Trans unpeak moment

[Sunflowersforever]

Have really been tuned into the whole self-Id issue and subsequent discussions through mumsnet, and appalled at the encroachment into women spaces and the silencing of women's voices. Was so glad to have read Hadley Freeman's article and how she summed up concerns in such an articulate way that reflected my views.

Ok. Here is the unpeak trans bit.

On HFs twitter feed, someone posted about selfid saying. "It means swearing a statutory declaration that you are living as a woman (and there are legal consequences if you lie), changing your name and documents, telling friends, colleagues, family".

Is that correct? If it is, I didn't know that and it changes the whole 'any man can enter a woman's space unchallenged' argument a bit as surely documented proof can be produced if challenged?

Someone else also said Ireland had adopted this law with no consequences? Really?

Anyone aware if any of this is true?

That research shows we should ‘validate a transgender identity’ which could be interpreted in many different ways. It doesn’t mean that there are men’s brains in women’s bodies and vice versa, just that we should be open to gender non conformity, which as gender critical radical feminists we are.
It doesn’t show we can change sex.

Earlier in the thread we were talking about how women are not unaware of trans males in their spaces and that lack of complaints and/or police reports is not indicative that they are unaware.

I think this blog shows that very well. It's worth a read. I realise you won't like it crispbutty, since it accepts AGP as the obvious-to-anyone-with-eyes phenomenon that is. Sorry.

madamnomad.com/2018/04/06/tranz-encounters-of-the-weird-kind/

(To note: I don't think AGP, whether in combination with dysphoria or not, is inherently a bad thing. I simply don't think male people should be in women's spaces, whether they have AGP or not.)

I don’t think anybody has a problem with anybody having a transgender identity. I can not argue with somebody’s identity.

However I need specific services, rights and protections because I am a human who happens to have a female reproductive system not because of my identity. I need words and legislation that communicate clearly.

My reproductive system isn’t a vague concept. It has clear, predictable, unavoidable consequences.

I need the word ‘woman’.

just that we should be open to gender non conformity, which as gender critical radical feminists we are

Hear, hear.

The problem with this argument is that that there is no set definition of the main terms, ‘transgender’ ‘transphobic’ ‘gender identity’, they all have such a wide scope.
I’m all for ‘validating the transgender experience’ of that means being gender non conforming and living the life you want free from persecution and ridicule.
If it means validating any man who says he’s a woman to be allowed full legal protections as a female? And giving kids hormones the second they say they are confused. Not so much.

crisp I'm sure that transition has been helpful for some trans people. My argument is an argument against uncritically accepting a scientific position purely because it's endorsed by some scientists.

With respect to your exposition of neuroscience, this is an example of the dangers of leaping to conclusions on the basis of a fragmentary understanding of the systems involved. We are only just beginning to understand how the brain works. We have a relatively good understanding of some basic processes (e.g., visual perception) although even in these areas there is still a huge amount to be done. Our understanding of topics such as dysphoria or the conscious experience of the body and how these are reflected in brain activity is extremely sketchy. We are nowhere near being able to reliably characterise gender identity in neural terms, even if such a concept is objectively measurable. These are all interesting questions but we are really nowhere near answering them.

@crispbuttyfan, that was an interesting long post about gender indentity studies. This was my takeway on it:

There is not that much research but it is growing, into transgender. One line of thinking, that has some good support, is that it is inborn. It is clear, as is from the revelations from transwomen on here, it is a real thing and it is hard and heartbreaking.

Here are my feelings:
No one is denying transgender exists. Also, there is a lot left to research as the field is very young. However, with all the transactivism, aren't we in danger of not allowing research into areas that will not support the transactivism line of thinking? Like the proposal to look into people desisting or transitioning back? If you only allow the research to be done into areas that fit into your narrative, how valid is all your research outcome? Wouldn't it be a good idea to do more research into AGP and ROGD to see if there is any valid line of thinking into it? Not debunk it before you know what is what?

And lastly, no matter the research into transgender, it still doesn't say anything on what gender is, or do anything about the risks of allowing self id without legal protections of the characteristic biological sex written clearly in the law. Sorry, but there it is.

