Push and pull factors in transitioning

I always speculated, by reading the thoughts of gender dysphoric people, that there are two aspects to it - a strong physical mis-identification with the body of your sex, and a strong social mis-identification with what society consider the role linked to your sex. Sometimes they coexist, sometimes one causes the other. I'm reading with interest

How do you know they are telling the truth?

How is that relevant to the discussion? The equivalent question regarding gender identity would be, "How do you know that people claiming a gender identity are telling the truth?", which is not what we were discussing.

Its relevant because you are claiming there's no way of proving gender ID & there is with mental illness even tho they both rely on self reporting.

Observable behaviours like presentation & interests.

Those behaviours are already "symptoms" of plenty of other things, such as sexuailty or just plain personality. Why would you need to posit the existence of such a thing as gender identity in the first place?

What do you mean by "sexuality"?

First, how the hell would you know whether there is such a thing as a "transman gender" or not? Why would you automatically assume that the "transman gender" is the same as the "man gender"?

Because I happen to know the definition of gender & trans isn't it.

Second and far more importantly: what is "gender identification" in the first place? I don't identify with a gender type. I identify with a discrepancy between my physical sex and the way my brain sees my body. There's nothing about gender in there.

Whilst I agree the phenomena you are describing exists, technically the word transgender means identifying with the opposite gender. Now that maybe a flaw in the word usage where people such as yourself aren't identifying with the opposite gender or non binary but are identifying with the opposite sex which relies fully on self reporting as there are no observable behaviours. In any case for trans people who do identify with gender there are.

How do you know they are telling the truth?

How is that relevant to the discussion? The equivalent question regarding gender identity would be, "How do you know that people claiming a gender identity are telling the truth?", which is not what we were discussing.

Observable behaviours like presentation & interests.

Those behaviours are already "symptoms" of plenty of other things, such as sexuailty or just plain personality. Why would you need to posit the existence of such a thing as gender identity in the first place?

First, how the hell would you know whether there is such a thing as a "transman gender" or not? Why would you automatically assume that the "transman gender" is the same as the "man gender"?

Second and far more importantly: what is "gender identification" in the first place? I don't identify with a gender type. I identify with a discrepancy between my physical sex and the way my brain sees my body. There's nothing about gender in there.

They are diagnosed because they report actual symptoms of a mental illness.

How do you know they are telling the truth?

But there's no equivalent symptoms of gender identity,

Observable behaviours like presentation & interests.

If self reporting is good enough for mental illness its good enough for gender ID.

Except self-reporting is NOT good enough for mental illness. Nobody is ever diagnosed just because they say they have a mental illness. They are diagnosed because they report actual symptoms of a mental illness. But there's no equivalent symptoms of gender identity, so yes, I can have it both ways.

BTW what's your 'evidence' for your claim?

What claim?

This is incoherent.

Gender identification by its very definition requires an identification with a gender type as in man woman or non binary. There is no 'trans man' gender.

I never said they are unfalsifiable. I said they are not directly observable - no, correction, I said that sometimes, depression is not directly observable.

So too is gender identity.

Indeed! Thus it is invalid reasoning to present a claim that gender identity exists and then demand that others disprove it. By all means, present your evidence for the assertion that gender identity exists.

If self reporting is good enough for mental illness its good enough for gender ID.
Can't have it both ways.

BTW what's your 'evidence' for your claim?

Plenty of trans people do NOT identify with the supposed average behaviours of men or women. They identify with being trans people, and with that having zero to do with so-called average gender behaviours.

I, for example, am not identifying with nothing. I'm identifying with being a transman, which has nothing to do with identifying with the posited average behaviour of men.

So are you suggesting depression & anxiety don't exist because they are unfalsifiable?

I never said they are unfalsifiable. I said they are not directly observable - no, correction, I said that sometimes, depression is not directly observable. However, it becomes blatant once you treat that depression and it recedes, with very visible changes in behaviour and outlook. Same with anxiety.

