Pregnant trans men Guardian article

[Todayissunny]

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/mar/22/story-one-mans-pregnancy-trans-jason-barker

I just find this so confusing....
It tells me that we should just be able to live how we want to. We should absolutely not be defined by gender.

Or am I just really, really old fashioned that this is just absolutely crazy.

Who you gonna believe? Stillscreaming or your lying eyes?

Here's the information from the Tavistock:

gids.nhs.uk/about-us

They are an NHS clinic, as underfunded as the rest of the NHS, so hardly looking for business.

They've got a press office if anyone needs further information.

These non-binary people then, are they missing the genes that code for masculine or feminine behaviour?

This is just another round of "This never happens" except when it does.
For example: "Dr Helen Webberley said she listens to 'children's hearts' about when they want treatment. "

We haven't found those genes yet, we have genes for sex but nothing for gender, there might not be any for gender, who can tell? I'm not a clinician, I think it's best to leave diagnosing to medical people.

Personally, I think the non binary as an identity thing is probably a bit of a phase with most of the teenagers, best left to do their own devices. Some will turn out to be gay but the rest will probably be terrifying normal.

..said she listens to 'children's hearts' about when they want treatment.

The General Medical Council have stopped her from treating transgender patients, unsupervised, while they carry out a full investigation. If she did over-treat one child, that doesn't mean that the vast majority of kids aren't getting evidence based medicine, adhering to NICE guidelines. It doesn't make the trans expereinces any less valid.

Even Harold Shipman didn't make all doctors guilty by association but it's only fair to say that this woman hasn't been found guilty of anything.

I am very interested in the discussion between Rat and others about gender as a social construct. But I am struggling with the concepts and want to ask if I could give a couple of examples from my own life for response.

We haven't found those genes yet, we have genes for sex but nothing for gender, there might not be any for gender, who can tell?

Then what could possibly be the cause of a biological innate gender identity?

I read Mary Beard's Woman and Power not long ago. It struck me that there are some very enduring beliefs about women and our general competency for any sort of public life. Do you take this as evidence of gender being a social construct?

Then what could possibly be the cause of a biological innate gender identity?

Although the whole genome has been mapped, scientists don't yet fully know what it all does or can do. I think the last estimates I read were that they had a fair idea of what 20% does but that 20% might have impacts that they don't understand.

Do you take this as evidence of gender being a social construct?

I don't think that we can take any specific piece of evidence of behaviour or attitude as being proof of anything. I can throw out a good few women who ruled Egypt, Wales, England, Acient Greece, etc. who obviously overcame those beliefs but neither piece of information negates the other.

I occasionally find myself doing a weird bit of gender performance, and I have no idea if I'm doing it because I'm female or because I'm a woman, if it's cultural, a habit or just me. If anyone else can break this sort of thing down, I'd be delighted to hear what they have to say.

I'm not claiming to have all the answers, I'm just pointing out that some people are stating a theory, for which there is no definitive evidence, as fact. If the starting point in a discussion is that one groups has the 'facts' the discussion doesn't go very far.

It’s a wierd one. I totally support people’s rights to dresss and identifyvhowever they want. However, you can’t call yourself a ‘man’ and then have a baby. A trans man yes. But not a man. Giving birth is s uniquely female experience and shouldn’t be give away.

Totally a fad. Really boring way of making yourself more interesting

The difficulty with using subjective tests in laws that give people rights is that they are very hard to police and prove. How could you ever prove that someone had made a false self-declaration of trans just to access women’s spaces - you just cannot. So it is unenforceable. That is the reason that traditionally a Dr’s medical diagnosis has been required, as some kind of objective “proof” from an independent third party (albeit flawed proof, but it is what it is). The Nicot case in Strasbourg found that the State had a legitimate interest in maintaining that as a condition of being treated in law as the opposite sex. Arguments we should be making : we ought to draw parallels to analogous situations such as emerging trends on allowing mental illness and other non-visible illnesses to be grounds for claiming to be disabled. I think there you also need a diagnosis; I’d be amazed if not but I haven’t checked. Clearly this is open to abuse if you can self-declare as suffering from depression or anxiety such that you are eligible for benefits etc. Again, unintended consequences. There appears to be a trend towards using these subjective criteria in law but I think in time the issues will start to become noticeable...

thanksjanes go for it; I've been thinking about it more overnight too, it's interesting (to me!).

We haven't found those genes yet, we have genes for sex but nothing for gender, there might not be any for gender, who can tell?

Pretty hard to find genes for something that nobody can objectively describe.

No. The human genome will really not be turning up genes for gender. It’s like saying there will be genes discovered for political belief or religious belief. These are cultural phenomena.

If the starting point in a discussion is that one groups has the 'facts' the discussion doesn't go very far.

Believe in the existence of sex is evidence based. Belief in the existence of gender isn't.

I am happy for Gwyneth Paltrow to believe in the power of crystals and healing stickers. I just don't want her beliefs to influence public policy.

I liked that article, i loved that they had an amazingly positive experience when they had always looked on it with dread. Hope they’re enjoying parenthood - the child seems much loved.

Hard to find genes for something that changes over time and place
How did the 2 year old Jazz Jennings know innately that dress=girl when 50 years ago all babies wore dresses

PussyTrump covered that in response to Olennas up thread. It's called signalling.

Ratrolypoly, signalling what?

I believe some people cite stereotypical interests as reasons why they knew they were trans because to them they felt they were being drawn to express their allegiance to a particular group, indicating to them that they really were a member of that group in some way. It's called signalling. It doesn't matter what the signs are that one would use to display one's belonging to a particular group, or that the signs are different in different parts of the world; it is the desire to "signal" one's belonging that transpeople are commenting on in these circumstances. Hope that helps.

Here you go merry, I copied from my other post. So when someone like Jazz says they knew they were a girl because they liked dresses as a toddler, it's most likely a really cack-handed way of saying that they were compelled to "signal" themselves as a girl; by whatever means was currently associated with girlhood (i.e. dresses). And that this, to them, was one of the first indications that something inside themselves truly is a girl.

I should point out thought they like aaaaallll of these things on both sides of the argument there are no definitive answers that everyone agrees on. Only theories, some of which one cohort find more believable based on their lived experiences and some which the other do, based on the same.

Exactly; a 2 year old has to be told that dresses are for girls. The way the parent talks about the child, and about girls and dresses can cause a desire to please the parent.

ratrolypoly I went back to your post and understand the point that people use cultural signifiers to show that they are part of a group. I also understand wanting to belong or feel part of a tribe. But what if you are trying to join a group because you are projecting on to it qualities that don't exist?

I don't know what I am supposed to have in common with Caitlyn Jenner that I don't have in common with any other human, or as a woman, why I would feel that I have anything in common with other women beyond living with the consequences of similar biology.

I believe in human rights and that because of different biology women and men sometimes need different services, but Katie Hopkins is no more my 'sister' than Nigel Farage is my 'brother'.

So again, what is being signalled?

Yes it can Upstart. There are a lot of competing influences going on at any one time on any individual. Too many in fact for any of us to ever know why anybody does anything really.

In theory if we could unpick all the whys and wherefores we could have a fairly good stab at predicting the future, but unfortunately people remain too complex at present.