain the disparity of outcome we see.

Actually it is...because we're talking about the exceptions, and those exceptions are on the tail ends of those curves.

 

[rjs330]

What reasons would you ascribe to young men taking up smoking at higher rates than young women?

Social contagion?

 

[rjs330]

Yeah, you said it's a law. Thou shall not steal. It's also a moral position. Either way, that stone tablet wasn't the first example of the idea that it's not in everyone's best interests to go around stealing things. It really came as no surprise when Moses showed everyone.

Now if you have any moral position that didn't exist before Christianity, then let's hear about it. We haven't had any yet, so you can be the first.

God does not deal in morality but in law. If you want to continue to discuss morality with Steve be my guest. But I'm not talking morality and neither is God. The Jewish Law was not a moral code. It was Law. Morality is something that men come up with. And we can talk all day whether something moral or not. Which depends a lot on culture, history, etc etc. Morality is not written as law. God deals in Law. Not the same thing. That's why they are called commandments.

 

[Bradskii]

Social contagion?

If you mean peer pressure, then yeah. Coupled with images like the Marlborough Man (5 actors taking the role dying of smoke related illnesses) and a suave 007 at the Bacarrat table, white jacket and cigarette drooping from his mouth as he intones 'Bond. James Bond'. Hell yeah. Who wouldn't want to be a cool dude...

 

[Bradskii]

God does not deal in morality but in law. If you want to continue to discuss morality with Steve be my guest. But I'm not talking morality and neither is God. The Jewish Law was not a moral code. It was Law. Morality is something that men come up with. And we can talk all day whether something moral or not. Which depends a lot on culture, history, etc etc. Morality is not written as law. God deals in Law. Not the same thing. That's why they are called commandments.

Stealing is illegal but isn't immoral? Gimme a break. Anyway, come up with a law that is applicable to all that was first proposed from within Christianity. And please, not ones such as 'Do not have any God's but Me'.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If you mean peer pressure, then yeah. Coupled with images like the Marlborough Man (5 actors taking the role dying of smoke related illnesses) and a suave 007 at the Bacarrat table, white jacket and cigarette drooping from his mouth as he intones 'Bond. James Bond'. Hell yeah. Who wouldn't want to be a cool dude...

Then why in the world would you want children exposed to trans people at such an impressionable age. They're easily influenced by peer pressure....and the idiots in the classroom want to celebrate the trans people for a whole month and give them special privileges. Cigarettes don't get a month of celebration.

 

[Paidiske]

No it isn't. It could just as easily be an absence of talent.

Except that when women and men are actually assessed for competence as leaders, the women don't come out behind. Eg. See here: Research: Women Score Higher Than Men in Most Leadership Skills

Do you have anything saying "we don't hire or promote women"?

Mostly they can't admit it that blatantly for legal reasons.

Uh huh...so if the Anglican church dies out completely (hypothetically of course) in Australia....you still succeeded? What does failure in your "leadership position" even look like?

The kingdom of God is not coterminous with the Anglican Church. What does failure look like? Lack of strategic direction and vision. Lack of action aligned with that direction and vision. Lack of equipping, encouraging and enabling people to pursue those actions.

Actually it is...because we're talking about the exceptions, and those exceptions are on the tail ends of those curves.

But I'm not talking about exceptions (or not wanting to focus on the exceptions). I'm talking about the barriers faced even by the "average" people, because of gender.

 

[Paidiske]

Social contagion?

Well, yes, we noted peer pressure, but driven by what? What is it about smoking that makes it seem desirable to young men, in particular?

 

[Robban]

Well, yes, we noted peer pressure, but driven by what? What is it about smoking that makes it seem desirable to young men, in particular?

C.H.Spurgeon
"If through smoking I had wasted an hour of my time;
if I had stinted my gifts to the poor;
if I had rendered my mind less vigorous.
I trust I should see my fault and turn from it.

But he who charges me wih these things shall have no answer but my forgiveness"

From an original book printed 1877.

 

[rjs330]

Called it. When men smoke....it's men's fault. When women smoke....it's also men's fault. Feminism in a nutshell? It's men's fault.

That seems to be a lot of this in a nutshell. Women are never responsible for anything. Men are always responsible. Whether it's work, dating, marriage issues, single parent families, income, or illness.

 

[rjs330]

Well, yes, we noted peer pressure, but driven by what? What is it about smoking that makes it seem desirable to young men, in particular?

Are you saying there is such a thing as social contagion? Or is there a difference between that and peer pressure?