Conversion Therapy and a Survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth

As I said, the world doesn't always resolve into simple binaries.

No, but when it does 99.9% of the time it's far more accurate to describe it as a binary than to say "well it's all a wibbly-wobbly spectrum". The saying is "the exception that proves the rule", not "disproves".

The chances of a human not being unambiguously male or female are similar to the chances of a coin landing on its edge. It's most useful to model a coin toss as 50/50 for almost all purposes, and a coin toss is a perfectly effective way of deciding who kicks off a match.

Sure, if you want to play philosophy football you can spend all 90 minutes explaining that you didn't lose the toss because "how can you be sure it actually came up heads" but normal people would like to just get on and play the match.

And this is why you're losing all the court cases, by the way. You might be able to get away with this in private circles, but when it reaches the courts, the referees - I mean judges - get to red card you for being a tosser. This sort of 4th-form level bullshit just annoys judges.

As I said, the world doesn't always resolve into simple binaries. It would be easier if it did, but it doesn't.

Actually, around sex classification it does. And for many reasons it is really important that people do not spread misinformation. I am sure that you have heard of some rather serious life threatening medical situations caused by people not acknowledging their sex which has led to at least one death, and several publicised other near death misses.

I am sure you are aware that even though the majority of the cells in your body are red blood cells, the other cells that control other functions of your body will still have the original codes for your body to function as the sex it was from a foetus. It is rather disingenuous to suggest otherwise really.

It is therefore vital for a person to be honest about their sex and the changes they have done so they get the best care. So, again. Stately that transwomen are female is misinformation and it is factually false.

And people with differences in sex development, those you point out that might have differences in their reproductive systems, are still male or female. That group have asked continually to not have their medical conditions politicised as explanatory conditions for trans people. With modern medical technologies and looking at a range of different organs, and body processes etc, they are categorised as either having bodies that are male and female.

No, it's really quite simple.

Yes, I agree it's simple. It's individual personality expressed through an ideological framework which is entirely based on sex stereotypes. No more complicated or meaningful than that.

We are all "non binary" in terms of our individual personalities.

The link has links to peer-reviewed science to back up the claims in the statement. Think of it as a portal to the science.

Have you read the papers linked?

There are a total of four references concerned with proving a biological basis for gender identity.

1. Most papers do not in fact provide evidence of a biological basis for a gender identity universal to all humans, but examine possible biological causes of gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition, so it seems logical to assume that there might be a biological cause for developing it - in those few individuals who are diagnosed with it. (FWIW, I believe that we will eventually find that the multifactorial causes of gender dysphoria do include a biological basis of some sort.) That is not evidence for the existence of gender identity.

1. The first reference is a literature review of research mostly concerned with people born with a difference in sex development. The authors conclude that the available data suggests a biological basis of some sort, but they don't know what or have any evidence. The papers they state do have evidence of a biological basis of some sort are not concerned with gender identity but with gender dysphoria (see above).

1. The second reference is another literature review coming up with the same arguments and again, looking not at the etiology of gender identity but gender dysphoria. Notable in both literature reviews is the emphasis on papers making claims about people having male and female brains even if they are not that sex. Such papers have been analysed extensively on FWR, the result of which is that we know they do not provide any evidence for the existence of male and female brains and are therefore unhelpful when trying to prove the existence of gender identity.

1. The next reference is a literature review of twin studies. The conclusion: These findings suggest a role for genetic factors in the development of GID.

That there may be a biological factor involved in developing gender identity disorder (as it was then called) is an accepted hypothesis. The paper does not however make any claims about providing evidence for the existence of a universal gender identity in humans (because it can't).

1. The fourth reference is to another literature review, this time limited to studies of people with a particular DSD. Again, this is looking into the biological basis of gender dysphoria, not gender identity.

Do you have any papers purporting to provide evidence for a biological basis of a universal gender identity in humans? Or, to say it in your words, any evidence for an innate sense of oneself as being male or female?

Well put, midge. Yes, it is tiresome dealing with all the sophistry about intersex conditions.

So are their gonads as male or female? Some say "kind of both" and others say "neither".

Do you think people with congenital disorders of sex development are a third sex, or that they don't have a sex? Human sexual reproduction is dimorphic. There are two gametes. Two sexes.