It is considered invalid reasoning to present a claim and then demand that others disprove it, rather than providing evidence for the assertion yourself.

Indeed! Thus it is invalid reasoning to present a claim that gender identity exists and then demand that others disprove it. By all means, present your evidence for the assertion that gender identity exists.

By the very act of identifying with something suggests an association with the category in some way. You can't identify with nothing.

Why isn't social contagion mentioned by the Op in group 1? It's been a major factor and acknowledged as such.

Trans people aren't saying the collective applies to all individuals, just to them.

Except we don't. Lots of us do not fall within "the collective" or "the average". We can't be properly identified as men or women by our behaviours.

So if you can't identify neither trans people nor non-trans people by those average behaviours... what good and use are those average behaviours to begin with?

That would work for some mental illnesses such as depression. It absolutely wouldn't for plenty others such as bipolar, psychosis, and so on.

So are you suggesting depression & anxiety don't exist because they are unfalsifiable?

But sometimes that's exactly what it means. And remember: the burden of proof is on those positing that something does exist, not on those arguing that it doesn't, since you can't prove that something doesn't exist.

False.

"The burden of proof always lies with the person making an assertion—whether that assertion is that something exists or that it does not. Whoever is making a positive truth claim bears the responsibility to back it up, while the opposing party simply requires that evidence be provided before accepting the claim. 1, 2, 3]
A useful way to understand this is through the concept of the Burden of Proof Fallacy. It is considered invalid reasoning to present a claim and then demand that others disprove it, rather than providing evidence for the assertion yourself. 1, 2]"

Same way you can't with mental illness. A person could be severely depressed & suppressing their symptoms publicly so nobody knows. It relies on self reporting.

That would work for some mental illnesses such as depression. It absolutely wouldn't for plenty others such as bipolar, psychosis, and so on.

Like mental illness it relies on self reporting. Just because you can't 'see' something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

But sometimes that's exactly what it means. And remember: the burden of proof is on those positing that something does exist, not on those arguing that it doesn't, since you can't prove that something doesn't exist.

Lets say i am a trans man. Maybe I am "pulled" towards having a body that feels more like mine. It doesnt necessarily compute that this is a "push". Maybe i am "pulled" towards having relationships with men from the perspective of another man, rather than a woman.

I think the push, pull thing might be valid and a useful way for people to talk about how they feel. But the attempt to make it into the "good" trans people who are pushed away from their sexed bodies and the "bad" trans people who just want to get off.

That's not to say that sexual fetishisation can't be or isnt a pull for some people. But I also think people who lack that sexual arousal element can be "pulled" towards a different gender identity.

Well, you're inferring a lot of things I didn't say from what I did say, and you have even managed to infer that what I meant was the opposite of what I said.

You are claiming that collective gender doesn't exist because individuals differ & you think you can prove this by saying individuals don't reflect the norm

I haven't claimed this, and I have no idea how you have understood anything I've said to be claiming this. I haven't even used the term 'collective gender', let alone commented on it's existence.

I'm not totally sure what you mean by 'collective gender', but if you mean the stereotypical traits which are attributed to the sexes, then of course they exist. But the point is that no one is compelled to comply with these stereotypes.

An individual may or may not reflect the norm. That they don't does not mean the norm doesn't exist.

We can agree on this, at least.

You are claiming that collective gender doesn't exist because individuals differ & you think you can prove this by saying individuals don't reflect the norm which is ….bonkers. Its like saying there can't be a category for black crime in the US because not all black people commit crime.

Trans people aren't saying the collective applies to all individuals, just to them.
This makes no sense.

An individual may or may not reflect the norm. That they don't does not mean the norm doesn't exist.

I'm not making any sort of statistical error. I'm certainly not "Applying aggregate group data (like demographic trends or averages) to an individual". If anyone's doing that, it's you.

And I have no idea what you mean by the phrase "the collective applies".

Trans people aren't saying the collective applies to all individuals, just to them.

This makes no sense.

