Can someone please explain... (trans)

[WednesdayAllTheWay]

So I've been trying to follow this trans situation for a while but now having skin in the game in the form of a child (and also noting through work how more and more people are identifying as the opposite gender) I need to understand it better.
Feel slightly embarrassed asking but:

1. How exactly do the words sex and gender differ in this area?
2. What reasons do trans people give for wanting to change their physical bodies? As in what do people believe they will get from this that they couldn't get in the body they were born with?
3. What are children being taught at school about this?

Thanks!

Upthread I wrote that gender dysphoria is rare. That's now been contradicted. However, it is rare:

www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/gender-dysphoria

Gender dysphoria has been reported across many countries and cultures, and incongruences between sex and gender have existed in human society for thousands of years. According to the DSM-5, among individuals who are assigned male at birth, approximately 0.005 percent to 0.014 percent are later diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Among individuals who are assigned female at birth, approximately 0.002 percent to 0.003 percent are later diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Because these estimates are based on the number of people who seek formal treatment—including hormone therapy and/or surgical reassignment—these rates are likely an underestimate of actual prevalence.

That's roughly 1 in 10000 men having gender dysphoria in its proper clinical meaning of "significant distress or impairment". Even if it's unreported by a factor of 5, that's still only 1 in 2000 men. The number for women is much lower.

Like I wrote above, some people seek to redefine gender dysphoria into a very broad condition wide enough to embrace the sense of discomfort children commonly have with their bodies as they go through puberty.

@nauticant, that article was my WAIT, WHAT??? moment.

Throughout history and across cultures it’s been pretty steady, and MtF vastly outnumbered FtM, but suddenly there are thousands of young girls seeking transition?
Something is very, very wrong in society, and it’s certainly not the bodies of these girls.

The number for women is much lower.

My gut feeling is that this is not because women are less likely to suffer severe distress around our sexed bodies, but because the diagnostic wossname is tailored to the male experience.

That, and we've so rarely had the luxury of opting out of servicing males with our vaginas. Dysmorphia and dysphoria are things we've always been expected to just suck up, and don't dare let them get in the way of performing the approved womanly role.

A glance at the diagnostic criteria is very telling though. It's nearly all about the cross-sex identification, with very little about the preceding same-sex disidentification. I'd wager the number of females doing the latter - feeling not like the other girls because the other girls are real human beings - far outweigh the number of males doing it. But the diagnostic criteria only pick it up if the individual opts for a cross-sex identity.

And there are a whole host of patriarchal reasons why a cross-sex identity has been a far more viable option for males than for females.

Hi Positrans
Could you elaborate on this please as I’m unsure what you mean by “gender euphoria”
Both do have gender euphoria though which essentially means they start from a different point rather than being qualitatively different to trans people with gender dysphoria.
Also with regards to the following, could you please point me in the direction of some scientific websites or similar, where I can read about it
I would merely would point out that it's a very simplistic definition. The truth is a lot more complex.
Also could you define your meaning of “sex” I'm happy to confirm, as a trans woman, that sex is very real.
Thanks

This is what I'm getting at. Gender dysphoria used to mean a condition so debilitating that it would drive people having it to undergo gender reassignment surgery. Now it means distress, often of children, around sexed bodies, and also relates to this new concept of "gender euphoria".

You don't have to spend much time reading about this issue to see that many of its key concepts have changed fundamentally over time or can vary according to whatever ideological viewpoint is being advanced. Like the word "trans". This now means something fundamentally different to what the MPs and Lords thought it meant when they passed the Gender Recognition Act.

Like the word "trans". This now means something fundamentally different to what the MPs and Lords thought it meant when they passed the Gender Recognition Act.

Yep. I confess I'm baffled by it.

In old money, trans was clearly an abbreviation of "transsexual", and referred to a person who had actually undergone surgery on their genitals.

Nowadays, though? Seems to mean different things to different people, and none of the buggers will ever offer a definition, which makes it a meaningless non-word.

@TyroTerf

There are no genetic tests that can unambiguously determine gender, or even sex.

This one always cracks me up.

Most of us don't need genetic testing to determine our sex. The proof of mine's at school at the moment. Conceived, gestated, and birthed myself. Unequivocal proof of my being female. By the same token, the person who provided the sperm is without doubt male.

Because that's what male and female mean.

Whatever identity Positrans and others may have, the name for that identity is not female. Because female refers to a reproductive sex class.

exactly, it would lovely if @Positrans can confirm exactly how their 'femaleness' manifests - what evidence they have of this.

I did wonder if it was a feeling of 'being feminine' that they experience as it can't possibly be 'female' for the many reasons stated above.