Turning into a well worn record

How many legs do humans have ?

Can humans see?

Are both those answers true in every case?

No

But if they are not true we know something is wrong. Just likeDSD . And not like transgender

You might find this paper interesting, Shizuku. Biological sex is important.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919971/

In this review, we provide a setting for the basis of differences between male and female cells and highlight why these differences will likely provide novel insights into the roles of the X and Y chromosomes. Throughout this review, we have avoided the use of the word “gender,” specifically referring to the “sex” of cells. According to Institute of Medicine, “sex” is a biological construct dictated by the presence of sex chromosomes and in animals and humans the presence of functional reproductive organs. On the other hand, “gender” is a cultural concept referring to behaviors that might be directed by specific stimuli (visual, olfactory) or by psychosocial expectations that result from assigned or perceived sex and therefore can influence biological outcomes.

Some people's gender identity falls somewhere between male and female.

I'm afraid that's a bit of a spoke in your "gender identity is just innate knowledge of your sex" wheel. You can't claim that and simultaneously claim it's more complex than that for some people. "Non binary" gender identity is just personality expressed through an ideology which is obsessed with sex role stereotypes. What else exactly do you think it is?

Very interesting point . I think to ban conversion therapy whilst at the same time allowing people to transfer to another sex is inconsistent. Either both or nothing. I have grave concerns over the damage we are doing to our children and young people, the current situation sees them confused. Once they are adults I understand it is their choice, although I still do think the nhs should be paying for this

The link has links to peer-reviewed science to back up the claims in the statement. Think of it as a portal to the science.

This link?
www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health

That's been posted on here many times as 'evidence' of the existence of 'gender identity'. First in 2018, and again last year when it was revised with more references - the earlier version only contained 5 distinct references from journals (3 of them were cited 3 times each to bulk out the reference list). I posted this on one of the earlier threads:

The first reference is a very short literature review, Saraswat A, et al. Evidence Supporting the Biologic Nature of Gender Identity. Endocr Pract. 2015 Feb;21(2): 199-204.

This paper concludes: "Because the sample sizes of most studies on this subject were small, the conclusions must be interpreted with caution. Further research is required to assign specific biologic mechanisms for gender identity."

Despite this, the Endocrine Society use it to claim that "the data are strong for a biological underpinning to gender identity".

My comments on the other paper which is cited by the Endocrine Society to support the statement that gender identity is real and biological are here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228447-Transing-children?msgid=77306113

Original version of the position statement from 2017:
<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200312050136/www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20200312050136/www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health

Link to (long) thread where this was discussed last year:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4104554-Can-someone-please-explain-trans

Indeed, but like the healthy kidney and recipient's healthy body, they are incompatible, and that incompatibility is a big problem that typically needs a medical resolution.

You're making it sound like the "incompatible" gender identity is a quasi physical entity that would be fine in a different body. Like a soul. This is your ideology. I do not share it.

No, the law does not. Self ID is not the law. You have to get a certificate to achieve the legal fiction of changing your "legal sex". You cannot actually change sex, it's encoded in every cell.

Look at it this way - you can transplant a healthy function kidney into your body from someone who isn't a good tissue match. You now have a normal healthy body with a normal healthy kidney - neither are "faulty" but nor are they compatible, and because they are no compatible, you now have a major problem needing medical attention.

But your biological sex isn't a "transplant" and nor is your brain. For better or worse, it's you.

Well. Most people posting here have agreed that some people feel that they have a gender identity. Most of us do not have a gender identity and some people believe that they do not exist.

And it becomes much clearer if your gender identity is non-binary. In that you don't identify as male, or female. When clearly, you are one or the other.

That is indisputable.

No one disputes somebody of one sex may want to be the other sex. But they're not. That's the difference. Wanting to be and are, are different.

Wanting to be, and wanting names, pronouns and other signifiers is not 'are'.

And in this particular context, that of conversion therapy, it's very important to understand that. Especially when wanting to be, means that you are given rights, protocols and access as if you really are.

Well. Most people posting here have agreed that some people feel that they have a gender identity. Most of us do not have a gender identity and some people believe that they do not exist.

Yep. This.