Comments on new DNA study please

[gingerpusscat]

This article appeared today in a major Australian newspaper, The Age.

www.theage.com.au/national/scientists-find-dna-clues-to-gender-identity-in-transwoman-database-20181002-p507cj.html

I've noticed a marked increase in trans issues being reported here in the last two months, but absolutely zero coverage of the ferocious debate raging in the UK.

It's always interesting reading about these studies, which are presented as though they undermine the feminist claim. They DO NOT. Even if scientists find a genetic cause for gender dysphoria or a mismatched gender identity compared to biological sex, the fact remains that all trans women are biologically MALE and will remain so.
The clue is in the SRY gene/Y chromosome.
Tellingly, the study compared trans women (males who claim the gender identity of woman) to OTHER MALES.
Also, they mention an identical twin study. Identical twins share pretty much the same genetic makeup as well as upbringing. You'd think if it was ALL about genetics, then I would expect that identical twins should have a much higher rate of both people being transgender than 20%.
They've been looking for things like a "gay gene" for ages.
Nobody on the feminist board says you can't be transgender, or that gender dysphoria/transsexualism categorically does not exist.
It's just that males with gender dysphoria are not biologically female. Trans women are all born male, but they genuinely believe they are women. If we find genetics to explain why this happens, then great. If we don't, we don't.
But you still cannot change your actual sex.

I cannot access the original paper.
It is apparently about transwomen (not transmen). I would be interested, if these are homosexual transwomen or autogynephiles or a mixture, and if results were compared to gay men.

There was a problem regarding some brain scan study that showed average data of homosexual transwomen in between average male and female brains. The scientists back then had not bothered, whether this pattern was similar in homosexual men or not, and just claimed it was a 'prototypical' transwomen thing (even though they had not included autogynephile, heterosexual transwomen, either).

There are scientific findings that suggest that being homosexual is influenced by hormones / hormone insensitivity in the womb, so it would be important to know, if what they looked at was homosexuals or not, and how they could actually differentiate a correlation of these genetic features with transsexualism vs with homosexuality.

Either way, it still does not change the body's sex, obviously.

My comments:
They took a sample of men who 'identified as female'
And compared them to a control group of men

So, it's intriguing that there was ZERO comparison to females. Just male Vs male, presented as evidence that male => Female.

I replicated the study.
I took a sample of miniature pugs.
And a control group of great Danes.
I observed significant differences between the two groups.
I have concluded that miniature pugs are in fact hamsters.

I await funding for my next groundbreaking study.

According to the article the study has been going on for 15 years. The funding!

DH just suggested that the methodology treats the TW as a subset of men, so there was no need to use women in the control group.

DH just said, 'The study's not about you, love. It's about men!'

your DH is spot on, OP!

Gender identity seems an oddly amorphous entity as a basis for scientific research. How can you define it? What tests were done to ensure the control group of other men had “male gender identities”, whatever that is.

I wonder also if HRT might have an epigenetic impact on male DNA? Or other environmental factors for that matter.

It would be interesting if they did the same mapping for people with anorexia or other physical delusions.

Doesn't control for sexual orientation.

So is it roughly, 'some men who are a bit different to some other men are a bit different from some other men?'

Just had a look at the study (not a scientist) and frankly I don't think it proves anything, the control group is men without HRT which doesn't really mean anything, surely there should be a group of transwomen who have not taken HRT and a group of men who do not have gender dysphoria who have taken female hormones (it can be prescribed sometimes for prostate cancer).

And does it control for/ compare with mental health issues for eg, given that MH disorders could also be linked to hormone receptors in some way. We don't have all the answers for that yet. The article itself quotes the high rates of depression, suicide etc that are often co-morbid with being transgender, and we know also personality disorder is often co-morbid.

What are the impacts of hormones receptors in MH disorders? Oxytocin is being researched for eg, but the studies involve brain scanning, and needs to look at cause and effect eg low oxytocin in people with BPD, could be result of changes to the brain caused by trauma, but then low levels throughout life could exacerbate symptoms. But we don't know for sure which came first the low levels or the disorder, and the research is still ongoing.

I think many of these studies need to be looking at brains and bodies, not one or the other, and linking more than one speciality together to get a better understanding.

Many transwomen have been very macho men before transitioning, both in attitude and physique so what does that mean? It doesn't look like a lack of testosterone there, unless someone can explain that to me! But then these males might be transvestite rather than dysphoric.

These studies look at such small numbers and as PP said, no women, or transmen. Comparing to only 344 males doesn't seem like enough when there are millions of men on the planet.

I have that thing where my third finger is longer than my first which is said by some to be some testosterone wash or something that is probably bollocks, yet I am very female in sexual attributes eg boobs, shape, waist etc. But I do have a GC brain - but I put that down to having some intelligence and critical reasoning skills.

I cannot access the study, but did they look at OXTR rs53576 an oxytocin receptor gene for eg which has been linked to certain personality traits?