But then being a tomboy (as Posit self describes) is exclusive to a person born female and refers to one 'who displays masculine traits' so if you are born male and act in a masculine way where does any concept of femaleness or even feminity get a look in?

Curiouser and curiouser.....

Google gives me this for Tomboy: a girl who enjoys rough, noisy activities traditionally associated with boys.

Not sure how someone with a male body who enjoys stereotypically boyish activities counts.

Out of idle curiosity I googled "boy who behaves like a boy" just to see if there's a word for that.

All the hits are about effeminate boys.

Anyway, I'm with gardenbird on the key question here: what aspect, trait, or experienced phenomenon are you pointing at when you use the word "female", Positrans? Clearly it's not the reproductive sex class that produces large immotile gametes, so what is it?

Positrans

"And finally, you seem to be disagreeing with the WHO definition of sex quoted above. Why?"

I would merely would point out that it's a very simplistic definition. The truth is a lot more complex. The relationship between sex chromosomes, genitalia, and gender identity is complex, and not fully understood. There are no genetic tests that can unambiguously determine gender, or even sex. Furthermore, even if such tests existed, it would be unconscionable to use the pretext of science to enact policies that overrule the lived experience of people’s own gender identities.

Why bring gender identity into the answer to a straightforward question about sex? Sex = male or female, that is it - however a human of either sex chooses to self identify.

I also find it interesting that you say it would be unconscionable to use the pretext of science to enact policies that overrule the lived experience of people’s own gender identities however it seems that you think it would be fine to use the 'lived experiences of people's own gender identities' to enact policies that overrule the biological reality of sex?

"The pay gap disadvantages all biological adult females as a class, not people who choose feminine expression."

It also disadvantages trans women who pass.

Oh come on. This is the clearest descriptor of sex and gender yet. All female people as a sex class regardless of their gender expression are affected by the sex pay gap. You are assuming that TW who may be successfully mistaken via their feminine gender expression as of the female sex class may be affected.

They could of course end that oppression at any moment by sharing their actual sex class. Female people can't. Sex based oppression; this is why female people need continued access to sex based language, sex based thinking and to be allowed to organise on the basis of their sex.

Trans women who don't pass are already disadvantaged of course (the unemployment rate is much higher in trans people than the population at large).

Has nothing whatever to do with the sex pay gap. There are many groups disadvantaged in many ways: that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a sex class of adult human females, or that all work for females on sex based issues must be conflated with and involved in dealing with issues specific to those who are not of the female sex. That's like insisting that whatever kitten rescue may think about their kittens, there are whales dying and this is shocking and ought to somehow be their issue, much more importantly than just kittens. (And there's no such thing really as kittens anyway, it's much more complicated than that, and kittens are overprivileged little buggers who don't need rescuing anyway or have real feelings like whales do.)

Even woker than woke Vox know that the 'gender pay gap' is really about biological sex:

"The gender wage gap is mostly a penalty for bearing children."

www.vox.com/2018/2/19/17018380/gender-wage-gap-childcare-penalty

"The gender wage gap is mostly a penalty for bearing children."

So not something that would affect tw then, whether they pass or not.

What they may be affected by is bias in hiring procedures, in much the same way as women of a certain age are often overlooked due to the assumption that we'll be dropping sprogs left right and centre as soon as we've got our feet under the table.

But they'd have to actually pass 100% for that to be the case, and very few do.

Plus there's that whole issue of lumping in infertile women, childfree women, and male women in together, which I gather the infertile and the childfree find rather offensive. And quite rightly so, as you do not have to actually breed in order to qualify as female.

I'm prepared to believe that transwomen are discriminated against in things like employment.

But this NOT because they "pass" as "women." It's because they transgress the very strongly-policed boundaries of what it is to be a man, and masculine.

It's a men's issues with masculinity (ie gender), not a women's issue with sex-discrimination.

In the same way that it's not radical feminists who are raping & assaulting transwomen ...

which I gather the infertile and the childfree find rather offensive

Indeed we do! Not only do we have to go through all the crap of not being able to have children, but we also get treated as if we are just popping them out.

(I realise pp have covered a lot of this now too but I started this post this morning and ran out of time, and having saved it to finish later, WTH, I’m going to post it anyway.)

It also disadvantages trans women who pass. Trans women who don't pass are already disadvantaged of course (the unemployment rate is much higher in trans people than the population at large).

Positrans, it doesn’t disadvantage biologically male trans people who “pass” in the same way at all, quite apart from the fact that they are very much a minority.

