How can people seriously believe....

[PerverseConverse]

That there is scientific basis to support that transwomen are women and trans men are not women?

Facebook is awash tonight (thanks Posie ) with women saying that this sign in a cafe (pictured) is perfectly ok and that terfs (can I use the full word on here? Sorry if not) can't be feminists as they don't include all women. All women meaning men identifying as women.

I was following a discussion based on a review of the cafe but when I read that there is a "bunch of science behind it" that transwomen are not men I had to give up trying to get my scientific head round what she was trying to say.

Where do people get these ideas from and then claim that science supports them?

I don't want to get into the whole toilet debate here, I'm purely astounded as to how people come up with this and believe it to be supported by science. But then there are people who believe the earth is flat....

agirlhasnoname

I believe stefonknee was consulted by the Canadian government with respect to the law around transgender people

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/transgender-father-stefonknee-wolscht-who-left-family-to-be-a-six-year-old-girl-uses-childs-play-to-a6775051.html

That's really interesting. Surely no one would dispute that person needs medical help and would not be given the rights of children because they believe to be one.
Cats and dogs is another common role for people to identify as.

Are there any highly respected scientists, doctors, biologists etc who can define what is a woman and what is a man? Until someone with enough authority does with the scientific proof to back it up, then tra's will get away with saying that twaw. When I discuss argue with people over this, this is my main stumbling block.

Let's face it, the whole thing is (to borrow a favourite phrase from the TRAs) LITERAL madness.

Men and women cannot change sex.
Women don't have penises.

But.....since the advent of Trump we live in a post-truth world. And having watched the tsunami of lies and flat denial of reality that's come pouring out of the White House since his arrival, I honestly believe that people around the world have begun to feel that they can spout any old crap with total impunity.

So they do. It's bloody terrifying, but that goes for so-called 'educated' people too. It's like all the flat-earthers have been keeping their heads down, knowing they couldn't say anything because they'd be dismissed out of hand as bonkers, but they've now miraculously been given some secret signal that it's fine to reveal themselves. So the 'science proves it! TWAW!' is pouring out with a vengeance.

Well, I know who I'd rather stand with, and it sure isn't anyone who quotes science to claim that men can change sex.

Stefoknee also got kicked out of a trans org they used to work for for being so incredibly self-centered that even the other identifarians couldn't stand working with them. Someone hopefully has a link - basically they made every single discussion and issue all about themselves to the point where nobody else in the group could tolerate it. And then the Canadian media decided they were a brilliant example of the struggle for trans justice, and a Canadian MP involved herself with them, very publicly.

It's always fascinated me how consistently the "allies" pick absolutely terrible people to represent the trans community on an official level, and it's not as some sort of expose and shame tactic - they honestly seem to think that people like Stefoknee or the violent criminal who Lord Patel was enamoured with who trained police on trans issues (the one who tried to rape a shop assistant) are tragic figures in need of protection and deserving of admiration.

Surely there must be some transwomen who aren't blatantly Cluster B who they could promote instead, but nope, they pick the blatant nutters every time.

I found this a really useful thread when I was trying to wrap my head around the science.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3212295-Biology

What I took away from it was that biology as we know it is still not "outdated" - men are men, women are women, XX and XY are still reliable indicators of your biological sex, the world is still round. But that there are some arguments around the "brain science" which have been co-opted and blown out of all proportion - and that the pro-trans "TWAW" side of the debate never acknowledge that it's virtually impossible to account for the effects of socialisation (AKA 'ladybrain') in order to isolate any outcomes...

randommouse woman is an adult human female. And female in mammals is the category whose body has the principle ability to produce ova. Intersex conditions are pathologies and in fact also fall into male and female (the presence of the SYR gene, which is on the Y chromosome makes the orgsnism male, no matter how many X chromosomes there are. Intersex conditions are infertile exceptions that proof the rule).

There is no definition (a definition must be noncircular and objectifyable) of ‚woman‘ ‚female‘ and ‚trans‘ that would make TWAW true.