Not really how this works, @crispybuttyfan, especially since you claim Blanchard's typology to be ancient and outdated. Scientific studies do not lose their validity just because they are older than three years, but as you insist, here are a few*:

Hsu, K. J., Rosenthal, A. M. & Bailey, J. M. (2015). The psychometric structure of items assessing autogynephilia. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 1301–1312. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0397-9

Rönspies, J., Schmidt, A. F., Melnikova, A., Krumova, R., Zolfagari, A. & Banse, R. (2015). Indirect measurement of sexual orientation: Comparison of the implicit relational assessment procedure, viewing time, and choice reaction time tasks. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 1483–1492. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0473-1

van de Grift, T. C., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Steensma, T. D., De Cuypere, G., Richter-Appelt, H., Haraldsen, I. R., … Kreukels, B. P. (2016). Body satisfaction and physical appearance in gender dysphoria. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 575–585. doi: 10.1007/s10508-015-0614-1

Zucker, K. J., Lawrence, A. A. & Kreukels, B. P. C. (2016). Gender dysphoria in adults. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 217–247. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093034

Lawrence, A. A. (2017). Autogynephilia and the typology of male-to-female transsexualism: Concepts and controversies. European Psychologist, 22(1), 39-54.

Hsu, K. J., Rosenthal, A. M., Miller, D. I., & Bailey, J. M. (2017). Sexual Arousal Patterns of Autogynephilic Male Cross-Dressers. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(1), 247-253. DOI: 10.1007/s10508-016-0826-z

Despite all the pressure from trans activists, AGP is still included in the Gender Dysphoria discussion in the DSM-V aka American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington

*Not that I think you care about my answer.

@crispbuttyfan

I would appreciate an acknowledgement that I am engaging with you in good faith.

Your very long post above, essentially says science is difficult and the evidence points to transgender being biological. I agreed with you on that.

I am a scientist. I have a doctorate from Oxford. I worked for 15 years as a medical genetics researcher in a Russell group University. I know work as a science editor. I am not a specialist in gender dysphoria studies, but I find it fascinating.

All of the studies you cite will have had clear criteria for gender dysphoria (i'd certainly hope so anyway), which means the results are only applicable to people with gender dysphoria as defined in those studies. I'd be incredibly surprised if any of them were based on self-I'D.

You're asking women to redefine their definition to include anyone who self identifies as female based on evidence that only applies to people with diagnosed gender dysphoria. That's not right.

Let people be whoever they want to be if they are distressed by their body then let them modify it (if they are an adult and sane). Doesn’t mean they change sex though.
This.

crispbuttyfan i find your lack of answer to yet's repeated question enlightening. Obviously we could all be pretending about who we are as this is the internet but declaring our interests (as it were) is helpful when understanding differing viewpoints.

My reproductive system isn’t a vague concept. It has clear, predictable, unavoidable consequences.

I know I've said this before, but it's a lot easier to pretend that sexual organs are a social construct if you're not bleeding out of your social construct at the time.

And I can't spell 'now' I'm think I am going to sack myself

Angry

almost peed myself out of my social construct due to squeezing three babies out of my social construct

Clustering: significant over representation in a particular area or social circle than the would be expected in the general population as a whole.

As for research, I've done a fair amount of looking into the research around childbirth. Its an area which is fraught and intensely influenced by ideological influences and biases. There are a large amount of study which are held up as good, but when you scratch at them, they come up with some huge flaws in methodology. I've seen people who are critical of one side, actively ignore the same flaw in a study they favour.

I find the trans stuff very similar and very frustrating. Few people understand how to look at a study with a good critical eye and instead tend to go with the headlines about the study (media reporting of studies is an area I find particularly poor in saying what a study actually concluded), or just stick to the most basic conclusions of a study by its writer which again can often be flawed.

Unless you start to really drill down into a study you never get to the bottom of whether the study actually does say what its said to or whether it simply points to an area which needs more looking at.

Given we are at a point in time where people don't even bother to read a full news item and instead prefer to stick to the character limit of twitter this is particularly bad for the whole situation and leads to some pretty gross and misleading stuff being put out as 'fact'.

Science is complicated and NEEDS nuance and detail. The trans lobby and their constant pushing on the suicide thing I find particularly disturbing in this context as not only is it so flawed and light on detail it uses emotional blackmail to effectively stop the further pursuit of research.

For all the talk of trans health being neglected this paradox of not wanting to look at things in a rational and dry way which is removed from emotion, as well as in a social context is really self defeating and working against your own interests.