For a start, one of the biggest barriers that women face is our female socialisation, which biologically male trans people know nothing of, being raised and socialised as male. (However much aversion you may have to your maleness, it has nothing in common with being actually female and being socialised as such.)

Career choices and expectations made in the context of that male socialisation will likely yield higher income over a lifetime than those made in the context of female socialisation, however the individual ultimately presents.

Secondly - and how extraordinary that you appear not even to have considered this! - the other bedrock of the “gender pay gap” is our female reproductive capacity, which quite obviously no male person shares.

Not all women have children, but only women do. The processes of pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding take their toll only on biologically female people; it is biologically female people who are likely to see their career take a hit and their earning potential diminish because of becoming a parent. Female people who may lose their jobs when they get pregnant - see Pregnant and screwed. Female people who are (still) asked about their intentions re having children at job interviews, even though it’s supposed to be illegal now.

Female people who still shoulder the bulk of childcare (and other caring responsibilities); on whom the responsibility still usually falls to take care of things when a child is off school sick, during school holidays or unexpected closures. Female people who are more likely to be single parents, many with a completely uninvolved ex who doesn’t even contribute financially. Female people who are more likely to be the main carer if their child is disabled, leading to complete loss of earning potential in some cases.

This isn’t even on your radar, is it?

Then you finish with your spurious association of trans employment disadvantage with the “gender pay gap”.
Many biologically male people face employment disadvantage of some kind, on the basis of disability, ethnicity/race or mental health issues for example. Those are all issues that need addressing but that doesn’t make them women and has nothing to do with the specific issue of the misnamed gender (actually sex) pay gap.

Furthermore, there are a significant number of biologically male trans people who have achieved considerable success in traditionally male-dominated, well paying fields (careers usually carved out before any kind of transition, and thus benefitting from male privilege in its absolute entirety) and whose earnings, if counted as those of women, as they apparently are, serve to distort the true picture of the imbalance between the sexes. And whose accolades as “highest female earner in x field” etc are both untrue and rob adult human females of their rightful recognition.

Off the top of my head, some examples:
Pips Bunce, finance
Jennifer Pritzker, military
Martine Rothblatt, pharmaceuticals/lawyer/entrepreneur
The Wachowski siblings, film directors
And any number of biologically male trans people in lucrative STEM careers, especially IT.

At least one of the people on the Forbes list of America’s 50 richest self-made women is biologically male, very possibly another one too.

No. Biologically male trans people are not disadvantaged on the basis of their sex, as women are. On the contrary, like other male people, they often reap significant advantage from being male.

No women’s rights movement has ever had the runaway, stratospheric success of the “trans rights” movement, has it now?

I mentioned somewhere else that you can't explain what a sex identity feels like to someone who doesn't have one for the same reason you can't explain what red looks like to person who was born blind.

So then you would also agree that no person born male can possibly know what it is like to live in a female body.; could never know what it is like to be female and by extension can't have a sex identity that is female.

I’ve asked on another thread but didn’t get an answer, perhaps you can answer Positrans, if sex isn’t binary, what are the implications/consequences/results of that?
As far as I can tell, sex being binary implies that one male and one female are needed to produce a baby.
There’s never been anything other than a baby produced
There’s never been any other permutation of one male and one female involved in the making of a baby
The only thing I can think of is that if the male and female are too close on the spectrum then they are incompatible are can’t make a baby

@334bu

*I mentioned somewhere else that you can't explain what a sex identity feels like to someone who doesn't have one for the same reason you can't explain what red looks like to person who was born blind.*

So then you would also agree that no person born male can possibly know what it is like to live in a female body.; could never know what it is like to be female and by extension can't have a sex identity that is female.

well doesn't that just nail it on the head!! Of course!!

We have no idea or understanding about 'gender identity' in the same way that male people have no idea about being female or vice versa - and how can one internal belief system trump another - they just have to remain moot (forever).

great post above TalkingtoLangCleg - it is interesting how many male-bodied transgender people have reached the top of their careers before making any transition - I can think of several more and as you say, some are very open about making the most of their male privilege before transitioning.

In a small senior management team or company for eg. could definitely skew the salary inequality and also the headcount for sex equality as we are seeing in some political groups where it is supposed to be 50:50 male:female but is now actually 80:20 due to male-bodied transgender people 'leaping the divide' (the Green Party possibly?)

Eyes I predict lots of waffle about sex being a spectrum coming your way.

Which I will pre-empt by noting that it takes one person from the female spectrum and one from the male spectrum to make a baby. So we're still looking at a binary situation.

sperm -> sperg -> spegg -> egg

there you go. That's it isn't it?

