Help me with an eloquent response to this argument

[PaperBeige]

i am firmly GC and have recently been trying to be more open with my views, fighting against my natural tendency to follow the crowd and be a people pleaser. Mostly because I feel that as a woman this issue is extremely important.

I’m not a very eloquent person but mostly I get on ok because the GC arguments feel quite obvious to me, ie it’s not possible for someone to change sex. Of course a man shouldn’t be in a women’s prison etc etc

However this one has come up several times now. When I have said that I do believe in gender dysphoria but I think it’s complex and I think often the result of deep mental health issues where the person longs to be fixed and thus they cling onto this idea that the problem all along has been because they are actually the opposite sex. And the response I’ve had several times is that that used to be what people thought about gay people (and I am a lesbian so there’s often been an undertone that I should be more understanding). And if I say that’s different, they say ‘how?’ And I say ‘well it’s biologically impossible to change sex’ And they say ‘well they used to think it was biologically impossible to be attracted to and have sex with a same sex partner’. And I don’t really have a good response to this! Can anybody help?

It almost sounds like they're unwittingly agreeing with sexual inversion theory, which was a homophobic theory...?

1. Who are these people you're debating with, and 2. Why are you bothering?

Why be involved in pointless, circular arguments? Who has time for that?

That's simply not true. It was never thought to be "biologically impossible" to be attracted to and have sex with people of one's own gender. How ridiculous is that? Are they trying to say people used to say a woman was physically unable to eat another woman out or whatever? 😄
It was always known to be not only possible but something that does happen, but it was frowned upon for reasons of religious based morality. They are making up a crock of shit to try to win an argument.

It's true that some people have claimed that same-sex attraction is a curable disorder, in a similar way that you're claiming gender dysphoria is a curable disorder.

It's different because what the two groups want is radically different. Same-sex attracted people want romantic and sexual relationships.with people of the same sex, and not to be discriminated against because of it.
Gender dysphoric people typically want to be surgically.modified to resemble the opposite sex, and then for everyone to pretend that they actually are of the opposite sex, even though it's obvious they aren't.

But if I were you, I wouldn't argue this point. People want to transition for all kinds of reasons, some more sympathy-inducing than others, e.g. because of sexual abuse. But however much sympathy we feel, it doesn't change the fact that it's impossible to change sex, that it's unreasonable to demand that everyone you interact with pretends that you're the opposite sex, and that it's vitally important to retain sex-segregation in a limited number of situations for reasons of privacy, dignity, safety, and fairness.

If the people you're arguing with are really claiming that it's possible to change sex, you could ask them to justify that claim. Can pelvis shape be changed? Can ovaries be turned into testicles?
Only the most superficial secondary sexual characteristics can be changed, and only incompletely.

Gay people didn’t need massive medical intervention to be their authentic selves, just for people to stop criticising them.

They didn’t need other people to get involved, just freedom to mix with other gay people. They weren’t asking straight people to sleep with them, or marry them, just to leave them alone.

Gender dysphoria requires other people to change their language, to consider them as a partner regardless of one’s own sexuality, and to accommodate massive dangerous medical intervention.

Nothing like being gay. More like anorexia.

I don’t believe anyone has ever claimed it’s biologically impossible to be attracted to or physically have sex with someone of the same sex. Although men have claimed lesbian sex isn’t “real” sex as it doesn’t involve a man and his penis. This is sexism and lesbophobia.

The stigmatising of mental health disorders by those who claim to support gender dysphoria angers me greatly.

“well they used to think it was biologically impossible to be attracted to and have sex with a same sex partner’”

So why were there laws against it, if it was impossible to exist? We don’t have laws to prevent people changing their eye colour- because they are unnecessary.

Thank you, these replies are helpful. I wasn’t going to a huge effort to argue with these people, it just came up in conversation and I’m trying to be more open with my GC views. The conversation has been mutually respectful, i just wish i had responded better to that claim. Thank you so much for the replies!

This is really quite straightforward.

What the difference between a man (a gay male) who sincerely says, "I feel I am attracted to men," and a man (a transwoman) who sincerely says, "I feel I am a woman"?

-- The difference is, the first man must be telling the truth; the second must be mistaken. - Why? Because to feel attracted is to be attracted, but feelings have nothing to do with what sex you are, which is physically (biologically) determined.

