Trans unpeak moment

@LangCleg absolutely this. Better said than me, too.

I was a GNC kid and when puberty kicked in the last thing I wanted was to grow up to be a woman. I raged at what society expected from me then just because I was born female.

I still struggled with it in my thirties when I was considered to be just a stupid housewife. It pissed me off when the job interviewer asked me about kids in my forties. All they wanted to know was who'd look after them when they were sick/at weekends/during holidays.

But when DH gets asked about kids, he gets a big fat star for having them and me

At the same time forgive me for getting a little frustrated at people who have never experienced gender identity incongruence or gender dysphoria reducing the experience of millions of people into mere thought exercises as a way to dismiss them

Mate, we're women. The vast majority of us experience dysphoria, usually during adolescence. We know what it feels like. We just don't think that it means our bodies are "wrong" or that "gender identity" exists. We think it means that patriarchal societies impose restrictions that many of us find unbearable during periods of our lives. It makes women ill sometimes, too.

We've read your studies. We agree that they show that some cases of dysphoria may well be innate. We just don't agree that this applies to all trans people (self ID'd an' all) or that this also means that the sexed body belonging to dysphoric people is somehow wrong.

At the same time forgive me for getting a little frustrated at people who have never experienced gender identity incongruence or gender dysphoria reducing the experience of millions of people into mere thought exercises as a way to dismiss them.

Gender identity as a thought exercise? That's a new one. Please elaborate.

Please also explain what bearing this has on the self-id issue because self-id is not just for those with GD. According to GIRES only 5% of the UK's trans community has sought any medical help so far, including therapy. With 100 in 10,000 being trans, that means only 5 in 10,000 have gender dysphoria serious enough to seek help and less than 1 in 10,000 have a GRC so far. But self-id is for the other 95 as well though. So that matters to us if the rights of 95 non-GD people are expected to override the rights of others. Based on what exactly?

When trans people en-masse state these beliefs are wrong, then it is clear people are treating the opinions of those people who are experts in their own experience far more than any cis scientist or commentator, as deceitful and nefarious. That is incandescent in some of the reasoning on here.

Experts in their own experience, yes, absolutely. It is a logical fallacy however to believe that just because no one else can be an expert in you, other people cannot be experts in what particular issues or problems you may have. Why else would those with actual gender dysphoria seek expert help? And as we know from many different voices, including the GIDS clinics here in the UK, these experts also have differing opinions on treatment options and outcomes.

And if you object to this so strongly, as women are experts in their own experience, why do trans activists tell us we're doing womanhood and feminism wrong?

People who are not trans posit themselves as having a better understanding than trans people.

Nope. Not better understanding than trans people of their own individual experiences. Better understanding of what it means to be a woman because of our own individual experiences as women which are collectively based on and shaped by our shared biology.

But let me repeat:

We do not deny gender dysphoria exists, is serious and has long-term consequences for those who have it. We do not agree that gender dysphoria literally means you are the other sex. And we object to the 80 to 95% who self-identify, who do not have clinically diagnosed gender dysphoria, having rights overriding ours.

Today, the PR department of the research organisation puts out a press release, sexed up to attract maximum interest.

Yup. And if the PR department think the results of research might bring negative attention to the research organisation. There won't be any press release. Certainly not a sexed up one. It's not healthy.

I digress. MUST do some work!

I would never dismiss the lived experience of a trans person as invalid or unimportant. But I don't think lived experience is a guide to the biological processes that underlie it

In order to perceive distance, your visual system performs amazing feats of trigonometry. You don't need a conscious knowledge or understanding of trigonometry in order to do this. If your beliefs about trigonometry were incorrect, this would not affect your eyesight. Similarly, how we consciously theorise about our bodies is a different set of processes from what our bodies are actually doing.

Lived experience is important but it is only evidence of lived experience.

@crispbuttyfan

You asked for peer-reviewed studies. You got peer-reviewed studies. Two of which have nothing to do with either of the highly respected and experienced academics you object to because you feel personally insulted by the theory they research and publish in. Your inner feelings of the worth of research however does not invalidate their findings. At least not in this universe.

As for that condescending blog post and the levels of familiarity with research. Who do you think mumsnetters are - mummy's with baby brain? Barely functioning above an instinctive, caretaking level? Is it meant to let us all know that we can't possibly dare to evaluate studies for ourselves?

