"The Other Genders"- Chpt 1 to 11 PDF version

[Kendall]

Here is some of the book I am making concerning Non-Binary gender or as I title the book The Other Gender , in its current form. Still a ways to go. Enjoy the stats! It is in Adobe Acrobat form .pdf.(2/14/10 Update).

Disclaimer:
I know its littered with mispelling and grammatical errors, this is a working copy right now, not a finished work. Some things are unfinished or just small scriblings of notes.

**If you know of any relevant data please send me a pm or email so that I can add it and give you credit.


Summary of Estimates
Title page, Table of Contents, Acknowledgments, Preface,
Chapter 1.Introduction to Other Genders
Chapter 2. Basic Characteristics of Androgynes
Chapter 3. How many Androgynes are there?
Chapter 4. What type of Androgynes are there?
Chapter 5. Aspects of Androgyne influenced by the Androgyne Gender Identity
Chapter 6. What are some unique obstacles that androgynes face?
Chapter 7. What are the most common fears an Androgyne faces?
Chapter 8. Androgyne Discrimination and Unequal Treatment
Chapters 9. Anti Non-Binary Gender
Chapter 10. Androgyne: Naming oneself
Chapter 11. Gender Neutral Pronouns
Non-Binary Gender Modern History
Appendix

Tell me what you think.

Ken Kendra Kendall KK

[Kendall]

Added chapter 2 PDF after I felt the numbers seemed to make sense.

[Rebis]

whoa. The androgyne sexual orientation poll shows the same amount of female bodied folks pretty much mirror the number of male bodied in the numbers. For instance, 11 male bodied are Bisexual and 11 female bodied are Bisexual.

It's too bad most of us have had to live our lives of quiet desperation. I wonder what life would have been like if we could all have been open about ourselves?

[Rebis]

chapter 2c - I'm not sure about poll H, the sexuality poll. it asks about men & women & FTM & MTF, but some of us think of FtMs and MtF's as their true gender only, for instance, the terms might be used to specify concepts in a conversation, but not used in general. All FtM's ARE men. So someone who said they are attracted to men, may or may not also include FtMs.

it just seems a little iffy. maybe the poll should have specified cisgender men and cisgender women. I mean, you could say it was implied by having the FtM/MtF choices, but I think if a person doesn't care about cisgender or not, they're going to answer simply male or female.

[Kendall]

chapter 2c - I'm not sure about poll H, the sexuality poll. it asks about men & women & FTM & MTF, but some of us think of FtMs and MtF's as their true gender only, for instance, the terms might be used to specify concepts in a conversation, but not used in general. All FtM's ARE men. So someone who said they are attracted to men, may or may not also include FtMs.

it just seems a little iffy. maybe the poll should have specified cisgender men and cisgender women. I mean, you could say it was implied by having the FtM/MtF choices, but I think if a person doesn't care about cisgender or not, they're going to answer simply male or female.

Yes good point. The poll should have had cisgender male and cisgender female.

The difference on the female and MTF really surprised me. The the difference between FTM and male was much less.

I almost didn't include the poll but since the poll sorta tied in with the prior poll, had interesting stark differences within the poll, and provided a second source of information to compare I did. I wish this poll was asked in a similar manner of Poll G.

Glad to see that the read and stats is generating some thoughts.

whoa. The androgyne sexual orientation poll shows the same amount of female bodied folks pretty much mirror the number of male bodied in the numbers. For instance, 11 male bodied are Bisexual and 11 female bodied are Bisexual.

It's too bad most of us have had to live our lives of quiet desperation. I wonder what life would have been like if we could all have been open about ourselves?

Yes that was a good poll since the bodied numbers were near the same, and the bisexual orientation was the same.

[Rebis]

Maybe you could post the poll again, but throw in

cisgender men
cisgender women
men (trans or cisgendered)
women (trans or cisgendered)
MtF
FtM

actually I picked up a new term for the TS's. A doctor in Boston calls them 'Affirmed'. Affirmed men and Affirmed women.

[Kinkly]

I tried to post a pole on this site but didn't work out how was going to be who r u attracted to feme/'girly' females,manly/'butch' females,MtF,FtM,feme/'girly' males, manly/'butch' males,Androgynes

[Shadow Dragon]

I tried to post a pole on this site but didn't work out how was going to be who r u attracted to feme/'girly' females,manly/'butch' females,MtF,FtM,feme/'girly' males, manly/'butch' males,Androgynes

Yeah, and some people would probably have to vote for two of those choices.

[Kinkly]

I would have set it up tick all that apply


great work on the book so far Kenra

[Kendall]

Added first charts to chapter 2, a pie chart, line graph, and scatter graph. I will add more if these seem to work well and add value to writing. Tell me what you think.

Also finished analyzing sample sizes based on population, confidence, and error. This will give you an idea how accurate the polls and data could be, when considering each piece of information. See chapter 3 for this new addition tables and such.

