Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Does the Transgender community have a problem with well evidenced science? Does the community only ever accept favourable reports, AKA confirmation bias, or is it something deeper?

443 replies

HydraDominatus · 14/03/2024 13:25

Every piece of science or news thats not entirely supportive is buried under accusations of transphobia or bias

Why is this a political debate rather than a mental and physical health issue?

Cancer care isn't bias and politicised, trans health care shouldn't be either. Surely it's all about properly designed and researched programmes, with the outcome not predetermined, that we should be entirely standing behind?

Would the community ever stand behind rigorous, transparent, and ethically conducted research into transgender health care that did not align with its previous, deeply held views? If not, isn't that a problem?

tl;dr Is the Transgender community bias to it's own detriment?

(inspired by recent UK changes which do seem to be well researched, evidenced and guided by true support for people with genuine issues, it just does not line up with existing trans community narrative)

OP posts:
Thread gallery
31
popebishop · 16/03/2024 23:52

It's bizarre quite how many times over the years some posters have had it explained to them that it is physical sex that is a risk factor for many different things we are concerned about, not what they're like, who they fancy or how seriously they believe sexist stereotypes.

Yet they post pretending they haven't been told that. Because they don't have anything actually honest to say.

I tend to scroll past their posts if they are relying so much on straw men.

popebishop · 16/03/2024 23:56

I mean, the argument "some people were wrong about a different thing in the past, so different people must be wrong about a different thing now" is... well, see the OP. Just a failure in logic.

Britinme · 17/03/2024 00:16

I ran alternatives to violence workshops in our local prison for eight years. My observations are that there were a lot of women who were in lesbian relationships because there was no sexual alternative available but they were essentially straight, or bi.

BackCats · 17/03/2024 01:58

Britinme · 17/03/2024 00:16

I ran alternatives to violence workshops in our local prison for eight years. My observations are that there were a lot of women who were in lesbian relationships because there was no sexual alternative available but they were essentially straight, or bi.

I was going to say ‘gay for the stay’ as it’s known.

Nellodee · 17/03/2024 07:07

Last time someone brought up the figures for lesbians in us jails, I did some research to see if the figures were replicated for U.K. jails. They weren’t. I can’t be bothered to repeat my research.

Whatever is happening in the us has something specifically to do with the us. Maybe religious fundamentalism? We are not the US, and it’s just one more example of the way arguments based on data, attitudes and experiences from America do not hold when brought over the Atlantic.

Nellodee · 17/03/2024 07:16

Ah, it was quick and easy enough. Latest figures from ONS /HMPPS.

93.4% of the U.K. population states their sexuality is heterosexual.
97% of the U.K. prison population who started their sexuality said they were heterosexual.

Gay/lesbian/bi people in the U.K. are very underrepresented in prisons.

Helleofabore · 17/03/2024 07:51

suggestionsplease1 · 15/03/2024 23:38

Can I ask you what you think about the huge over representation of lesbians and bisexuals in US jails:

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/graphs/lbq_women_prisons_jails.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/overwhelming-number-lesbians-bisexual-women-incarcerated-n728666

Perhaps you have some ideas on how straight women can be protected?

Readers note:

Please be reminded that this quoted post seems to have been flippantly posted to draw a comparison between the over representation of homosexual and bisexual women in prison in the USA and the over representation of male people with trans identities in jail in the UK. It fails at this.

The flippant ‘protect the straight women’ is homophobic.

Those women in US jails are not considered to be of higher risk of committing a sex crime because what this poster has posted has not discussed sex crime. This is a very lazy tactic. And it homophobic because it is weaponising (that flippancy shows this was deliberately done) the situation facing US women who are lesbian and bisexual. It is blatantly attempting to use homophobic trope to present these women as a risk to others.

The two are not comparative though.

Posters on FWR have used the prison statistics in the UK for male people to point out the safeguarding risk profile of male people to state they should not have access to female single sex spaces. And we point to male people with trans identities because their prison representation doesn’t show they are LESS of a risk profile than all other male people.

