What exactly do you mean when you say 'Trans people have always existed'?

[RainWithSunnySpells]

I'm hoping that people who genuinely believe this will explain it to me.

I would like to know:
(1) how are you defining 'Trans'?
(2) what is the evidence that convinced you that this was 'always' the case?

I just want to understand this phrase as it genuinely confuses me and I saw it again on a current and sensitive thread that I do not want to derail.

Thanks to everyone who answers.

I think part of the problem is that gradually (largely during the C19th in Western world) non-normative behaviours began to be considered a 'disorder' instead of just different or unusual

When I am talking about gender identity disorder, I am talking about people with a deep distress with their sexed body, rather than defining it as non-normative behaviours. When I refer to this always existing for a small cohort I am meaning people for whom this persists into adulthood and which has no clear cause ( such as a history of sexual trauma).

Of course; I guess what I'm saying is that there is no such thing as a 'trans' person; trans is just a framing device, a term that is used to describe some people who feel certain types of thing, or who like to present as the opposite sex for whatever reason.

@lamppostliving Ah I see. Disorder makes sense in terms of identifying distress or difficulty.

Bit I often wonder how far ”disorders” are an external expression of an internal personal problem, or a response to the pressures of the external world. (Always both, surely.) For example, is the distress the product of being dissatisfied with one’s body, or living in a world where one believes their sex just match their gender?

The debate is similar for depression - is it a personal problem or a social/environmental one? Is it just faulty brain chemistry, or faulty brain chemistry that’s a logical response to living in a hostile/stressful environment?

I agree that at least some of the confused teenagers who are currently claiming to be trans, actually are not.

But SOME OF THEM ARE.

Can you explain exactly what you mean when you say that some people 'are trans'?

Don't any of the posters on here with their vitriolic comments know any non-gender-conforming people? And even if you don't can you not at least try to understand and empathise?

Assuming your definition of non-gender-conforming is similar to mine, many of the people here who find the notion of 'being trans' difficult to understand, are non-gender-conforming.

Above all, why is it absolutely fine for people to be gay, but not trans??

Of course it's fine for people to be gay. Being gay just means being attracted to people of the same sex. But what is trans? Is there a similar simple definition?

And it's fine if people want to identify as trans (whatever they happen to mean by that), but nobody can change sex.

And what are the 'vitriolic comments' you're referring to @ChristabelHolloway?

@ChristabelHolloway

Do we have to descend into hatred?

Nobody here hates you or your child, we just disagree about your claims regarding material reality.

But I really can't stand posters on here who basically don't believe that my... trans daughter exists.

Nobody here believes that your child doesn't exist, we just don't accept your un-evidenced assertion that your child has changed sex.

This is exactly it. All the examples I’ve seen given by transactivists are either male recreational cross-dressers or single women who disguised themselves as men for greater freedom or safety.

Above all, why is it absolutely fine for people to be gay, but not trans??

Thd very simple reason is that homosexuality has no effect on anyone else and goes nog impinge on anyone’s rights. Men claiming to be women break all women’s accepted boundaries of privacy and safety.

Don't any of the posters on here with their vitriolic comments know any non-gender-conforming people? And even if you don't can you not at least try to understand and empathise?

These comments baffle me. Many of us are non gender conforming. Many of us have kids who are non gender conforming. We simply don't believe in trans ideology.

I am irritated that all those people in other times and other cultures who chose to conform to one of the standard variant ways of being the sex they were without fitting in to the majority stereotype are now suddenly 'trans'. To say nothing of all the poor men who were turned into eunuchs, many of whom endured lifelong incontinence.

Though eunuchs could be pretty misogynist, Ezra and Nehemiah are not my favourite Old Testament characters, great though their achievements were.

But they weren't 'trans', because nobody was, because no-one had imagined 'gender' was an actual real thing, because no-one had invented ways for fringe and quack medicine and the pharmaceutical industry to profit from it.

If you read Daphne du Mauriers letters it's very clear that she didn't feel 'normal'. It caused her a lot of anguish over most of her life - probably a lot of women did. I guess it's hard for us to fathom, but when you're literally constrained with what you can do, where you can go, who you can speak to, because of (what are now considered) arbitrary social rules, then yes of course, you'll feel unhappy and anguished about it. Even more so if religion drives some of it.

What exactly do you mean when you say 'Trans people have always existed'?

Do I believe that people who are unhappy with the social expectations of their sex have always existed? Yes.

Do I believe that people who have tried to subvert these expectations have always existed? Yes.

Do I believe that people who believe they are the actual opposite sex have always existed? Yes - but I also believe that depending on which area of the world you would have been in, you might have been institutionalised because of this belief; you might have been put to death or jailed. Or, your culture might have created a third "space" for you and people like you.

Do I believe that due to the overwhelming patriarchal rule over most of the world for most of human's being on this earth, that women who disguised themselves as men or who behaved as men did it because they believed they were men? No, I believe they knew they were women and were trying valiantly to prove themselves or protect themselves in a man's world.