[Kendall]

Maybe you could post the poll again, but throw in

cisgender men
cisgender women
men (trans or cisgendered)
women (trans or cisgendered)
MtF
FtM

actually I picked up a new term for the TS's. A doctor in Boston calls them 'Affirmed'. Affirmed men and Affirmed women.

Someone can do another poll. Just make sure the terminology used is simple and clear. Easy for everyone to understand, not just scientists.

I hope the whole book encourages further polling, surveys, and research to gain more information, clarify current data, test my observations, and verify claims (both for and against).

My efforts are all on the book atm, but send me a pm if you poll and gather more data that might change what is known so far.

I spent like 3 hours trying to remember and relearn how to do statistical regression and correlation, lol. And another 3 hours how to determine sample sizes, confidence, and error. If I made any mistakes there, someone let me know because its been a while since college. I think its correct.

A few days trying to figure out how to figure out the populations. That was pretty difficult.

I tried to post a pole on this site but didn't work out how was going to be who r u attracted to feme/'girly' females,manly/'butch' females,MtF,FtM,feme/'girly' males, manly/'butch' males,Androgynes

Yeah, and some people would probably have to vote for two of those choices.

Yes the prior poll Rebis was mentioning was a "click all that apply" type poll, not just a single choice.

[AlexTheSane]

Kendra, the graph explanation for body type in chapter 2 confuses me. From what I know, one can't find a correlation coefficient from catagorical data (intersexed, female, or male) because there have to be two numbers for each in order to graph in a way that can produce a regression line (scatterplot, etc, a correlation coefficient measures deviation from the line of best fit from what I understand). With the three data you have (N% intersex, X% female, Y% male), you only have one number for each, so I am actually at a complete loss as to how you managed to graph it in a way where a program would give you the correlation coefficient. That part reads like complete gibberish, quite frankly.

Actually, I think that the acrane-looking numbers aren't even necessary, the pie chart gives you quite enough information to talk about and draw conclusions from.

Edit: I just read down to the scatter graph of the different polls. I'm still confused, especially since there is one line for male/female and a separate one for intersex. I refer back to my comment about the pie chart. Also, all these different graphs and tables are making this very hard to read.

[Kendall]

Kendra, the graph explanation for body type in chapter 2 confuses me. From what I know, one can't find a correlation coefficient from catagorical data (intersexed, female, or male) because there have to be two numbers for each in order to graph in a way that can produce a regression line (scatterplot, etc, a correlation coefficient measures deviation from the line of best fit from what I understand). With the three data you have (N% intersex, X% female, Y% male), you only have one number for each, so I am actually at a complete loss as to how you managed to graph it in a way where a program would give you the correlation coefficient. That part reads like complete gibberish, quite frankly.

Edit: I just read down to the scatter graph of the different polls. I'm still confused, especially since there is one line for male/female and a separate one for intersex. I refer back to my comment about the pie chart.

For the main data Female to male:
X is female bodied from the 7 polls
Y is male bodied from the corresponding 7 polls matching up with the female

Intersexed one is female to intersex. This wont be on any final version, rather was an experiment.

Also, all these different graphs and tables are making this very hard to read.

Yes. In the beginning it was all just raw data of tables. I will have to keep figuring out how to make it easier to read or use.

Actually, I think that the acrane-looking numbers aren't even necessary, the pie chart gives you quite enough information to talk about and draw conclusions from.

Besides the intersexed regression data though, you think the pie chart easy to understand.

The last chart actually relates to the pie chart, showing the range, rather than average. Its sorta out of place and maybe not needed.

I may have to do another correlation chart to for the ts to androgyne population data in chapter 3.

As for the correlation data, I might just reduce it to 4 to 5 pieces of data. Since people can get the information on their own if desired.

I am next trying to figure out if I need something for the transition section. First thing I thought of is pie or bar chart if needed.

Thanks for your comments, suggestions, and critic Alex.

I will try to make it better and address some of the problems.

Kendra

[AlexTheSane]

I may have to do another correlation chart to for the ts to androgyne population data in chapter 3.

As for the correlation data, I might just reduce it to 4 to 5 pieces of data. Since people can get the information on their own if desired.

Actually, the correlation data is what seemed the most out of place, because you are not supposed to be able to even GET a correlation coefficient for data that involves a category (I/F/M). As for the scatter, you put female on the x-axis and male and intersex on the y-axis is what I think you were alluding to? I'm not sure why you did that, or what it would say. I really thing the pie chart is all you need.

Edit: I am, in part, being really anal because I'm a math-head and am currently taking a class on this sort of thing (note currently, so my information is incomplete on the subject), but mostly I think the problem is too many graphs. If this is supposed to be a book leading toward an understanding of Androgyne, so much mathy-fun graphing and interpretations is really going to turn people off.