That risk being the propensity ‘to commit a sex crime’. (Also used for other issues such as the prevalence of misusing gender identity for some perceived gain, such as a better prison experience by being moved to the female estate)

The links posted in the quoted text highlight a horrific inequality that should be address and discussed and solutions found. But they are not ‘gotchas’! Not in the way the poster thinks. The ‘gotcha’ is that extreme trans rights activists tend to be very homophobic in the way they leverage homosexual and bisexual people to defend people with trans identities such as this post quoted.

Those women are not considered to be a risk to female people in prison because of their sexual orientation. Female people with same sex orientation or bisexual have not ever been shown to be a group with a higher rate of committing sex offences than other women, well since legalising homosexual activity if that was applied to lesbians. So again, this was an irrelevant point to make.

And as a group even male homosexual people have not been found to be committing sex crimes at a higher rate than other male people. So again, this was just homophobic in how this poster attempted to leverage this group- male or female.

Female people in general are not considered a high risk to others because female people also lack the many physical advantages male people have over female people. Grip strength and punching power are highly relevant and no male transition removes the fact that a huge majority of these male people have much stronger grip and punch power than 90% of all women. Another reason male people are considered high risk to be put in female single sex spaces. Happy to link studies showing this. Transition in male people does not bring average punch or grip power down to match the average female person’s power statistics.

The over representation is fucking serious and needs to be addressed. Not a jeering ‘Perhaps you have some ideas on how straight women can be protected?

What is important to note though, is that no evidence was presented that shows male people in the UK with trans identities committing sex crimes at a rate equal to or lower than female people. This US prison statistic was a deflection from that obvious lack of information.

Some posters often posts links to studies and reports without adequately understanding methodology or conclusions or even thoroughly reading what they post. This is a long line of similar irrelevant or misused links

RedToothBrush · 17/03/2024 08:19

Nellodee · 17/03/2024 07:07

Last time someone brought up the figures for lesbians in us jails, I did some research to see if the figures were replicated for U.K. jails. They weren’t. I can’t be bothered to repeat my research.

Whatever is happening in the us has something specifically to do with the us. Maybe religious fundamentalism? We are not the US, and it’s just one more example of the way arguments based on data, attitudes and experiences from America do not hold when brought over the Atlantic.

If it's not replicated in the UK then there are two likely reasons.

  1. greater prejudice in the judicial system in the US against none heterosexual women. Given judges are political picks this is highly possible.
  2. the US system is much more heavily weighted against those who live in poverty. The bail system means you can be innocent but get stuck inside in a way that doesn't happen in the UK. Your access to a good defence is also much more dependent on what you can afford. If lesbians and bisexual women are financially worse off compared to straight women you would expect to see this pattern.

We know that as a whole the UK is more accepting of homosexuality than the US. We also know that whilst out judicial system has a lot of flaws which impact more heavily against those in poverty, this issue isn't as pronounced as in the US if for no other reason than the wealth gap is smaller.

Emotionalsupportviper · 17/03/2024 08:29

SpicyMoth · 16/03/2024 20:03

I don't understand why according to @DadJoke we must believe and not question those who say they have a gender identity, but when WE say that we don't have a gender identity and can't relate at all, we are not believed and we are arbitrarily disbelieving something that is "not questioned", even though it is very much questioned in the same sense that atheists question religious beliefs that they do not share and can't relate to at all.

Yet again we are brought back to the question "What is a woman?", "What does being a woman 'feel' like to know whether one is or isn't?" What makes up this "innate feeling" of woman-ness?

With that in mind, I found this an interesting read - AMAB Trans perspective on the question/definition "What is a woman?";
https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/comments/1bfoffy/the_answer_to_what_is_a_woman/?sort=new

NOTE; Please do NOT engage in the above linked thread, just lurk and read.
I am posting it here just because I thought other would find the AMAB Trans perspective on this question/definition interesting, especially given that within the comments they can't seem to agree amongst themselves at all.

