Royal College of Psychiatrists Statement

[dorade]

What hope is there when respected scientific organisations uncritically adopt phrases like "sex assigned at birth" and use "two spirit" people as evidence for the need to mutilated bodies to a facsimile of the other sex?

Report here

Spoonless, it is not as simple as saying did you feel female or not just male? When this first starts so early you don't really get the difference in the way you do as an adult. So you don't wake up one day and say you are a girl. Or at least, I didn't. Though some trans kids these days seem to possibly because sex and gender are now taught and understood much younger than they were in the 50s.

You know it is in that general area and you get clues along the way I suppose you could say that gradually points towards the realisation it is based around the boy/girl polarity.

When you first figure it out you sort of feel as if you ARE a girl and for some reason God has given you the wrong body. I remember crying myself to sleep praying to wake up 'fixed'. But once you start to better grasp the realities you come to terms with the reality of biology and so asking God to correct the mistake drives you to a doctor to ask if they can please. Even if you have no idea that is possible - because remember in those days schoolkids did not know there was such a thing as 'sex change surgery' or 'transgender children'. As they do today.

So it is an impossible question to answer because it is not as concrete as feeling like a girl (what is that anyway?) or 'not feeling like a boy. All you really feel is a polarity or mismatch of two halves and as you realise the two halves are boy/girl you pin labels around those I suppose.

I have noticed recently with the rising number of transgender children that I can guess which of those are really transsexual and are probably going to have surgery when an adult (child surgery does and should not happen).

When that moment comes that they have to make aware their self (seems to be any point between pre school and in primary school - not much later) a boy will start off by saying they ARE a girl to incredulous looks ore disbelief and 'no you're not'. The insistence goes on but at some point it dawns on them that what to them was just a fact based on this inner awareness is not quite what it seems and is less a statement of who others surely can see that they are and more an aspiration to become what apparently they are not and they start to say I am GOING TO BE a girl.

This is not a difference in awareness or understanding or a lessening of the dysphoria, it is just growing old enough to see the root cause as not personal (your reality is the only reality and others around you must surely see what you see) but from a wider perspective (your reality was just your reality and others are explaining the actual reality so now you have to shift focus and BECOME what you are not rather than convince everyone that you are that already).

Anyone who reaches puberty without expressing any of this may well have something else going on or are luckily not so deeply dysphoric. As I cannot see how anyone can get that far without it being noticed by others or you yourself not having to tell someone and seek help.

Because by puberty you are going to know you have a heck of a problem and that it is in some sense to do with your physical self not being what your inner self says it is so self evidently you should be seeking help and advice to try to correct that imbalance.

@Jayceedove's use of the word gender in her post was fine, in its meaning of "appertaining to the feminine".
Humans do seem to have an innate sense of gender when naming things in a number of languages, so gender as a perception exists.
The mistake is in thinking that it can be precisely defined, or that it is synonymous with sex, which is the mistake of trans ideology.

Jayceedove - you're describing dysphoria or body dysmorphia.

I think all of us, including Barrack, have great sympathy with such a body integrity disorder. But... but but but but but - your discomfort has nothing to do with women. It may well have to do with society's prescriptions for acceptable social roles for male humans, but your personal discomfort cannot be a legal definition of "gender" or "gender identity" to which women are also subject.

How do you know your experience of dysphoria is the same as anyone else's?

And besides, you may well be defining "gender identity" as a synonym of dysphoria. But you know as well as anyone here that transactivism has no such definition. Transactivism defines "gender identity" as each person's subjective declaration - unless of course, they are a "cis" woman, in which case "gender identity" is imposed on them whether they like it or not.

No offence, but what you personally have decided is a "gender identity" is of no relevance to Barrack's point - you can't legislate for something that has no objective definition. And if you do, your law will be a bad one.

borntobequiet - it is not the mistake of transsexual ideology, though.

That is the point I have been trying to make without perhaps unfairly seeking to create a 'real trans' versus 'not real trans' divergence.

I have had quite a bit of flak from some transgender people on other forums who see this as my intention.

And it really isn't. I don't know what causes either kind of being trans, or whether they are different causes or different degrees of the same cause, or just changes in society that have shifted focus. Or generational in that many transsexuals transitioned long ago and so have become realistic with time or by not being activists.

Plus there likely will be overlap and cases where the generalisations are not followed.

What I am saying is that the way that transsexual and transgender people interact with society seems to be noticeably different and related to big differences in the way the two groups see things.

Which may be something someone should be looking into as it seems quite stark and might illuminate the search for causes or resolutions if better understood.