People will believe anything if they try hard enough.

History is full of examples of people believing rubbish because they suspended all their rational faculties.

They believed older women in the village could get on their broomsticks and fly.

They believed they would have sex with their pet cats.

They believed that when Stalin told them that communists who had fought with Lenin for the overthrow of the tsar were traitors, those communists were traitors.

They believed that something they had strongly believed five years ago, was rubbish because Comrade Stalin told them it was rubbish.

They believed that it was year zero.

They believed that when Jews in their city were rounded up and put on trains, they were just being taken away to work.

They believed that the gulags were actually really nice places to go, sort of like a rehabilitation centre, doubtless filled with massage parlours where you could go after a healthy hour of breaking up stones (mind you that last one was the Goldsmith's LGBT society, so perhaps they're not representative of most people, however credulous).

In short, people will believe anything they feel there's a social benefit to believing. We are living through one of those frightening periods in history, where adherence to a belief in something everyone knows is a lie, is being demanded by a tiny section of the population who are determined to ensure that our authorities and institutions also demand it, so that people will be too afraid to publicly question it. Because the belief is utterly ludicrous, we don't really believe that it will fly, but it is no more ludicrous than all those other beliefs that flew for a time.

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Transwomen are women

I think there is some evidence that gender dysphoria has a biological basis and that the brains of some transgender people may share some neurological characteristics with some women. I think this is interesting from a scientific point of view.

But. Big but. The defining characteristics of sex are not the brain but the chromosomes and sexual organs. Not the brain, because even if you could unequivocally distinguish between male and female brains (which you can't) this does not change the fact that your sex - your sexual organs and sex chromosomes - by definition determine your sex. So therefore, you cannot change sex, however dysphoric you are. Which is a shame for those with the condition, but is not a basis for forcing women to give up their sex-based rights.

(Leaving aside the nonsensical mind-fuck that some trans individuals say they do not have dysphoria.)

My dog can tell men from women at 50 yards, and lets men know that she fucking hates them. Most 'rescue' dogs are like that. Since women are the same species as men, it's even more important that we're able to tell which of us are men and which are women.

I'm constantly amazed at how lacking in self-awareness some men seem to be. They put on a dress and heels and think everyone else in the world sees them as women :(

I found this very interesting when it popped up in my fb feed this week.

parentingsciencegang.org.uk/web-chats/how-different-are-womens-and-mens-brains/

I'd like to know more about her research, however it's interesting that she refers some questions back to Cordelia Fine's Testosterone Rex.

Neurotrash is my new favourite word!

@ChangetheLabels there is a “Petitions” topic - if you report your post to @MNHQ they’ll move it for you. You might also want to try the Ethical Living board.

Thank you. I will do that😊

(Leaving aside the nonsensical mind-fuck that some trans individuals say they do not have dysphoria.)

Really this is the root of my problem with Self ID not being a medical issue. If you believe you are the opposite gender to your natal sex you have disphoria, disphoria is a mental health issue.

There shouldn’t be any stigma attached to experiencing or living with a mental health issue, and you shouldn’t be discriminated against because of your mental health issue, but denying you have a mental health issue is worryingly unhealthy (and more evidence that you have a mental health issue!)

I've said it previously but friends on FB who have a scientific background and/or usually reject any research that isn't peer reviewed/ repeated have quite happily got on board with an one off study, with a small non controlled pool of participants.

Seems all logic goes out the window on this especially when it fits with their narrative.

@Nosquirrels

I kind of do, and kind of don't agree with you there

There is some evidence that gender dysphoria has a biological basis, but I think it is still very unclear whether it is a normal variation of human characteristics (like homosexuality) or a mental health condition (like depression). Maybe it depends on whether you think gender dysphoria is benign or pathological? And there may also be different kinds of dysphoria, with some having a genetic or congenital basis and others with a strong acquired or psychological element.

On the other hand, I would argue that being absolutely convinced that your male genitalia ie your penis is female, is so strongly delusional, that it's difficult to believe that this is not a mental health condition.