Do I believe there has always been people who wish they were the opposite sex? Yes. I actually think they were probably a lot more switched on as the obfuscation and terrible medical care of today's world has fumbled this. At least back then, you might feel like you wish you were the other sex but would know that other than cosmetically it would never happen.

Do I believe that trans people exist? Yes, I'm not blind. But sorry, I cannot square the circle that says it's both not a mental health issue but is a physical one that can be fixed by changing how a body looks. Because no matter what small children are growing up to believe, it is not possible to change sex.

Unfortunately I do not have any links. I do not claim to be an expert on the topic. My understanding comes from discussions with my mother, who is an arts scholar, and the representations in movies.
Most certainly the terminologies used across cultures and time periods are different. Eunuch, third gender, and hijras were and are, in some contexts, used to represent those who don't confirm to the typical gender standards.

Certain early societies, especially under the rule of Hindu kings, were quite open and accepting of such individuals. However, invasions, societal inequalities, and many other factors have led them to be ostracised and treated poorly. Yet, in certain contexts their presence is seen as powerful and auspicious, such as when a household has a newborn. The juxtaposition is fascinating and equally hypocritical.

Your mum's wrong, Fiery. I'm absolutely confident about that. You can tell her from me (Hi, Fiery's Mum! Hope you're well!).

Quite a jump from your rather portentous reference to 'ancient texts' (you meant the Mahabharata didn't you? Those were definitely eunuchs) to now saying you've seen 'representations in movies'. Is 300 an histoircally accurate representation of ancient Sparta? Is Troy an accurate representation of The Iliad, and is the Iliad an accurate representation of the apparent destruction by fire in the 12 century BC of TroyVII at Hassarlik in Turkey? Nope, non, nein.

And please don't mention hijra. The idea that hijra are trans is so colonial - this idea that we can impose a very postmodern and silly Western idea about gender identity onto quite old Hindu fertility ritual clans led by nayaks, is very silly indeed. And evidence of a rather condesecnding colonial mindset.

No, I didn't mean the Mahabharata. I am not talking about religious and mythological texts. I am talking about ancient societies that thrived under various rulers. So, no I don't think my mother is wrong.

I agree, I am not equating hijras to trans people at all. I said it in the context of people with varied gender identities being part of society for centuries.

What a fascinating thread.

oh my goodness - "Trans" is used widely as an umbrella term. Its modern usage would include so many things that previously would have been described differently with different vocabulary.

It is so disingenuous to use this fact to say that "trans people have always existed" is therefore not a true statement, because all of those people wouldn't necessarily have used modern terminology to describe themselves.

The gender fluidity of many cultures is so well documented, this thread is just stupid in the face.

Why thank you Little, I feel that I have really achieved something by starting such a 'stupid in the face' thread.

My desire to understand what other people think and to achieve that by asking them was obviously completely daft.

Condescending colonial mindset is what it's all about.

Condescending colonialism wanting to make money by stealing little snippets of other cultures it doesn't understand and doesn't respect, and the using those to undermine the self-respect and self-confidence of normal non-conforming young people (some neurodiverse, some same-sex attracted, all totally normal and ordinary), while encouraging them to spend money on quacks and their snake oil to harm their healthy bodies.

It depends how you define 'trans', doesn't it? I'm GC. I think the definition of a trans person is 'someone who wants to be or considers themselves to be, or tries to present as, a person of the opposite sex'. And yes, I imagine there have always been some people who fell into that category.

I think a trans person is someone who desperately wants to conform to a stereotype of something they call 'gender', preferably not the 'gender' associated with their sex.

Young people who don't have confidence in their own personalities. I blame ubiquitous on-line images for this crushing conformity.

Also a few men with another agenda, but that's a different matter. But none of it anything to do with anything that happened in all those non-modern, non-western cultures.

In my mind it means cross dressers have always existed. Eg the molly houses where largely gay men would meet.

I expect these days it means gender non conforming people have always existed which is a completely different thing and meaningless twaddle so the slogan might as well be 'people have always existed' 😂

Oh yes, people in early modern and modern Europe played dress-up for all sorts of reasons. Nothing to do with 'gender'.

Loads of eunuchs knocking around back in the day.

Molly houses
Indigenous north american tribal societies
Eunuchs

OP the "Gender A Wider Lens" podcast has a really interesting interview on the Fa'afafine and male femininity in relation to social and cultural contexts in Samoa. I think when people say "trans people have always existed across time and cultures" this is the type of thing they are talking about but listening to the interview it obvious that these traditions and cultures have little in common with modern day western transgender ideology.

NB edited to add, sorry if this has already been linked I haven't read the entire thread...

"Recent theories about gender often describe “third gender” categories found in other cultures. Prof Paul Vasey is one of the world’s leading academic experts on the Fa’fafine. These individuals are feminine males who live “in the manner of a woman” in Samoa. Sasha and Stella have a spellbinding discussion with Paul about how our western constructs can sometimes completely misinterpret well-researched phenomena in other societies. This conversation actually highligths the universal truths of sex difference between male and female and helps us understand the organice, naturally emerging trait of femininity in androphilic (or same sex attracted) males."