Not saying these OXTR rs53576 studies are conclusive or perfect either, but it would be interesting to know of any correlation. To have simply not looked into it when you have a person's whole DNA in front of you seems most frustrating, so would hope they did.

Are there any farmers who could turn their prize bullock into a dairy cow?
Are there any cockerels wanting to sit with the hens in the shed?
Can a racehorse breed then the sex of the foal decided after the birth?

Answers on a postcard please

If anyone can provide a link to the study I can look at it properly. I can’t access the actual paper

Bowlofbabelfish this?

academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1210/jc.2018-01105/5104458

• The study is sure to be controversial within the trans community, where it will be both validating and concerning. “It’s helpful to have evidence that says trans people are who we are – as we always knew,” says Sally Goldner, executive director of Transgender Victoria. “But a genetic study should never invalidate someone’s sense of identity.”*

Studies which show any genetic basis for dysphoria probably have some of those sheltering under the trans umbrella quaking in their stilettos.

Cheers arran. That’s the abstract - the main article is paywalled?

It’s possible there is a genetic mechanism behind gender dysphoria - I’d expect there to be a genetic component to most of the dysphoric type disorders such as anorexia and BDD.

Where this gets misrepresented though is:

1. leaping from that to the stance that there’s a gene for being trans, or that it’s entirely genetic. Very few things have one gene that cause them. Most are a complex mix of genetics and interaction of the environment with that background. So for example with anorexia there may be a predisposition to certain traits,?but the main thing that drives it is societal. Think of it like a threshold where you need to reach a certain threshold to manifest a disease or illness.

You have two people in an identical environment - their environment can take them to 75% of the threshold. If one person is already 40% of the way there and one is only 2% of the way there due to genetic background then the first person will develop the illness and the second won’t. (Does that makes sense?)

Oops sorry baby needs changing. Back soon

Ah, Bowlofbabelfish I don't have access to that journal but thought you might through your academic account - I looked on Scholar Google/Researchgate but can't find the full text through those (I was hoping an author might have posted a pre-print on a personal/academic account).

1. They arent actually looking at ‘being trans.’ Id need to see the exact composition of the groups but in previous studies they’ve looked at men taking exogenous hormones, and found differences in genes being expressed that are due to ... hormones. How they then say that’s causative rather than being caused by the hormones is unclear.

1. True gender dysphoria - I’d bet that has some genetic predisposition (although it still has a big environmental driver and we may not be able to distinguish it from other dysphoric illnesses.) but that’s not applicable to the whole umbrella is it?

My feeling on it is this:

The whole suite of dysphoric illnesses, as well as other self harming behaviour like trichotillomania, etc, may share a ge Eric predisposition.
For someone to actually become ill they also need an environmental trigger.
Exactly how that predisposition manifests is likely to be strongly driven by environmental factors.

I’ve been struck by people on here saying that ten years ago, female distress manifested as eating disorders and self harm and now it’s ROGD.

In summary:,Our society is toxic. Some people are more sensitive than others to this. Some of those people will become ill with coping mechanisms/self injurious/avoidant behaviour. How that manifests will depend on what surrounds them.

Alas I’m no longer able to - I’m in industry now (I miss my Athens account...) :(

Patients

Caucasian transwomen, pre- and post-operative diagnosed with transsexualism (DSM-IV) or gender dysphoria (DSM-V) were recruited. Most were receiving hormone treatment at the time of recruitment.

Once again, as with every scientific study involving anything related to trans people that I've seen so far, the research subjects are transsexuals (if we understand transsexuals to be persons who have been diagnosed by a medical professional with gender dysphoria).

Even if we cannot read the actual paper right now and even if we cannot understand it because it isn't our field, what we can say is that it's irrelevant to the self-id debate

Opponents of self-id who are gender critical feminists are denying neither the existence of transsexualism as a condition nor the existence of transsexuals.

We may have different views on transitioning, but we all agree that humans cannot change sex - transitioning does not turn a male into a female.

And we agree that the existence of transsexuals - whether fully or partially transitioned - does not erase the right of females to a legal category of their own, separately from males.

Exactly. Taking our anorexia analogy, there’s probably a genetic predisposition. However if we find it, the conclusion is that some people have a genetic background that predisposes them to a dysphoria, which is that individual manifests as anorexia. The conclusion is NOT that those people are fat.

I would like to read this study also.

My thoughts:

• a previous Brazillian 'transgender brain' study compared 'transwomen', which in their study were exclusively sexually attracted to men to 'cisgender men' and 'cisgender women'. There were statistically significant differences in one area but since they tested so many in an automated fashion it wasn't surprising. And they should have compared them to 'homosexual men'
• there is no test for 'transgender', they can only show (maybe) that certain genes etc. are different, but this doesn't mean ALL transwomen have a certain gene expression, nor that ALL transwomen do not, merely that the group on the whole (but subject to the caveat about sexual orientation) is slightly to the right on the curve.