We have researchers here, scientists, academics, lawyers, teachers, engineers, policewomen, doctors and nurses, all kinds of highly skilled tradespeople and workers, and, yes, stay-at-home mums of all persuasions. Who can all think for themselves, you know.

Part of my work consists of writing analyses of papers and literature reviews for my clients. I actually get paid for reading and understanding research studies. In all kinds of fields, including medicine. My earning potential literally depends on being able to work my way into a new subject in the shortest amount of time possible. I don't have to do the research, I just have to understand it.

When I got my degree in journalism, I did so the old-fashined way. Apart from learning the craft, we also spent our whole first year learning how to find evidence, how to assess and analyse research, how to compare contrasting, conflicting studies, how to support our statements. Later, we had courses on statistics, on logical fallacies and so on.

It was a time when journalists published articles about scientific studies only after reading the studies in detail and talking to the researchers. Do you know what happens today? Today, the PR department of the research organisation puts out a press release, sexed up to attract maximum interest. The papers and magazines, many of whom have long since stopped employing science journalists, print this verbatim.

When you read the studies, as I am wont to do, the articles, but especially the headlines, often bear little resemblance to the actual results and/or are completely misunderstood. Which is why I always go to the source.

And my experience in this debate so far has been that once you read the actual studies, they don't support the claims made by trans activists. That includes claims of an innate gender identity. So yeah, I dare to disagree with you.

Disagree. A couple of weeks ago I categorically did not know they were included in the category. I do now.

Sorry I was more referring to people with a specific agenda like that poster appears to me to be than people who genuinely weren't aware. It was a figure of speech but I appreciate i should have been clearer.

My lived experience is as a woman, a ‘cis’ woman.
A woman who has fought against gender at every turn for her entire life, I reject the idea of an innate gender identity with every single cell of my being. I am a female and I have a personality THAT IS IT.
I have had a really hard time as a gender non conforming woman, I’ve been told I’m too loud, too sexual, too bossy, too aggressive, will never be funny, to shut up, to let the men speak, be pretty, be understanding, be caring, be anything but myself.
No.

When you say gender is innate it’s as offensive to me as misgendering a trans person.
I know gender is not innate because I don’t have one. How do you like them lived experiences?

This is not a ‘thought exercise’
You don’t need to have gender dysphoria to have skin in this game.

Where did the term 'transvestite' go to? Is it ever used now?

4thwavenow/ fairplay for women are explicitly anti-trans propaganda sites.
Again, that will not be accepted by anyone who is a supporter of these sites, and relies on the premise that trans people, cannot be trusted and can not possibly call out transphobia where they see it.

I don't know the history of 4thwavenow very well, but fairplay4women is not anti trans, it is pro-women. There is a huge difference.

You have also fallen for the line that being on Mumsnet means that people here are "just" mums (whatever that is). We have a full complement of doctors, biologists, psychologists, lawyers, and academics of all stripes. There are trans people here, and people with trans friends, family members and children, and many, many women who were gender non conforming as children and as adults ourselves.

One other thing you've not accounted for is that on a board full of feminists, you are lecturing at people who have decades of experience and knowledge of what happens when science tries to tell us what gender is and does.

We've been thinking about gendered brains for years. We are on it. It's incredibly patronising to assume otherwise. There is lived experience and knowledge here in spades, and your dismissal of it as propaganda is frustrating.

“When trans people en-masse state these beliefs are wrong, then it is clear people are treating the opinions of those people who are experts in their own experience far more than any cis scientist or commentator, as deceitful and nefarious”

I think I am doing this actually. I don’t trust the gender rights activists because they are using research based on trans-sexual people to further their own agenda. It is deceitful and nefarious. And truly transphobic actually.

crispbutty "People who are not trans posit themselves as having a better understanding than trans people"

conservativeuterus "A bit like men telling woman what they are then"

So can I add....

" A bit like transwomen telling women what they are?

and might we all agree that in order to understand different experiences it is essential to respect and listen....

But I think a particular population here doesn't want that because the paths forward would be better for women, female trans people and TS trans people, but not them.

Quite. And it can get hard to see that through the barrage of information that gender dysphoria is real! (we know) People with gender dysphoria are often suicidal! (that’s terrible and should be addressed).

But you don’t have gender dysphoria do you? You quite like the body you have. So, what’s the issue again?

