Thread 41339217

Why did everyone become trans, all at once?

>>41339217 (OP)
the proliferation of social media, rapid onset autistic trooning

>>41339217 (OP)
>everyone is when 120 youngshits per 100 000 normies which is 0,0012%.
WHY
EVERYONE
TROONED
WHY.

>>41339217 (OP)
Why, they didn't!

>>41339217 (OP)
Holy shit, 80 more people per 100,000 trooned out last year! Stop the fucking presses and roll out the national guard to every American city. We have to answer the transgender question with some sort of final solution.

>>41339217 (OP)
Good. The number should be higher.

>>41339217 (OP)
The knowledge that HRT existed became widespread

>>41339217 (OP)
Chemicals in the water turned more than the frogs gay

Why weren't people trooning out when there was no established concensus on medical treatment and awareness of this medical condition and access to medication for it??

This is also probably a huge undercoat since all the major cities had areas where tranny prostitutes congregated as early as the 60s

>>41339217 (OP)
Repressed demand

>>41339601
Everyone knew about ladyboys and shemales

>>41339217 (OP)
So my futa fetish can become a reality.
The world owes me chicks with dicks, they will not love me for it, but my will is as iron.

>>41339302
>0,0012%
maybe not shooting up illegal drugs would have let you finish high school.

>>41339262
from 5 to 80 is much bigger jump than whatever your graph is trying to tell

>>41339217 (OP)
those are the sheep, anon.
they require herds.
they can not be outside of the herd.

you must protect them from the wolves.
or be the wolf.

>>41339217 (OP)
now bring up the gendered stats and see how 90% of those are afab.

theyfabs dont deserve to transition.

>>41340798
ok whatever jarby just take your t

>>41340768
Pretty sure it isn't, percentage wise
>absolute increase of 7% for lefthandedness in the population
>5 in 100,000=0.00005
>80 in 100,000=0.0008
>amount increased in absolute numbers is 75 in 100,000
>75 in 100,000=0.00075
>expressed as a percentage, an absolute increase of trans identifying people of 0.075% in a total population of 100,000

So not only is the percentage increase of trans identifying people a smaller percentage increase compared to lefties, it is in fact 100x lower than the increase in left handed people overall. Though my math might be bad here idk

>>41339335
>I don't want to acknowledge the question, so I am going to change the question to something I can mock

>>41340847
???? 80 is like what 1400% bigger than 5, 12 is 100% bigger than 6.

>>41339217 (OP)
Hollywood retardedness got a taste for it, Now their now fucked in the head children made it trendy to fuck yourself up. More than half of those kids aren't even gay.

>everyone is transgender!
>graph shows 80 people out of 100,000 (0.08%)
but the answer is probably because people won't kill you for being trans anymore

>>41340847
>>41340864
And this kind of shit is why nobody takes you seriously

>>41340864
>>41340919
I'm not comparing the 5 to the 80 dumb dumbs I'm comparing the overall increase of 5/100,000 to 80/100,000 which is a miniscule increase overall. If the graph had been scaled from 0 to 100,000 (the total sample size) instead of 0 to 80, the big scary lines would be tiny little bumps that might not even show up when you looked at it

>>41340910
80 out of 100,000 is 0.00008, not 0.08

>>41340952
Apologies.
I thought you was defending the jump instead of questioning why there was such a large lead in scale in such a short time compared to historical data.

>>41340978
You're good I'm just trying to break down why the fear mongering over that graph is silly and not at all justified. Yes the increase is substantial when compared to the previous number of trans people but I don't think it's EMERGENCY - POPULATION COLLAPSE DUE TO TRANNY DEGENERACY level either, which is what the poster of the graph is coyly trying to portray

>>41340854
See >>41340847. There is no "transgender explosion" in terms of actual people

>>41339217 (OP)
Because it became socially acceptable in most places and if you take it seriously and make an effort to pass the majority of people won't openly shit on you for doing it. There will always be chuds posting ywnbaw on online pseudo anonymous places like this (before turning around and cranking their hawgs to futa, ironically enough) but by and large if you look and sound like a woman you're not going to get overtly harassed in most spaces anymore. Same in reverse for the ftm's, if you pass, nobody real gives a single fuck for the most part.

If you're asking why so many people are trans in general you can look no further than the petroleum industry and our overreliance on single use plastics made with chemicals that fuck up the endocrine system. Frankly it's a miracle the numbers aren't like, 1000x higher than they are.
>>41341019
Yeah the whole "society will die because gays and troons" angle is played out and frankly retarded. Unless you have like a third of the population just outright refusing to reproduce it's a non-issue. Plus it's not like there's not plenty of lgbtq people that have had children either

>>41339217 (OP)
more importantly the divisions in age groups would need a clarification, otherwise it would imply something is turning kids trans and sparing adults

>>41340952
Co2 has gone from 300 parts per million to 400 parts per million, what's so interesting about that, the air is still 99.99% other gas

>>41341468
>Oh yeah? Well how about you try comparing your oranges to my apples?? Checkmate, leftists!!!!

Here is your threadly reminder that a common fascist argumentative technique is to radically and unexpectedly change the topic of discussion to a totally different subject to distract and confuse people they are arguing with

>>41341044
I never said there was an "explosion" and only an idiot would suggest there is.
I was simply pointing out the increase in a short amount of time in a hockey stick manner.
It's like how if a city only suffered from up to 100 murders for over 200 years but one year it "jumped" up to 125.
In the grand scheme of things, in a population of millions, that should be less than noteworthy (putting emotion aside), but it is still a 25% increase on top of a 200 year trend.

But then, it is "new recordings of transgender identity", not transitioning (unless you are immediately transitioning because you say you are trans).
The number of those that are actually trans, and not just theyfab/theymab might account for only 10% of the numbers.

Long story short.
Never trust your sanity to polls unless you understand who was asked the questions, and what questions were asked.

>>41341707
No, it is simply exemplification to make a point.
In this case, to call out the dismissal of the data as not significant, because the change is small in absolute terms, when that is not relevant, The change is relative terms is what is interesting.
When dealing with these data. values that start occurring DOZENS of standard deviations from the historical mean are very significant.

>>41341468
>trannies cause global warming
Damn the EPA really has gone downhill lately.