And I also think that there is a group of people who are just appropriating the condition for nefarious purposes and the trans gender lobby does itself no favours in denying this.

There is some evidence that gender dysphoria has a biological basis, but I think it is still very unclear whether it is a normal variation of human characteristics (like homosexuality) or a mental health condition (like depression). Maybe it depends on whether you think gender dysphoria is benign or pathological? And there may also be different kinds of dysphoria, with some having a genetic or congenital basis and others with a strong acquired or psychological element.

I see what you mean, although I just can't really see how thinking that your body doesn't match your mind - your innate 'spirit' - could be anything other than a psychological issue REGARDLESS of whether it is triggered by biological/genetic/'nature' reasons or whether it is a result of social conditioning/trauma/upbringing/any other 'nurture' reason etc.

I absolutely don't think that one or the other is more 'true trans' than the other - it doesn't matter at the end of the day.

I think you should be supported with mental health counselling regardless to explore the reasons why you think your body doesn't match your mind and make sure you are not falling prey to changing your life irreversibly when perhaps you could feel better about yourself and your place in society by psychological interventions first and foremost, and radical acceptance of yourself as you are. And then if you are truly never going to be happy as you are disphoric, then of course you should be supported to transition from a place of 'good' mental health.

Everyone deserves to be happy.

But I don't think transition should be seen as the first step, and I don't know how you could possibly untangle it from a psychological "problem" in the first place.

Well, I do. You compel everyone else to say biology doesn't matter and only internal 'gender' does. Which is unworkable.

Yes, I think it's very challenging to know where biology ends and psychology starts, because we're all a mix of both and psychological disorders can have a biological basis. I totally agree with you that the idea of having a 'spirit' which doesn't match your body seems a bit crazy, but personally I think this is where the parallels with homosexuality come in. Because the evolutionary purpose of your sexual organs is to reproduce and from a biological point of view, this is only possible if a man puts his penis in a woman's vagina. But gay people don't want to do that, so in a sense their identity doesn't align with their biology. Historically this was an argument against homosexuality, because it was unnatural, but over time it's been accepted that this isn't the case.

So I personally think that I can accept that it could well be a normal variant to consider that your 'identity' doesn't tie in with your body. But I would also agree with you that we definitely can't rule out that it could be, at least for some people, that psychological interventions are worth considering. Particularly with younger people where I definitely think there is an element of social contagion.

Really interesting to discuss this

There might actually be a link between gender dysphoria and homosexuality. (None of what I say implies this is necessarily monocausal, so a correlation does not mean this is the one cause leading to transgenderism/homosexuality).
Blanchard suggests that gender dysphoric very effeminate homosexuals might subconsciously conclude living as a woman is the best/easiest/most authentic way to live. There are indications hormones in the wombs might play a role regarding homosexuality, and studies indicate differences to heterosexual male brains on average for homosexual and homosexual transwomen brains (doesn‘t mean you can look at a brain and tell sexual orientation).
As far as I know, nobody has ever compared average features of gay men and homosexual transwomen, to find out whether these differ or are similar.
In any case, not even a brain with a pink bow on it has any bearing on the organism‘s sex. Sex is determined by the reproductive system.

That's the thing, even if there was something in the brain that explained it, what is that meant to prove? That other people must therefore interact with the person based on some invisible-to-them feature of their brain structure? What we see is the face and body, and therefore that's what we react to.

The thing that I don’t like about the parallels with homosexuality argument (and I know this wasn’t the point you were making really, and it is an interesting one) is that the fear/unnatural thing around homosexuality was really born of men’s reluctance to accept gay sex as natural- even though you see it in the animal kingdom too. Men have been afraid that other men would assault them sexually. Because of ... male violence? Homosexuality and tolerance is very historically and culturally quite well accepted in lots of societies. Women have generally not been ‘afraid’ of homosexuals.

So when the equivalence is drawn with this debate it feels off - we’re not afraid of ‘trans people’ because it’s unnatural we’re afraid of male violence and the unintended consequences of a too-liberal law.