Gah! And again. I give up

Bold fail, sorry
*
People who are not trans posit themselves as having a better understanding than trans people*

A bit like men telling woman what we are then.

At the same time forgive me for getting a little frustrated at people who have never experienced gender identity incongruence or gender dysphoria reducing the experience of millions of people into mere thought exercises as a way to dismiss them

I am a little frustrated at you not being able to say if you personally have experienced such issues.

People who are not trans posit themselves as having a better understanding than trans people.

A bit like men telling woman what they are then.

I admit there are people who agree with elements of what I have posted, I am not referencing those, I accept that. And maybe didn't reference that sooner. I am not saying everyone is dismissing all elements of this discussion.

At the same time forgive me for getting a little frustrated at people who have never experienced gender identity incongruence or gender dysphoria reducing the experience of millions of people into mere thought exercises as a way to dismiss them.

When trans people en-masse state these beliefs are wrong, then it is clear people are treating the opinions of those people who are experts in their own experience far more than any cis scientist or commentator, as deceitful and nefarious. That is incandescent in some of the reasoning on here.

People who are not trans posit themselves as having a better understanding than trans people.

This fact is almost entirely ignored, and is clearly bad-faith.

4thwavenow/ fairplay for women are explicitly anti-trans propaganda sites.
Again, that will not be accepted by anyone who is a supporter of these sites, and relies on the premise that trans people, cannot be trusted and can not possibly call out transphobia where they see it.

If any other minority, pointed to a site that was clearly set up to dismiss and stigmatise them, the site will always be defended by those invested in believing it to be true.

I dont expect anyone on here so far, to call out anti-trans propaganda sites for what they are, and insist that trans people are the only minority in existence that doesn't have trolls targetting them, and in fact they are run by 'reasonable' people... clearly transphobia exists in the world, and some people are invested in that, and usually have a paypal button for donations.

I think my input to this discussion has now run it's course.

I wish everyone well. Good-bye for now.

I am sensing an element of projection in the accusations of not engaging in good faith.

crisp, people are agreeing with much of what you are saying in that it is likely that there is a biological or genetic element that causes dysphoria and dysmorphia. It's incredibly frustrating that you won't acknowledge that.

The point of disagreement comes when you insist that this predisposition overrides all other biological criteria of genotypal, phenotypal, primary and secondary sex characteristics and means that the person is actually the opposite sex.

How can it, and more pertitently - why should it?

And if you are genuinely in good faith, then constantly referring to "anti trans", "propaganda" and "transphobes" is not helping you out here.

Also, it's not your first time at this rodeo is it? I smell copy and paste in that last epic post

crispbutty why do you keep referring to things being ‘protrans’ and ‘antitrans’ it’s so infuriating.
There are actual trans people here, how can thy be ‘antitrans’. I am not ‘antitrans’ just because I don’t agree with self id or that all trans people are in someway intersex or that women need same sex protections.
You have said that we are not posting in good faith and yet it doesn’t feel like you are listening to us at all.

That's completely different to the non-med, non-op transwomen women are concerned about.

Indeed. An non-op non-med transwomen is just a long way of saying man, or even crossdresser tbh. Obviously men retain a male pattern of criminality. Its just ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

4thwavenow is not an anti-trans propaganda site at all. I am finding it interesting that you dismiss 4thwavenow and fairplay4women as propaganda, whilst giving links from transadvocate though

A couple of weeks ago I categorically did not know they were included in the category. I do now.

It changes everything, doesn't it?

For me, it moves from something manageable for women (even if I don't really think women should be managing it because men should manage themselves) to open season on risk factors. And suddenly, a lot of aggression and male pattern dominance behaviour online makes complete sense.

If we could only recognise the several distinct populations here (female trans are distinct also), we could find paths forward. But I think a particular population here doesn't want that because the paths forward would be better for women, female trans people and TS trans people, but not them.

yet I don't even know what the point is in quoting the Swedish study when we're discussing self-id. That study only included post-op transsexuals and while it's interesting in a scientific sense & medical & psychological outcomes for post-op transsexuals kind of way, self-id has nothing to do with post-op transsexuals anymore (if it ever did).

Besides, there's at least one other study showing that where crime by post-op transwomen occurs, it tends to be survival crime and we know from the UK where trans rights are enshrined in law, survival crime largely (if not completely) disappears. That's completely different to the non-med, non-op transwomen women are concerned about.