So - that gives us a "definition" of "woman" then. Thank you, anonymous Reddit contributor. Would you like to offer a definition of "female", now?

I'll wait.

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 12:53

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
"Actually, there are scientific tests for sexuality. They involve sensors for temperature and pressure being attached to or inserted into people's genitals and then showing them lots of photos of people. Likewise, you can image people's brain activity whilst showing them photos of people."
Show me a link to a study which shows THAT please because the one you linked to shows something completely different and irrelevant.

"Your sister is not a lesbian. She may be bisexual.

HTH."
Do you not know any lesbians who had sex with men when they were younger? It's pretty common IME. In my sister's particular case she was very troubled and was too nervous to meet other gay people, and spent a lot of her time getting drunk with men in straight places. You don't get to confidently state that she is bisexual because she had situations where a man wanted to have sex with her and she was like 'yeah alright why not, I'm lonely'. I also know two women who were married to men and had children with him but are now divorced and consider themselves lesbians. And I have a friend who always was a lesbian and then had a difficult breakup, and had sex with a man in the immediate aftermath of that just out of upset and confusion and easy access. People have sex with other people for all kinds of reasons not just arousal response and you are not the arbiter of anybody's sexuality.

"The literal definition of "fancying someone" is being sexually aroused by them. You didn't "fancy" boys. You might have mentally rehearsed the responses to boys that you thought you'd be expected to have when you grew up, but you didn't "fancy" them."
Well, I fancied boys. So you're wrong. I don't think you have a leg to stand on here. Attraction to other people can be romantic and/or sexual. Childhood experiences aside, I was very deeply in love with a male friend I had in college, absolutely yearned for him and was very jealous when he started dating someone else. Yet I didn't really have any kind of urge to have sex with him. Curiously it was a romantic attraction and not a very sexual one, and I have never felt anything like that towards a woman. Sexual orientation is complicated and multifaceted and can't just be boiled down to arousal response.

"Neither. That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation.

Boys disgusted me when I was young and I was adamant that I would never date one. I discovered my attraction to women years before I realised that I also fancy men, turning out bisexual. It's not a given that a child will grow into what they think they will."
Second paragraph is your personal experience and I don't deny it. Is your first paragraph a judgement on every person who says they knew their sexuality as a child? There's an extraordinary arrogance in that.

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz · 17/03/2024 13:28

Not as popey as I'd hopey Grin

popebishop · 17/03/2024 13:49

"That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation." going on to say 'It's not a given'.

Is your first paragraph a judgement on every person who says they knew their sexuality as a child?

No - it clearly is not. There's a way you can tell: by reading the words that were posted.

I'm actually rather alarmed that a poster either genuinely thought that describing a sequence of events that happened to one person was 'an arrogant judgment' on anyone, let alone an entire group of people, or pretended they thought that in order to call an anonymous stranger a negative word.

This rather unpredictable interpretation of words does demonstrate why we need key terms to have clear definitions where law and policies are built on them.

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 13:59

@popebishop did you see the original post of mine that this was a response to? The first paragraph was a response to me referencing gay people in general who may say they knew they were gay from childhood. They responded "That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation." That sounds like a judgement on any hypothetical gay person because it was not about a SPECIFIC gay person that we have any more information about. Go back and read it. That second paragraph is this poster's own experience and I said I don't deny that.

SpicyMoth · 17/03/2024 15:48

Emotionalsupportviper · 17/03/2024 08:29

So - that gives us a "definition" of "woman" then. Thank you, anonymous Reddit contributor. Would you like to offer a definition of "female", now?

I'll wait.