And average behaviours are just that. Averages. Some women will show traits in behaviour more like the average male, and some men will show traits in behaviour more like the average female. (Apart from behaviours specifically linked to male or female anatomy, of course.)

You are making an ecological fallacy here. Applying aggregate group data (like demographic trends or averages) to an individual is a major statistical error. A group average describes the collective, not any single member.

Trans people aren't saying the collective applies to all individuals, just to them.

So what? In western democracies in 2026 we have a lot of freedom to behave according to our own preferences. It's not the Victorian era or Afghanistan

And yet the collective still applies….regardless of patriarchal influences substantially reducing.

The one trait that distinguishes males from females is on average behaviours. That the sexes share behaviours doesn't change that.

Surely the one trait that distinguishes all males from all females is that males have a male body and females have a female body.

Anything that may be noticed about behaviour is secondary to biology.

And average behaviours are just that. Averages. Some women will show traits in behaviour more like the average male, and some men will show traits in behaviour more like the average female. (Apart from behaviours specifically linked to male or female anatomy, of course.)

You can't specify that some behaviours are 'male only' or 'female only' if they can be exhibited by both sexes. They are just human behaviours which may, for cultural reasons, sexism or personal preferences, be more common in one sex or the other. So what? In western democracies in 2026 we have a lot of freedom to behave according to our own preferences. It's not the Victorian era or Afghanistan

Whatever he may have in common with women is because it's shared between the sexes to begin with. There is no one trait that TIMs have that differentiate them from males.

The one trait that distinguishes males from females is on average behaviours. That the sexes share behaviours doesn't change that.

TIMs do not respect this, because they do not share our experience of being treated this way, because they are male.

In fact trans women do share misogynistic treatment with women like street harassment, workplace discrimination and sexual objectification. They are more likely to be harassed than trans men for a reason.

If they truly understood women, then they would respect the boundary on our spaces. They would say "Although I feel myself to be a woman, I want women to feel safe, so I will not intrude." That would generally be the response of someone who's raised as a girl, who's been made to feel she should put everyone else's needs ahead of her own.

Not all women agree with not feeling safe as exemplified by the huge generational & cultural divide when it comes to single sex spaces. In many countries no such widespread concerns exist.

Instead, we get a narcissistic display of anger, and another "No. I'm coming in whether you like it or not, and if you don't get out of my way..." Which is exactly how someone raised as a boy would respond.

Women never say no, resist or rebel against injustice? 'Feminism' ring a bell?

The pipeline:

• Trans people are in my life. They're all valid!
• Huh, I empathise with them, and don't feel like a woman. I must be some form of trans by their ideology.
• No, I'm not all the way trans. I'm non-binary. (You are here)
• Oh, I just thought I was non-binary because I don't have a gender identity. Does that make me agender?
• Wait, if I don't have a gender identity, then I'm not trans or non-binary.
• Wait, does anyone have a gender identity?
• Oh, it was a lie. There's just male and female.

You want to do right by the people you love. It's okay, and it comes from empathy. But sometimes we enable them, and sometimes we get caught up in their delusions too. You'll get there.

Living with someone who's trans, and coming slowly to terms with the realisation I'm non-binary while still (at present) identifying as a cis woman, is a decent qualification, cheers.

As is reading trans voices in an attempt to understand how trans people have to navigate the world. Plus having trans adult friends and actually listening to them.

Trying to justify rejecting & being abusive to yout own trans children (one example I see here a lot - what the hell is wrong with parents who fo that?!) is a bit different.

I'm sure done of you do know trans people - yet you've chosen to dehumanise and demonise them as a whole. That tells me pretty much everything.

Besides, it's deeply abnormal and antisocial to treat a minority as a hive mind and analyse them like they're Star Trek villains.

The OP is not conducting analysis, simply justifying their own worrying obsession with trans people by repeating propaganda like they're doing it for GCSE.

You ain't anthropologists, my loves. Or ethnographers. Just people who spend way too much time engaged in hateful behaviour and attempting to justify it with paranoid conspiracy theories.