So then you would also agree that no person born male can possibly know what it is like to live in a female body.; could never know what it is like to be female and by extension can't have a sex identity that is female.

If sex was a spectrum then historically female people wouldn't have had to worry about or deal with the appalling consequences of unwanted pregnancies. Getting pregnant would have been a pretty low risk thing, since who knows what a male is or which male presenting person actually has working sperm.

But you know what: believe whatever you want, I respect your beliefs. Respect the right of other people to be agnostic or atheist regarding your beliefs, or to hold beliefs of their own which involves retaining their sex based rights and spaces alongside additional mixed sex or whatever is needed spaces, and don't try and forcibly convert people via language and law changes, and there'll be no issue. The UK has happily been a multi faith society for hundreds of years by this kind of tolerance.

About experience and 'experience'.

positrans:
Telling someone that what they are experiencing isn't what they are experiencing is kind of the definition of gaslighting.

In a way, this is true. But notice that gaslighting could not happen without the possibility that what one thinks one is experiencing is not what one actually is experiencing.

Mistaking what we experience is very common, of course. ' in the night, imagining some fear, How easy is a bush supposed a bear! ' Shakespeare reminded us. It would not be gaslighting to point out that the bush is in fact a bush rather than a bear. Could that be going on here?

Think of another example, anorexia nervosa (a common enough analogy with trans in this regard): a sufferer might describe their experience of themselves as that of a person who is overweight when actually the opposite is the case. What a person with anorexia thinks she is experiencing misrepresents how things actually are. Many other examples; there are those, I am told, who experience themselves as being a reincarnation of some historical figure. And so on.

We may note this possibility of error does not deny one is usually authoritative about how things seem to one. I am not cannot be mistaken about it seeming to me I see a bear, even though it is actually a bush over there, or about it seeming to me I am Napoleon Bonaparte. And so on.

However, one way in which this first-person authority may break down is when the sense of the description of the experience in question is lacking. 'I seem to be dead and alive at the same time' could not be true if construed literally; there is no such thing as being alive and dead at the same time.

This is a semantic point, note. ' I am at this moment literally dead and alive ' just does not make sense. So there is no experience of being literally alive and dead at the same time; even to claim it seemed to you that you this was the case would be a mistake.

It is possible transgender people make such a mistake, involving contradictions of sex (male/female, man/woman) -- rather than life (alive/dead). Details maybe need filling in, but can you see this, positrans? Even if you think you are not yourself so mistaken, can you see the possibility of such an error?

Gender euphoria is just a feeling of positivity a trans person experiences when they move towards congruence. They may move towards it from a position of intense dysphoria or a position of indifference, but that's all it is.

@OldCrone
"But some of us find the c-word offensive. How about not using it because we don't want to be called that?"

I didn't use it and am not allowed to on this forum. It's worth pointing out though that trans women find it offensive if you call them "male" so perhaps there needs to be a compromise?

@Alethiometrical "Could you cite your sources, please? I work in a university and hang out with quite a few biologists. They would laugh out loud at your statement"

The quote above about the relationship between sex chromosomes, genitals and gender identity being complex is a direct quote from scientists. I mean, I can't do you research for you, but to get you started, I saw this on Twitter recently - it's a statement by the Endocrine society and it sums up the broad consensus quite well and has links to some papers:

www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health

"The medical consensus in the late 20th century was that transgender and gender incongruent individuals suffered a mental health disorder termed “gender identity disorder.” Gender identity was considered malleable and subject to external influences. Today, however, this attitude is no longer considered valid. Considerable scientific evidence has emerged demonstrating a durable biological element underlying gender identity.1,2 Individuals may make choices due to other factors in their lives, but there do not seem to be external forces that genuinely cause individuals to change gender identity."

You could use that as you starting point for further research.

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark "So now you’re saying that words mean whatever you want them to mean?"

They aren't my words - they are the words of scientists. I'm merely reporting them. It's up to you whether you believe them.

"You, and every other human being alive, were formed from the union of one female gamete and one male one."

You're trying to narrow humans down to 2 sexes based on gametes. Sex is way more complex than that. There's no point in discussing it here though - I would point out that some people don't produce gametes, then you'll talk about the class who do, and I will say if you don't produce them, then your not in the class who do, and so on and so forth and after the end of a long exchange, you will still believe that sex is only about gametes and I won't and both of us will carry on with our lives accordingly.

@nauticant "Upthread I wrote that gender dysphoria is rare. That's now been contradicted. However, it is rare:"

I thought you meant that it is rare in trans people. If you are saying it is rare in the general population, I completely agree.