Those who transition physically in the old 'sex change' way of talking appear not to be conflating sex and gender. We know the biological limits of sex and what can be changed and that we had to accept gender was being reassigned not sex changed. But the focus was still very much through physical adaptation to better fit in, because fitting in, getting on with being what we regarded our true selves to be and contributing to society, living happily and not causing a fuss or demanding anything back was all part of the major physical transformation we were willing to go through to achieve those goals.

These were once called 'transsexuals' because the focus very much was body and sex not gender and mind. There seem to have been a small percentage of people with this problem through history and in all cultures. So it does not seem to be based on gender stereotypes because these change with time and are different around the world. That there are still around a couple of hundred cases per year in the UK versus not much less 50 years back shows this is a pretty consistent thing not exploding in numbers as a modern fad as has been perceived.

However, there does seem to be another category of what are usually now all just called transgender people who do see this as rooted through gender identity and self expression and who appear to have less acceptance of gender and sex being different and so have been vocally fighting to change perceptions and definitions.

For them gender expression is the goal and not necessarily any physical transformation. Presumably as sex and gender are conflated so why bother changing body if you can just chanfe gender expression. Few want surgery and none want to be regarded as having any kind of medical condition and seek self identification to declare their gender without anyone else being involved.

The numbers here appear to be much higher (at least 50 times v transsexuals and possibly more) and do seem to have increased significantly in recent years.

So instead of say 200 transsexuals per year seeking medical aid there are now 10,000 + transgender people per year coming forward - and 6000 registered (with a GRC) versus up to as many as 600,000 who now wish to register via self ID.

It is easy to perceive the above as me suggesting these are two different problems or two different causes. But all I am doing is describing how things are. You draw your own conclusions here.

I am not suggesting that those seeking self ID and to avoid medical assessment should not be granted rights.

But I do think they have to be aware of the reasons why women in particular and society as a whole will likely equate unwillingness to be assessed and want legal recognition by saying so as fair enough if it has more safeguards and protections against what can go wrong in case someone nefarious slips through the net.

It probably does not matter whether transsexuals and wider transgender people have different causes or different depths of dysphoria associated with the same cause.

Women are going to have far more difficulty accepting and granting access to someone not wanting to change their body and express as a woman whilst being allowed to be still physically male and worry this might well invite the occasional criminally minded interloper using ease of access to self ID and a lack of gatekeeping to transition for reasons other than those stated on the declaration.

It is hard to argue that anyone with devious intent might be deterred by having to be medically assessed, undergo psychological counselling, transition and live two years in the gender role whilst contributing to society and being regarded as mentally stable - let alone going through any physical transition, which, whilst not necessary under current rules are evaluated when the panel decide on granting recognition.

And if all of these things are replaced by simply declaring who they are on line that one or two might think this provides an opportunity.

Really that's all I am saying.

Jaycee - yes - I understood that you came from a transsexual perspective and that if you used the word gender it was used appropriately and not conflated with sex - I should have made that clear in my post. Others though do make that mistake.

I wonder if my perspective is nearer to yours than some of the other posters simply due to age. As I said earlier with regard to the transsexual person I knew in the 70s, though we used the word transsexual, no one actually thought they were changing into a woman, just a better "approximation" (can't think of a better word) of one. My only problem was bafflement at why on earth anyone born a man would want to be a woman as for half the month I was crippled with cramps and bleeding and for another week nuts with PMDD.

Langcleg, when have I said my discomfort has anything to do with women? I have never asked anyone of women. Except to be allowed to get on with my life now my problem had been resolved.

Which is what I and others did do. For many, many years up to 2004 with no legal recognition which was granted by the UK after other countries had already and more or less under duress from European courts. Though with the support of doctors who had studied this problem for many years.

I accepted the fact that it meant I could never marry my partner. I accepted the fact that I was paid as a woman a lower income whilst having to wait 5 years longer to get my pension. I accepted the need to give up my work and become a full time carer for 14 years because I could and my brother couldn't.

Where here was I imposing anything onto or asking anything of women?

Though I should add most women have always been totally open, welcoming and accommodating. I have personally never had anything to the contrary.

Nor am I 'defining' anything, particularly gender identity. As I said I am using terms that people seem familiar with to try to help understanding as just saying don't know or I cannot express it in words, as I often have, is not considered acceptable.

I have not once tried to force words on anyone or change words or descriptions or define anything.

For 45 years nobody anywhere had referred to me as a man. Yet repeatedly on this forum many of you have called me that. And I have not once argued or complained.

How do I know my dysphoria is the same as everyone's? I don't and have not suggested I do. I know very few trans people and all are transsexuals I met over 40 years ago and only one have a known as a friend ever since. From talking to them (and, of course, seeing what others describe on here) I have some inkling.

