Trans people are not harming anyone

[AmoraObscura]

OK, so I've been having various discussions with people about this whole trans thing. The most prominent reason people have for supporting it seem to be that they're not hurting anyone, in fact they're doing themselves a huge diservice, so why not just go along with it as they have everything to lose and nothing to gain.

Also that brain scan evidence shows that being trans is a thing.

If anyone is able to help me out with this, or could point me in the direction of threads which address it, that would be much appreciated.

OK this morning there is very definitely a lot of posters coming on here to "redress the balance" of views. Which is kind of them, and I suppose gives us all a chance to reiterate what each of us as an individual thinks.

They could maybe try to be a bit more smart about it, though. They always come across so utterly stupid.

At least open debate rather than TA bullying can happen here. Pretty tragic really.

Trans activists are still harming the female sex and eroding our rights irrespective of brain scans

Trying to shout down the little women with their superior intellect - typical male behaviour

Maybe there are just a good many more feminists out there who are not of "one mind" than the MN Feminism boards would previously have suggested. I for one am glad that other people reading these threads will see that the other side exists, and is not only made up of TRAs, men or trolls.

Have any of our new guests given a good non-circular definition of what a woman is yet? One that includes me and Danielle muscato?

Trans ideology is:

Reifying harmful gender stereotypes
Sexually coercive and abusive towards lesbians
Homophobic and sexist (see 1 and 2)
Pushing for unnecessary medical intervention in children
Unworried about increased risk to the safety of women and girls
Prepared to overlook male pattern sexual offending
Authoritarian and bullying

I could go on.

Intersectional feminists cannot support trans people in female spaces, since that excludes Muslim and other women from female spaces.

Trans people have the same rights as everyone else with exception of parts of the Equalities act to protect women only spaces.

Yup. And the reason transwomen do not have womens rights is that they are not women.

Transsexual people are unlikely to hurt anyone, I would agree. 'Transgender'/transaction types? They are IMO. And any man who simply has to say he is a woman? Definitely. As the only kind of man who would declare himself a woman to gain access to female spaces, is the kind of man I would not want there at all

They are not harming anyone? Look, I have no problem with someone with gender dysphoria who just wants to get on with their life and live in peace. But as a woman, if you stand up for your rights, you get called a TERF and as this link shows, they want to kill us! This site is a compilation of tweets basically stating what they want to do to 'TERFs'. I do not want these pp sharing my space!

terfisaslur.com/

Also, regarding the brain scans (and sorry if I repeat, haven't read in detail all the posts)....just because something shows up on a brain scan does not mean that it was there from birth.

For example, those who have been sexually abused as children have been consistently shown to have a smaller hippocampus than those who haven't. It has been assumed that this isn't something they were born with, but a response to their early environment.

As another poster said, the brain is plastic, it forms in response to experience and environment. So for me, the differences in trans people's brains doesn't necessarily prove they were 'born that way'.

Of course it doesn't prove that they weren't! But I think there is a lot of evidence to support the fact that a lot of the brain is a work in progress from birth. But then this takes us into the whole nature versus nurture debate.....

@destiny - that is a shocking link

How can this be condoned?

Nope. Not harming women at all They never commit sex crimes they never threaten violence and they never take positions reserved for actual women.

No, this isn't spam I'm genuinely looking for responses

This study concluded that transwomen have brains consistent with those of men.

They purposely left homosexual transsexuals out of the study in order that the results could not be indicative of sexual orientation.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/digest.bps.org.uk/2011/11/02/male-to-female-transsexuals-have-male-brains/amp/

But it's immaterial.

Since gender dysphoria is now no longer necessary to be trans. And that transvestite fetishists are considered women.

You could of course brain scan every single person on the planet, sort them into two groups based on what you consider feminine or masculine brains, then decide on that basis somehow, whether or not they present a threat, and after that get transvestite fetishists to sign a statutory declaration that they are indeed fetishising women, and therefore should be excluded.

I am less worried about some ones brain and more concerned with their penis and them bringing their penises into female safe spaces.

Even if male and female brains are different, surely all that says is that nature has some effect. Whoopdedoo. nurture (gender stereotyping society and upbringing) can still also matter, and does still matter as can be demonstrated. Only the same kind of morons that hold the idea “blacks brains are different hence they’re inferior” would hold the view “women’s brains are different hence they’re inferior”.

I thought the trans being brain based thing was more about how the brain has a map of the body, and that map might not match the body - as with the whole phantom limb thing, missing parts itching or hurting. Was it Ramachandran who did some interesting stuff in this area?

Anything that can go wrong with brains or the rest of the body does go wrong sometimes.

Maybe it was ramachandran m.sfgate.com/opinion/article/GENDER-IDENTITY-AND-PHANTOM-GENITALIA-3219560.php

Thanks for pointing out that Nature study, Carrier. Figure 3 is fascinating (though, good grief, look at the size of the error bars...).

To say trans people are not hurting anyone and therefore self id should be allowed to come into law misses the point and purpose of law.
At present people are "male" and "female". We all know what that means. It informs how business etc operate. That will effectively disappear and "male" and "female" will become entirely subjective based on the individual "male" or "females", unconnected with those around him or her. The world people move through will have to account for that, presumably having to guess whether a business/ service should be catering their service for male or female on an individual case by case basis as the person walks in the door. That is not practically possible.

Some trans people who call themselves feminists claim that abolishing "male" and "female" is a good thing for women. It means society will no longer be about gender but about individuals, that somehow we have moved away from classification in this way. It would be a good thing for gender to go unremarked upon as no one could classify us and oppress us due to being a woman.

That is absolutely false. Oppression of women is centred around our biology - menstruation/ menopause/ birth/ rape/ access to toilet facilities/ contraception etc etc. If we remove biology from "male" and "female" and allow men to identify as women what will happen. Men, who do not and never have had the biological constraints of being a woman, will identify as women but without reaching menopause, without career break for having children, without having breast milk leak in public, without worrying about leaking menstrual blood in a long meeting etc etc. They will be generally physically stronger and have a male entitlement women do not have.
It will effectively create a "superclass" of women (that is men). Biological women will be sidelined and the changes that are still needed (esp globally) will not happen.
It has already crept in that pregnant woman should be renamed as "pregnant people".

If self id becomes law it will also deny science. It is frightening to say the least.

Does the Nature study not just conclude that the differences were in the part of the brain to do with self perception which from my very basic armchair understanding of neurobiology &neuropsychology could easily be a physical representation of nurture and not nature. It’s been noted elsewhere that people can change brain structure by various means (I think it was believing a lie often told) so why wouldn’t self perception be a similar process to believing a lie often told, given it’s essentially the same thing?

Thanks for the links to the research.

Fascinating to consider how the brain may, to some extent, generate something we experience as gender congruity/incongruity.

Not that, as things stand, it makes much difference to the self-ID issue.