"Like I wrote above, some people seek to redefine gender dysphoria into a very broad condition wide enough to embrace the sense of discomfort children commonly have with their bodies as they go through puberty."

I've not seen anyone do that. If they did, they would be mistaken because that's not what gender dysphoria means. Most people feel some discomfort with some aspects of their bodies, and this is often worse during puberty, but gender dysphoria is the distress a person feels because their gender identity doesn't match their assigned sex - it's a completely different thing.

@gardenbird48 "But then being a tomboy (as Posit self describes) is exclusive to a person born female and refers to one 'who displays masculine traits' so if you are born male and act in a masculine way where does any concept of femaleness or even feminity get a look in?"

You consider a trans girl to be a boy, I consider a trans girl to be a girl, so for me, the term tomboy can be applied to a trans girl.

@NancyDrawed "it seems that you think it would be fine to use the 'lived experiences of people's own gender identities' to enact policies that overrule the biological reality of sex?"

Gender identity is biological. See above.

@334bu "So then you would also agree that no person born male can possibly know what it is like to live in a female body.; could never know what it is like to be female and by extension can't have a sex identity that is female."

I would argue that trans girls are not born male. You think they are because your ideas about sex are based on a simple binary model. I would contend that the science is vastly more complex and nuanced. No one knows what it's like to inhabit someone else's body - in fact, that's one of the reasons it's so easy to dismiss claims by people with no gender identity that gender identity doesn't exist.

@gardenbird48 "sperm -> sperg -> spegg -> egg
there you go. That's it isn't it?"

Again, it's kind of a pointless discussion - I will talk about ovotestis, you will then say intersex people have asked not to discussed, and I will then say that trans people don't want you to discuss their experiences either and so on and so forth and at the end, we're both in the same position - you with your binary view of sex, and me with my complex and nuanced view of sex.

@9toenails

Thank you for your interesting post - I enjoy philosophy. I will try to answer some of the points you raise:

"It would not be gaslighting to point out that the bush is in fact a bush rather than a bear. Could that be going on here?"

I am by nature a sceptic, so would say yes, it is possible, just as it's possible I'm not typing this, and that I am a brain in a jar being stimulated by a clever scientist, but I have no particular reason at this moment to doubt any of those things - I merely acknowledge the remote possibility of them.

"Think of another example, anorexia nervosa (a common enough analogy with trans in this regard): a sufferer might describe their experience of themselves as that of a person who is overweight when actually the opposite is the case. What a person with anorexia thinks she is experiencing misrepresents how things actually are."

The analogy with anorexia is spurious. A trans person sees exactly what their body looks like in a mirror - it's that reality that she reacts to. And of course, if you affirm an anorexic, you kill them whilst all the evidence suggests that affirming a trans person saves them so they are clearly not analogous conditions.

"Many other examples; there are those, I am told, who experience themselves as being a reincarnation of some historical figure. And so on."

Again, this is a spurious analogy. Someone with the condition you describe believes themselves to be someone else. This is the opposite of being trans - a trans person knows who they are and they don't conflate themselves with anyone else - they merely observe their gender identity, their body, and the incongruence between the two.

"I am not cannot be mistaken about it seeming to me I see a bear, even though it is actually a bush over there, or about it seeming to me I am Napoleon Bonaparte. And so on."

Those are not comparable scenarios. The impression of a bear is a logical one, derived from what you can actually see - if something looks like a bear, it is reasonable to assume it is a bear until better information becomes available. Seeming to yourself that you are Napoleon, can only be a delusion unless you actually are Napoleon. The former is a healthy mind working logically with the information before it, the latter is an unhealthy mind working from a delusion.

"'I seem to be dead and alive at the same time' could not be true if construed literally; there is no such thing as being alive and dead at the same time."

This is not actually the case - there are several philosophical approaches under which this might actually make sense to some degree. Start with the ship of Theseus and see where it leads you with this. Your body contains almost no matter from the you of 30 years ago. Where is that person now?

"It is possible transgender people make such a mistake, involving contradictions of sex (male/female, man/woman) -- rather than life (alive/dead)."

Trans people don't see themselves as two logically incompatible things simultaneously. Your assumption that they do, may be derived from the assumption that sex is a simple binary. That's not the case. A trans person recognises their physical characteristics - they typically trigger gender dysphoria, and if they weren't aware of them, trans people wouldn't have medical interventions to change them. They also recognise that their gender identity is not congruent with those physical characteristics, although that is a nuanced argument given that gender identity is biological in origin and therefore, to be more accurate, a trans girl is recognising biological characteristics like her penis as well as biological characteristics like her gender identity.