But I can only ever tell what I experienced. That's all I have done on here. I am not an agitator or activist and have no desire to be. I just want to try to help bring a little insight by description. Nothing more.

I have no idea where you think I am trying to create a law or speak for activists. I am not doing either. Just telling what happened and how I feel.

How you choose to take it is entirely up to you.

Jaycee - because you completely ignored Barrack's point and typed reams of irrelevant stuff about you. This whole debate is all about what makes a woman and how the word gender and the term gender identity relate to that and Barrack's challenge about the definition of legal terms is vital to the preservation of women's rights. You did not define gender or gender identity - and Barrack's point is that nobody ever does.

That's why.

borntobe, yes we do seem to be in accord there.

There is no logic in being transsexual. It is just something you are.

I cannot imagine anyone aspiring towards it.

What sane person would volunteer to live with this festering insidiously inside of you and gathering power during the years of childhood when you should be enjoying life?

Instead of looking forward to adulthood and tomorrow you are overwhelmed by what seems to be an impossible, ridiculous but all too real need to transform yourself into something you are only too aware will always be an approximation.

But this is eating away inside of you and even though you fully see the absurdity and understand the profundity that you are forever giving up the chance of having children (as it meant that 100% back then and that hurt like hell) then you have no real choice in the matter. You just have to bridge that gap between inner self and body as best you can.

Every transsexual I ever talked to would happily have gone through any transformation possible to let them have periods or to have children. Many of us volunteered for experimental, sometimes dangerous surgery that we were well aware was going to be painful.

They did not let you do this unless they were sure you understood the risks and were realistic about the outcome. I often saw doctors almost shaking their heads in disbelief and then sadness at seeing someone apparently sane and intelligent and well aware of the limitations still adamant they would take any time as their true self after surgery we all knew could shorten our lives.

You will see transsexual women volunteering any day soon for womb transplants and ovary transplants and someone alive today will be the first trans woman to give birth (by caesarean).

This is not remotely a logical condition. It is very much a driven one.

Whilst you may hear a lot about self identification and wanting to express themselves as this or that I cannot still looking back figure out what makes me know I had no choice but to do what I did despite everything.

And now with 100% certainty I did the right thing and would do it again in a heartbeat.

That's fine,Langcleg.

You win

I will toodle off as these threads usually drive away trans people who try to help.

By tomorrow you will no doubt post that none of us ever try to answer your questions patiently and all just want to argue and fight and change your life.

I know when it is pointless.

Jaycee - without typing another several thousand words, can you:

a) define "gender identity" in one, objective and unequivocal sentence?

b) define "gender" as something distinct from biological sex in one, objective and unequivocal sentence?

c) confirm that you realise these terms are already used in law (GRA 2004 and EA 2010) but without the adequate definitions as set out in a) and b) that would be needed for good law?

Because when Barrack asked you that, you responded with hundreds of words about yourself. That's not helpful; it's deflection.

I think Jaycee is someone we need onside.
We do keep saying on these threads that we sympathise with "genuine" transsexual/ transgender people. Our issue is with those who for a variety of reasons, want to exploit gender self ID as currently proposed, and threaten women. Jaycee, have a peaceful and happy holiday.

Langcleg. I cannot define these terms any more than anyone else can. Being transgender does not mean you understand what they are.

Some activists might want to define such terms but not sure why they would.

The GRA made sense and was defined via medical assessment. The Equality Act seems to be a softer fudge. But you need lawyers to define terms that are going to have legal implications.

This thread was started as being about what psychologists and psychiatrists were saying on the subject and I just wanted to put into perspective what my interactions were with them to explain what they did and why.

I could do that. I cannot do what you ask and define terms I understand no more than anyone. Lawyers need to do that.

Nor am I trying nor have I ever wanted to erode women's rights.

Your beef is with trans activists and I am not one.

I think Jaycee is someone we need onside

Is that when Jaycee is reporting back to the TRA site Jaycee frequents about how being a fifth columnist on Mumsnet is going? Or just when Jaycee is here? Or just when Jaycee is flouncing off (for another five minutes)? Or do you just mean we should read every single one of Jaycee's interminable posts all about Jaycee and then display due female socialisation by congratulating Jaycee on allowing us to read them?

Sorry, no to all. And I'm very well aware I'm not mincing my words.

There are some TS people hereabouts that I like and have a great deal of time for. Likewise in my real life. What I don't have time for is endless deflections from the point at hand.

It appears that for some males who identify as transgender or transexual it is body dysmorphia, while for others it is a fetish that they will go to any lengths. For a huge percentage their disorder is co-morbid with NPD. The reasons for females who identify s transgender are also body dysmorphia for some, but it appears so far that trauma is also a cause for some. Currently there is a huge problem with social contagion due to transgender advocacy being widespread. That seems to be all they have figured out so far. Partly because the transgender lobby is doing everything they can to prevent research and to discredit the research that does not affirm their desired results.