I'd certainly like to see them try! The amount of infighting that came from just that thread alone was quite something to behold😂

popebishop · 17/03/2024 16:56

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 13:59

@popebishop did you see the original post of mine that this was a response to? The first paragraph was a response to me referencing gay people in general who may say they knew they were gay from childhood. They responded "That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation." That sounds like a judgement on any hypothetical gay person because it was not about a SPECIFIC gay person that we have any more information about. Go back and read it. That second paragraph is this poster's own experience and I said I don't deny that.

I don't understand what you think the judgement is? Can you explain?

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 17/03/2024 17:53

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 13:59

@popebishop did you see the original post of mine that this was a response to? The first paragraph was a response to me referencing gay people in general who may say they knew they were gay from childhood. They responded "That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation." That sounds like a judgement on any hypothetical gay person because it was not about a SPECIFIC gay person that we have any more information about. Go back and read it. That second paragraph is this poster's own experience and I said I don't deny that.

That sounds like a judgement on any hypothetical gay person

You asked if we thought someone who claimed to know their sexual orientation as a child is some kind of pervert. I don't. This is a refusal to judge the person. I accompanied my refusal with an explanation for why I refuse to judge.

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 18:33

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 17/03/2024 17:53

That sounds like a judgement on any hypothetical gay person

You asked if we thought someone who claimed to know their sexual orientation as a child is some kind of pervert. I don't. This is a refusal to judge the person. I accompanied my refusal with an explanation for why I refuse to judge.

"When someone says they knew they were gay when they were a child do you believe them or do you imply that they're a pervert?"

"Neither."

Yes you said you wouldn't think they are a pervert but also that you wouldn't believe them. So rather a third option that implies they are mistaken about that. That's the judgement I'm saying you've made,

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 17/03/2024 18:40

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 12:53

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
"Actually, there are scientific tests for sexuality. They involve sensors for temperature and pressure being attached to or inserted into people's genitals and then showing them lots of photos of people. Likewise, you can image people's brain activity whilst showing them photos of people."
Show me a link to a study which shows THAT please because the one you linked to shows something completely different and irrelevant.

"Your sister is not a lesbian. She may be bisexual.

HTH."
Do you not know any lesbians who had sex with men when they were younger? It's pretty common IME. In my sister's particular case she was very troubled and was too nervous to meet other gay people, and spent a lot of her time getting drunk with men in straight places. You don't get to confidently state that she is bisexual because she had situations where a man wanted to have sex with her and she was like 'yeah alright why not, I'm lonely'. I also know two women who were married to men and had children with him but are now divorced and consider themselves lesbians. And I have a friend who always was a lesbian and then had a difficult breakup, and had sex with a man in the immediate aftermath of that just out of upset and confusion and easy access. People have sex with other people for all kinds of reasons not just arousal response and you are not the arbiter of anybody's sexuality.

"The literal definition of "fancying someone" is being sexually aroused by them. You didn't "fancy" boys. You might have mentally rehearsed the responses to boys that you thought you'd be expected to have when you grew up, but you didn't "fancy" them."
Well, I fancied boys. So you're wrong. I don't think you have a leg to stand on here. Attraction to other people can be romantic and/or sexual. Childhood experiences aside, I was very deeply in love with a male friend I had in college, absolutely yearned for him and was very jealous when he started dating someone else. Yet I didn't really have any kind of urge to have sex with him. Curiously it was a romantic attraction and not a very sexual one, and I have never felt anything like that towards a woman. Sexual orientation is complicated and multifaceted and can't just be boiled down to arousal response.

"Neither. That person rejected the assumption that they would date the opposite sex at an early age and coincidentally that matches their adult orientation.

Boys disgusted me when I was young and I was adamant that I would never date one. I discovered my attraction to women years before I realised that I also fancy men, turning out bisexual. It's not a given that a child will grow into what they think they will."
Second paragraph is your personal experience and I don't deny it. Is your first paragraph a judgement on every person who says they knew their sexuality as a child? There's an extraordinary arrogance in that.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2022.2060927 shows that, not only is genital arousal measured to assess sexual orientation, but that people over-report their supposed changes in sexual orientation.

she had situations where a man wanted to have sex with her and she was like 'yeah alright why not, I'm lonely'.