[Silverblue]

Kendra, I don't know if this is useful, but my brother is a polling statistician and might be willing to help design polls which are constructed so as to reduce bias. Or logic check ones if you want.

[Kendall]

I may have to do another correlation chart to for the ts to androgyne population data in chapter 3.

As for the correlation data, I might just reduce it to 4 to 5 pieces of data. Since people can get the information on their own if desired.

Actually, the correlation data is what seemed the most out of place, because you are not supposed to be able to even GET a correlation coefficient for data that involves a category (I/F/M). As for the scatter, you put female on the x-axis and male and intersex on the y-axis is what I think you were alluding to? I'm not sure why you did that, or what it would say. I really thing the pie chart is all you need.

Edit: I am, in part, being really anal because I'm a math-head and am currently taking a class on this sort of thing (note currently, so my information is incomplete on the subject), but mostly I think the problem is too many graphs. If this is supposed to be a book leading toward an understanding of Androgyne, so much mathy-fun graphing and interpretations is really going to turn people off.

I made two mistakes so far. One is that the 0.43 doesn't pass a 0.10 (or 0.05, or 0.01) significance test. Because of the insufficient number of data pairs. At this number of data pairs,0.67 is the threshold, at 0.10 significance.

I was wrong with the 43%, it should be 18%, I didn't square the coefficient. (.43*.43*100). The 18% is okey, but isn't great is what the correlation alludes to. Thats why I had that other range chart. You can't use that average pie chart accurately, only 18% of the time in the observations. That means the rest of the time it is 82% uncommon, as one tries to predict the total population blend of bodied sex to larger, or the entire population.

The correlation is measuring the consistency of the multiple numerical populations of F and M bodied through 7 different observations. This shows how accurate that pie chart is at increased populations, from these samples.



When one says you can't compare categorys. That refers to in being in one source. Certainly I could not correlate individually a gender number from a poll without any other comparison, just like I can't correlate color, or favorite music style. Correlations only compare pairs of numerical data to see how consistently the lower to higher numerical data remains.

But in this case we aren't looking at bodied sex as one number, rather a series of different measures, there is 7 numbers pairs. Bodied sex when taken from multiple sources, at different times, and different places, becomes a numerical measure, rather than just a choice category, especially when looking at it as a ratio. What is being checked is how consistent (linear relationship) the ratio of F and M bodied remains when increased or decreased. The mathmatical equation only measures how scattered the ratio of both are. How much they change. The coefficient tells how scattered the series of male numbers are to its matching female numbers, 7 times. It is measuring how when variable X changes, variable Y changes with it and by how much. In fact then a formula can be made from the results. From the slope and coefficient.

That pie chart in other words though clear, can be misleading since the answer from average from 7 sources, 3.65% intersex bodied, 22.65% female bodied, and 74.36% is not entirely that stable. It is an average, with 82% scattered, mainly because of the 2 big differences in the largest male measure and largest female differences. When you compare 12 F and 57M to 18F and 21M this is where most of the 82% comes from, the widest difference.

The scattergraph is cone shaped from the available data, but is linear. Though the graph and numbers do show some correlation between polls, despite the spread. It is not entirely chaotic or independent. Rather there is some correlation.

I also computed how many polls would be ideal at a 0.43 correlation coefficient. At 90% reliability, 16 pairs (polls) would be needed, so I am short by 9 polls. And at 95% reliability, 21 pairs (polls) would be needed. Though doing so may increase or decrease the coefficient.

Just realize that although I put the pie chart, at 7 the pie chart is not usable as a accurate prediction tool, unless 9 more polls validate the consistency and correlation. Or a large poll brings greater confidence. The level of confidence currently for all the data is only 95%+/-7% when taken on a whole. But the varience of just looking at the M and F bodied info, causes the correlation concern and failure.

[Kendall]

Kendra, I don't know if this is useful, but my brother is a polling statistician and might be willing to help design polls which are constructed so as to reduce bias. Or logic check ones if you want.

If he wants to look at the information so far, that would be helpful.

If anyone else wants to try another poll, they better do it quick, because I am shooting to get past the 3/4th way to finish first draft milestone soon.

[AlexTheSane]

Ah, OK, I get it now. Sorry for being so pesky.

[Kendall]

Ah, OK, I get it now. Sorry for being so pesky.

=) Np. I wanted feedback. It helps me clarify the information.

I updated Chapter 3

I also used the same method to pass the population estimate data of chapter 3. One can compare how the chapter 2 ratio passes, where as the bodied Androgyne data failed to correlate. I also added a small near accurate pie chart showing my estimate of transgender members broken down to crossdressing, transsexual, and androgyne, based off of the numbers.

Side note also..
I was promoted to a department manager now, so my time is a bit less now, until I learn the ropes a bit more.

[Kendall]

Added a little bit of chapter 9 that I began today. It stops without completion of course, and has a lot more to be added.