JC comes here to talk about themselves at length and to take what we say back to their transgender forum to share. Why they have not been banned yet for this behavior is beyond me.

Barracker - it is simply because there are no words to describe what is a kind of ineffable inner state that you have felt since you were old enough to think that the problems you see as problems exist. I don't see them as problems of reality just of trying to explain what I doubt anyone who has not experienced it can grasp.
It is called mental illness when the problems you see as problems do not actually exist. Specifically body dysmorphia. I should think you would know that.

If only we had more common sense and discourse instead of silly arguments between activists on both sides but of which I never have been and never will be one.

But I can see that is never going to be possible on here given the posts above.

Hopefully hotheads fighting one another will not be the ones that make the decisions in which all women have a stake.

Not just Feminists and not just trans activists.

Happily I suspect it will whatever anyone says on here.

-2 for failure to stick the flounce. Again.

-2 for failure to stick the flounce. Again.

It's minus eleventy billion by now, isn't it?!

I have started drinking. Best I sign out for the night cos my words will get even less minced. Words and mincing and alcohol do not generally result in finest hours for Langs. Have a good evening, all!

I must say you two versus some of the equally one eyed trans activists out there should be worrying many ordinary women who have genuine concerns about transgender issues and what might happen.

Because quite possibly whilst you just pick fights with one another and look for agendas where non exist self ID might just get voted in whilst you are looking the other way.

I certainly do not want the current plans for self ID to happen as I have said but will leave you to your search for definitions whilst Rome burns.

I wonder who wrote these actual words... do TRA organisations have a lobbying and consultancy function? Many of these kind of statements are remarkably similar, given the historical diversity and disorganisation of their originators' positions on a number of things such as treatment pathways for eating disorders or autistic spectrum disorders... why so unified, so fast? Who is feeding them?

I wonder who wrote these actual words

I think they're all using the Yogyakarta Principles as a framework for 'best practice'. The Scottish GRA consultation referred to them:
3.08. In 2006, the non-binding Yogyakarta Principles were agreed by a wide-ranging group of human rights law experts, representatives of nongovernmental organisations and others. They set out existing international human rights law and principles, as the authors believe they should be applied to the treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Principle 3 asks countries to: “take all necessary … measures to ensure that procedures exist whereby all State-issued identity papers which indicate a person’s gender/sex including birth certificates … reflect the person’s profound self-defined gender identity”

The Scottish consultation also referred to resolution 2048 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe:
1. ... The fact that the situation of transgender people is considered as a disease by international diagnosis manuals is disrespectful of their human dignity and an additional obstacle to social inclusion.
3. ... In addition, administrative burdens and additional requirements, such as a period of “life experience” in the gender of choice, make recognition procedures generally cumbersome...

None of this is legally binding, but it seems to be where anyone goes if they want to write documents about transgender issues.

Thank @OldCrone. That would explain it, certainly although the phraseology of the statements does seem awfully familiar from some of lobbying TRA groups. Will do some digging if i have time. Did i read that Mermaids have provided the NHS policy basis?

I know JC would have us believe that the only problem is self ID, and that old school transexuals are not an issue.

But I've never really made that distinction. The scale will be wildly different, yes. But all trans (either sexual or gender) are self ID. The only difference is that a panel rubberstamps the former and not the latter.
But in both cases men are given permission to be treated as if they were female when they are not, and I am prevented from asserting my boundaries as an actual female.

I'd really like to talk about this properly with someone like JC, but the frustration of holding a conversation with someone who avoids the actual essence of the matter is almost not worth it.

I see such glaring hypocrisy and it infuriates me.

Feelings that are indefinable (yet claim the word woman for them)
Body which is still male after modification (but we'll claim documents which call it female)
Relief for dysphoria (but still the demand of validation by others)

You can't stand there saying you demand nothing of women whilst you wear our identity, prevent us from drawing a line around our own category, hold your legal documents that grant you forced entry to us.

Why even use the word woman when you know it means us?

This is why I respect Miranda so much. He has faced himself honestly and worked through this. His journey has integrity.

Have you ever read about "forced teaming"? I read about it the first time in the DeBecker book The Gift of Fear.

Remember that old Maya Angelou quote about listening when people tell you who they are? JayCee has told us who they are multiple times. It's a shame that only a handful of people are able to get past their female socialization enough to listen and acknowledge what they're hearing.

Words and mincing and alcohol do not generally result in finest hours for Langs.

I dunno, I'm finding drunk Lang quite entertaining! And you manage to do it in comments of less than 1000 words too.