That she could have willing sex with a man indicates some degree of bisexuality. Most of my ONSs have been similarly motivated. I've met gay men who are repelled by female bodies. If they were willing to have sex with women because they were lonely, they would not be gay! "Gay" and "lesbian" refer to exclusive homosexuality. Words have meanings and these meanings should be respected; this matters more than individuals feeling affronted by my, or anyone else's, refusal to accept their inaccurate self-label.

I also know two women who were married to men and had children with him but are now divorced and consider themselves lesbians.

Bisexuality is highly stigmatised. It's far easier for someone to claim a sexual orientation shift than to own and be proud of being bisexual.

Attraction to other people can be romantic and/or sexual.

I'll believe in romantic attraction when someone defines "romance" without relying on Western cultural stereotypes. Many other cultures do not have a concept of romance.

I was very deeply in love with a male friend I had in college, absolutely yearned for him and was very jealous when he started dating someone else.

Replace "dating someone else" with "sitting on someone else's lap" and you've described how I feel about DCat.

And none of this talk of sexual orientation has anything to do with trans people or TRAs rejecting science.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 17/03/2024 18:42

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 18:33

"When someone says they knew they were gay when they were a child do you believe them or do you imply that they're a pervert?"

"Neither."

Yes you said you wouldn't think they are a pervert but also that you wouldn't believe them. So rather a third option that implies they are mistaken about that. That's the judgement I'm saying you've made,

I don't think a prepubescent child can make judgements about their own sexual orientation because they aren't old enough to have one. The adult might look back and carry out some pattern-matching, but the child cannot have known.

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 21:11

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
All your points there are you making a judgement on what somebody else's sexuality is, like you know their mind better than they do. If you said any one of those things to any one of those people to their face they would absolutely tell you to fuck off. Also in some cases they would say you were being homophobic for telling them they're not real lesbians. I don't know whether your views are mainstream GC or not but I suppose that would track, if they were.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 17/03/2024 21:48

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 21:11

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
All your points there are you making a judgement on what somebody else's sexuality is, like you know their mind better than they do. If you said any one of those things to any one of those people to their face they would absolutely tell you to fuck off. Also in some cases they would say you were being homophobic for telling them they're not real lesbians. I don't know whether your views are mainstream GC or not but I suppose that would track, if they were.

All my points are founded in the well-known phenomenon of people's self-image not always matching reality. An example of this: we all think that we are better-than-average drivers.

It's not homophobic to say that someone who has willingly had sex with someone of the opposite sex on multiple occasions (i.e. not just once "to make sure") is actually bisexual. It's both homophobic and biphobic for them to claim that they are gay or lesbian: homophobic because they are diluting a word that isn't theirs to dilute, and biphobic because of the internalised biphobia driving that behaviour.

Even if we accept that sexual orientation can change (and the first study I posted indicates that it doesn't change as much as people tell themselves it does), that person is still arguably bisexual: if they fucked members of the opposite sex and liked it before, they might well revert to liking it again, even if they are currently only shagging same-sex partners.

There's nothing wrong with being bisexual. I'm bisexual and feel no shame for it. It boils my piss when other bisexual people deny what they are and undermine the meanings of "gay", "lesbian", and "straight" in doing so. Words have meanings and this matters.

Saltpepperpaprika · 17/03/2024 22:26

Bullshit. If my sister and other friends of mine who consider themselves lesbians and have only same-sex relationships these days don't get to use the word lesbian for themselves because they don't meet your purity standards then I don't know why you, not a lesbian yourself, get to arbitrate on that. The word doesn't belong to you either.

IAmAlpharius · 17/03/2024 23:40

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Dutchesss · 18/03/2024 00:04

The concepts of man and woman seem to be incredibly important yet utterly indistinguishable.

🙌🏼

Swipe left for the next trending thread