Liberal Democrats: ‘why are transphobes protesting? Because they are thick’

[QuoadUltra]

In case anyone was hoping that the LibDems might offer some political sanity in turbulent times, don’t bother.

Their LGBT thread on why ‘transphobes’ - women with concerns - are ‘a bit thick’: Thread Here

We could do with a sensible third party in British politics. Too bad the Lib Dems keep ruling themselves out.

Mammals are dimorphic. Moreover, they are only capable of large structural changes whilst in the womb. Metamorphosis has never been documented in mammals for this reason.

nauticant

It's like groundhog day isn't it.

"that doesn’t say anything about normal human sex being a binary"

Trans people aren't part of the "normal human sex binary".

There are no MRI studies showing gender identity. There are some showing up areas of average (key point: averaged, not total, you can’t sex a brain like you can a pelvis, these are differences seen only on large population levels) differences in people with dysphoria oh but wait that's not a disorder at all!!
Those differences are talked about at length in several threads on here and you can search for them. There’s no sign of them being consistent, no indication of them being causal and no indication of what they actually ARE. They are more likely to be associated with mental illness. Similar changes are seen in other dysphoric disorders like anorexia.

There’s no such thing as an objective measurable gender identity. That’s a faith based position. Now if you’re a dedicated Cartesian dualist or religious then that’s your right and you can think that. But there's no evidence for it and if you bring a religious POV to a scientific debate you’ll get laughed at.

The odd way TRAs use science is an interesting new development to see - it’s a very weird interpretation of studies that shows no deep (or even paddling pool depth) understanding of the fields involved

I’ve been a scientist for a few decades. I can assure you the science isn’t leaving us behind, we are just a bit bewildered atcthe odd things people take from out work sometimes.

The Sun once reported the work from our lab as we’d cured ageing - we hadn’t of course, the tabloid level briefing we’d given them was fairly blunt crayon level and about development and cancer.

Wakame, I’m afraid any actual developmental biologist would be laughing at you.

"It's like groundhog day isn't it."

Tell me about it!

"Gender identity (a person's innate sense of their own sex)"

OMG. A definition.

Why not call it SEX identity if its a sense of one's own SEX, Wakame?
Also, what do you mean by SEX here?
And when you say 'innate sense' could you put that into different words?

Waiting for the circle to close....

you don't need an advanced biology degree to identify the biological differences between men and women.

Trans people aren't part of the "normal human sex binary".

Mate.

Trans people aren't part of the "normal human sex binary"

How does that work then? All ears.

It's like groundhog day isn't it.

And they all think it's the first time anybody's used these arguments on us before or that there aren't already dozens of refutation here - still less by anyone with better credentials than themselves.

Trans people aren't part of the "normal human sex binary"

Has a third gamete been discovered?

‘Ha! I’m going to plonk down a NATURE article! That’ll show the witches!’

(Scientist who has indeed been published in nature giggles at op ed piece being silly.)

WHY ARENT YOU IMPRESSED WITH MY KNOOOOOWLEEEDGE? Sulk, stamp.

Has a third gamete been discovered?

. Well quite

"There’s no sign of them being consistent, no indication of them being causal and no indication of what they actually ARE. They are more likely to be associated with mental illness. "

That's a bit of a a deflection - here's a brief summary from a recent Scientific American:

www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

"Overall the weight of these studies and others points strongly toward a biological basis for gender dysphoria. But given the variety of transgender people and the variation in the brains of men and women generally, it will be a long time, if ever, before a doctor can do a brain scan on a child and say, “Yes, this child is trans.”"

I think that only looks at 2 or 3 studies, but do have a look at the 26 linked to from here:

www.cakeworld.info/transsexualism/what-is/brain-similarities

And of course, for more on the consensus, do have a look at the Endocrine Society position statement:

www.endocrine.org/advocacy/priorities-and-positions/transgender-health

My goodness who is writing that?? I'd be sacked for that type of language if I used it on my works twitter accounts! God, even going back pre social media I'd be sacked if I used it in a press release or interview!

"Has a third gamete been discovered?"

See above, your comment will only work if DSDs don't exist.

Do try to follow.

Head... desk... it's like arguing with a particularly recalcitrant toddler. Only difference is that the toddler will grow up one day.

Mate, I’m a scientist. I’m not reading your cakeworld link. It’s ludicrous. The multiple threads on here where actual neuroscientists have critiqued those papers - go read them . It’s bollocks ( they’re a male organ just in case there’s doubt.)

Unless it’s actualy cake? Is it cake?

See above, your comment will only work if DSDs don't exist.Do try to follow.

I’m torn between a head desk kind of expression and a genuine wonder that anyone can answer a question about gametes with ‘BUT DSDs!’

"Trans people aren't part of the "normal human sex binary" How does that work then? All ears."

Well, gender identity is biological in origin and ours is at odds with the apparent sex of our bodies. Do you see? As well as genetic anomalies and other physical anomalies.

Again, the endocrine society position statement will give you a very brief overview of the current broad consensus:

"Although the specific mechanisms guiding the biological underpinnings of gender identity are not entirely understood, there is evolving consensus that being transgender is not a mental health disorder. Such evidence stems from scientific studies suggesting that: 1) attempts to change gender identity in intersex patients to match external genitalia or chromosomes are typically unsuccessful3,4; 2) identical twins (who share the exact same genetic background) are more likely to both experience transgender identity as compared to fraternal (non-identical) twins5; 3) among individuals with female chromosomes (XX), rates of male gender identity are higher for those exposed to higher levels of androgens in utero relative to those without such exposure, and male (XY)-chromosome individuals with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome typically have female gender identity6; and 4) there are associations of certain brain scan or staining patterns with gender identity rather than external genitalia or chromosomes7,8."

What's that great phrase, Bowl? "You can't argue with stupid." And boy oh boy is the stupid strong in this one.

Why can't we have a "hide poster" button? It would be so useful.

(Scientist who has indeed been published in nature giggles at op ed piece being silly.)

WHY ARENT YOU IMPRESSED WITH MY KNOOOOOWLEEEDGE? Sulk, stamp.

B-b-b-but blinding them with bad science always works on Twitter! No fair!

"Mate, I’m a scientist. I’m not reading your cakeworld link. It’s ludicrous."

As a scientist, your first inclination ought to be to look and see if the link does indeed offer links to 26 peer-reviewed articles on trans brains. If it doesn't fair enough, if it does though...

"It’s bollocks"

The medical consensus is against you I'm afraid.

I’m torn between a head desk kind of expression and a genuine wonder that anyone can answer a question about gametes with ‘BUT DSDs!’

Well, be fair - it does fit with the so you think an infertile woman isn't a woman gotcha.