And that just begs another question: why would you do that? I do think this is an important question.

You can't compare studies for people with gender dysphoria with studies with people who are self identifying.

You have to compare like for like.

If there are differences between the two for the same thing, then you have a question mark over why and what that shows.

Yes what flowers said wrt gender dysphoria research not generalising to trans umbrella at large.

Also, just because something is measurable at a biological level doesn't imply it's 'hardwired'. Measurable differences have been found in the brains of taxi-drivers corresponding to their years of using 'the knowledge' - I.e. experiences within a particular social context have consequences for brain structure and function independently of genes or hormones.

Charley Parker I am unsurprised to see you link studies mostly involved with Bailey and Lawrence. Bailey especially along with blanched have carved a career amongst anti trans propaganda sites such as 4thwavenow and exclusively rely on blanchards decades old nonsense.

As I have already stated not a single medical establishment uses agp as a diagnosis. Or ever has.

Anyone open minded or who is interested in further reading that doesn't rely on anti trans propaganda framing... should read this, although it will be accused of pro trans propaganda.... that is unfortunately the current climate, and obviously only trans sites are countering it. transadvocate.com/part-i-the-rise-and-fall-of-discosexology-dr-zucker-camh-conversion-therapy_n_19556.htm

There's an interesting thread on cross dressing arousal by men who cross dress here;
(It will already be familiar to all of us who have been married to AGP's.)

www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/43mwza/sexual_arousal_and_crossdressing_if_you_had_it/

@crsipybuttyfan and let me be another poster to protest against your accusation that I am not engaging in good faith.

I read your posts carefully
I consider your opinion
I accept it is different from mine.
I respect your right to hold a differing opinion.
I consider my own
I look for supporting evidence for my opinion (where this is called for)
I reply
...

That's engaging in good faith.

@Yetanothertranswoman disagreed with my take on that twin study. I though about it some more and I've come to the conclusion that while the study suggests in 72% of the twin pairs other factors played a role in causing transsexualism, yet is right that it also suggests in 28% of the twin pairs genetics and/or hormones in the womb play a role.

I've examined my belief overnight and woke up realising that yes, I do actually agree that there is likely to be - among many other factors - a genetic and/or hormonal cause to developing gender dysphoria. Do I agree that this means an innate gender indentity? No. Why? Read the post where yet describes her experience. It is not identity-based (that is "gender identity" as used by trans activists).

That is also engaging in good faith.

Now my son got told last night when he refused to hand over his phone and asked me "but why" a hundred different ways that this wasn't a discussion and I wouldn't be engaging in a debate about the merits or dangers of nighttime phone use in teenagers either.

I did not engage with him because the only acceptable outcome to me was that I got the phone off him. My way or the highway (the highway in this case meaning an automatic one-week-loss of the phone). Reader, I got the phone. He got the hump.

That is not engaging in good faith. (Hence why I didn't engage)

We all know cross dressing fetishists exist and that they are included in the category "transgender" by trans advocacy groups. We can tiptoe around this and debate the finer points or what a gender identity is, but it's largely a waste of everyone's time.

Given we are at a point in time where people don't even bother to read a full news item and instead prefer to stick to the character limit of twitter this is particularly bad for the whole situation and leads to some pretty gross and misleading stuff being put out as 'fact

YY to this - and it happens on all sides of the debate and in any debate.

@charlie

I didn't respond to your twin study. You may be quoting the wrong person.

The study that I do have an issue with - the one that is repeatedly quoted - is the Swedish one. It's repeatedly quoted .

@yetanothertranswoman sorry, yeah I've just checked it was Jaycee

We all know cross dressing fetishists exist and that they are included in the category

Disagree. A couple of weeks ago I categorically did not know they were included in the category. I do now.

Don't forget, not everyone has been having this debate for years.

It's really important to have the discussions, even if it gets repetitive for some.

yet I don't even know what the point is in quoting the Swedish study when we're discussing self-id. That study only included post-op transsexuals and while it's interesting in a scientific sense & medical & psychological outcomes for post-op transsexuals kind of way, self-id has nothing to do with post-op transsexuals anymore (if it ever did).

Besides, there's at least one other study showing that where crime by post-op transwomen occurs, it tends to be survival crime and we know from the UK where trans rights are enshrined in law, survival crime largely (if not completely) disappears. That's completely different to the non-med, non-op transwomen women are concerned about.