>>16382576But what you said made no sense.
You're saying you're "seeing the constant headlines of 'trans woman raped XYZ' 'transwoman molested 7 toddlers at daycare'...".
I'm saying the news isn't a reliable lens to view the world through because it's impossible for them to report on a meaningfully large sample size of what happens in the world, because things happen in the world too fast for that to be possible.
So now you're saying that I'm saying that the news needs to prove I didn't rape toddlers.
How could you possibly interpret what I said in that way?
Even if we go with your implication that I'm trans -- which is false -- shouldn't you be saying that I'm saying the news needs to prove I *did* rape toddlers? That is, after all, what I'm expressing incredulity over, and claiming they're unreliable in regard to.
In which case, yes. If the news makes allegations, it needs to prove them. What's the problem with saying so?
