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?

[HydraDominatus]

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)

But what is a "gender identity"?

Is it like "woman essence"?

TRAs constantly talk about sexes matching genders yet can't even say which gender matches which sex. I've asked DadJoke repeatedly what he understands that to mean when he says it, and he doesn't know, yet keeps saying it.

He talks as though he thinks 'woman' matches 'female', but won't confirm this or say why.

totally on the side of science, though, yeah?

I think it is important to remember that the 'trans movement' as portrayed by media is of course a mix of people and a mixture of backgrounds and histories.

At a simplistic level it might be possible to split them into:

• those with a genuine mental health concern or issue relating to body dysphoria
• those who have other reasons for wishing to portray as the opposite sex

It is important to split our understanding of the make up of the component groups as it helps understand questions like this - those who have genuine reasons for concerns about who they are (and those who support them) will undoubtedly have an interest in science and understanding the evidence - they have a 'problem' they would love to resolve...

Those who have other reasons - well I suspect their interest in science might vary - as an example, if there were anyone who had ulterior motives around sexual fetishes or dominance of women, then you could see that if such people existed they might have every reason to shout loudly and try and drown out any science - the science and evidence is unlikely to support their arguments, so why would they want them aired?

I will leave it to our gentle readers to stop, think and consider - which of those categories are behind which activities that we see out there?

What is a person's "innate sense" of anything, if not a belief?

Feeling that there must be a god to give meaning to everything is literally what religion is.

If you are male and you have some personality trait you felt sure only occurred in females, is the scientific conclusion:

A) you must actually be female, despite not being female

Or
B) you were wrong to assume that the personality trait only occurred in females, and in fact you are proof it occurs in both sexes
?

The Pope has a very good point here

Using ‘sex assigned at birth’ in the very same paragraph you try to tell us that ‘every single major scientific’ and ‘medical’ body backs up your viewpoint shows you up as the mindless zealot you are. The poster upthread is right, you really do our job for us.

Do you accept that pretty much every reputable scientific, medical and psychological body of any repute in the entire world uses "gender identity" to mean an innate sense a person's innate sense of their own gender, and not a "belief"?

No.

I don't believe that they all use this because it is meaningless. Are you suggesting that all these bodies believe this nonsensical non-definition.

What does "their own gender" mean? Their sex or something else?

To my knowledge there has been no scientific study that proves the presence of a gender identity So I do view it with scepticism.

Id be very happy to read any studies about this.

But science can often lag behind reality, because science is just what it says it is : knowledge. And ‘knowledge’ is often dictated by the political, social or religious shibboleths of the time.

As we see here.

We're heading for a time (again) when ideology is seen as more important than science and scientific objectivity. As in so many areas, fringe academic contrarianism and activism starts to gain traction and anyone who raises objections is labelled as outdated or right wing. Just in the last couple of years, for example, I've seen a growing amount of activist types argue that curing or preventing disability is ableist. These are people who would let you go needlessly blind or paralysed just so they could prove their purity and goodness by hectoring people not to 'other' you. It reminds me of the most sinister and cruel aspects of medieval religion.

If you don't believe in the validity gender identity, and consider being transgender as a belief, you will oppose any efforts to allow people to transition, and believe in RODG, despite is being thoroughly discredited. Your beliefs lead you to bad science and bad allies.

I don't believe in gender identity because there is no evidence that it exists. There is also no credible definition of what it actually is.

Of course it's a belief. If it was something real then it could be defined. Although being able to define it wouldn't prove it was real, but at least we could discuss whether or not it exists.

If you're so convinced that gender identity and being transgender are real, why can't you define what they mean?

The vast majority of people transition because their gender identity does not match their sex assigned at birth. The fact you don't believe this, when every single major scientific, medical and psychological body in the world does, means the onus is on you to demonstrate the science is wrong.

The difficulty with this is:

• Sex is observed at birth not assigned - ask any doctor in obstetrics - in actual fact it is often observed before birth!
• There is no quantifiable 'absolute' as 'gender identity' - OED: The state of being male or female as expressed by social or cultural distinctions and differences - very clear, gender identity is simply temporal based on societal and cultural understanding at that moment in time - therefore as society and culture changes arguably anyone remaining static changes... there is no absolute and when something changes meaning so fast you can no longer use it to define...

I do understand that there are those out there who are born male or born female and yet feel more comfortable identifying with how society positions or portrays the opposite sex - but to jump from that dissonance to saying that somehow they can change biology is of course neither scientific nor helpful... what society needs to do is to work from both ends:

• Society needs to help those with gender dissonance / body dysmorphia - neither is a pleasant place to be and our medical services rightly should be supportive of them and help them to develop as the sex they are and be whatever shape man or woman they wish... (rather than lying to them that they can change biology)
• But of high importance - we need society to stop gender stereotyping so strongly - let us start to celebrate men and woman born as such but shaping their lives in a multitude of ways - the obvious ones of letting girls climb trees and letting boys play with dolls - to the more subtle around expected emotions / character traits / etc. Let's de-gender society and celebrate men and women as they are...

There will always be some differences between the sexes and that is fine we should acknowledge that and support those differences (e.g. women being able to bear children), but beyond that let's move forward with recognised two biological sexes living life to the full...

Do you accept that your lack of belief is not shared by the vast majority of reputable scientific, medical or psychological bodies?

@DadJoke FAIL AGAIN!

Come on? yes or no?

"would you accept rigorous research that showed a finding that does not align with transgender or transgender ally beliefs?"

The vast majority (if not all) of reputable scientific, medical or psychological bodies understand and recognise that people have an innate sense of a higher power or being that many refer to as God.

This does not mean they are saying God exists!

Do you accept that your lack of belief is not shared by the vast majority of reputable scientific, medical or psychological bodies?

No. Belief is not a feature of science.

*sorry I meant inner, not innate! Was echoing a previous DadJoke post.

@akkakk what you are saying is that the current scientific consensus is wrong - that gender identity is ill-defined and unevidenced. That's certainly something you can try to prove, but he onus is on gender critical people to prove all major scientific bodies are wrong.

Can you please define the characteristics of the man gender and the woman gender, and how these can be scientifically measured?

anyone who thinks a man can become a women simply by saying so has a problem with reality, let alone science.

@DadJoke Third fail!

Come on? yes or no?

"would you accept rigorous research that showed a finding that does not align with transgender or transgender ally beliefs?"

Basic Arguing 101

You say X exists (gender identity)
I say X does not exist

The onus is on YOU to prove its existence, not for me to prove that it doesn't!

You can't say "all these people, like scientists and stuff, believe in X so you have to prove to me that it doesn't".

You haven't shown proof that all scientific bodies also believe in gender identity, you've just said they do and asked us for proof they haven't!

Gender identity is a belief, plain and simple. If I haven't got one, and they absolutely 100% exist, how did I lose it? Did someone else remove it from me? Did I cast it out of my system when I became a "TERF"? Can you show me how to find it? What should I be looking for?

No. An innate sense is not a belief in scientific terms, and gender identity is never described as a belief except by gender critical people. You must know what innate means and how it differs from belief?

Proprioception and sexuality are innate senses. Christianity and Islam are beliefs.

Scientists think gender identity is the former. You think it's the latter.

@DadJoke Try again!

Come on? yes or no?

"would you accept rigorous research that showed a finding that does not align with transgender or transgender ally beliefs?"