So the first man (both are sincere, we assumed, remember) is definitely homosexual; the second is definitely not female.

Simple enough, really.

[Of course the same goes, mutatis mutandis, for women.]

I believe in gender dysphoria in the same way I believe in anorexia nervosa. But I think most people would be disgusted if the proposed treatment for anorexia was to indulge fantasy and tell the sufferer they were indeed fat, and support them in under eating to help them align their reality with their feelings.

Medical intervention for gender dysphoria is harmful too - we shouldn’t be medicated people to indulge their dysphoria, we should be helping overcome the dysphoria.

Because same sex attraction is NOT the same thing as a mental health condition whereby you are convinced your body is wrong. And you apparently need medication and surgery and life long medical care.

Their premise is that these things are the same.

They're being homophobic.

You need to point out that this basic argument, conflating the two, is a massive problem.

(Straw man argument? I'm never quite sure!)

They're either suggesting that being gay is a mental health condition or they're suggesting that people who are gay should transition to fit into gender/ sex norms. (as stats show most people suffering from GD are gay, though this varies with different cohorts as obvs porn is a driver with older often hetero men)

This shows how many people can’t do logical thinking.

Their argument is basically, ‘If someone says this can’t be true, but someone says it is, then it is’. Because once some people said something wasn’t true but it was, so that pattern must repeat every time.’ Which is clearly nonsense.

It’s not the claims people make which means something is true, but the quality of evidence which makes it true. They would still need to present good evidence and coherent fact based arguments to make their case that people can change sex.

well they used to think it was biologically impossible to be attracted to and have sex with a same sex partner

They didn't think it was "biologically impossible" though. They thought it was sinful, which is quite different.

What a silly person you're arguing with. It's a stupid gotcha that doesn't work.

Gender dysphoria is often separated from body dysmorphia because is it supposed to be about feelings rather than physical appearance. If this was truly the case then transitioning would not be necessary. If you feel like a woman in a man’s body but supposedly have no physical dysmorphia then there would be no need to change your body or take hormones to conform with society’s concept of a woman. Just identifying would be enough. Neither would you need to dress up in “women’s clothing “. If it’s just how you feel then you do not need to change anything.

I have a close friend who has been a transvestite since early teens. He freely admits that it is all based on sexual fetish. The majority of the time he is a man and now he is older he has admitted that he has grown out of it although still into sadomasochism. Honestly if you met him you would never know. He did, when younger make a very convincing woman when dressed up, and was part of the tranny scene for years. He admits that the whole gender thing has decimated the tranny scene. What was once sexual curiosity is now deemed gender fluidity, very confusing for young teenage boys who get a bit of a sexual thrill wearing heals and women’s clothes.
I’m not suggesting that every transgender individual falls into this category but I think that many are confused by the feelings they have and with the onus being on gender it’s difficult for them to navigate. My friend admitted that it all felt very wrong in his teens but after meeting up with like minded men he realised that it is just a fetish. He feels that as a cross dresser he is no longer classified as a man in a frock but as someone who needs converting. He is very definitely a man in a frock who gets a kick out of it.

As you point out you can be a lesbian without having to change your outward appearance. Sexual preference is very much about feelings. Obviously some stereotypes persist but most of the lesbians I know do not present as “lesbians”.

If gender dysphoria is all about feelings why does involve extreme medical intervention.
I really think that it would be better described as gender/body dysmorphia.
I feel like a woman, I am a biological woman, but I rarely present as a stereotypical woman. I only wear makeup occasionally, very rarely wear skirts or dresses ( hot weather) and haven’t worn heals in years. I’m now 60 so losing some of my natural femininity sadly, but being a women is so much more than how we feel.

Sorry didn’t quite answer your whole question.
Sexual preference has been fluid throughout history. Fundamentally we need heterosexual sex for procreation but sexual attraction and orientation is probably genetic. Just because it has largely been covered up historically doesn’t mean it never existed.
I don’t know why homosexuality exists but it is part of our evolutionary development so must have some biological purpose. That is to say there is no explanation, homosexuality has been observed in lots of species so it is in my mind just a variation and therefore does not need explanation or reason. Can you tell I’m an scientist 😂Edited.

As for why transgender is preferable to some societies over homosexuality then that is easy. Religion. The rules for many dictate the status quo. But you can now fix homosexuality by changing sex in order to fit in. We all go through our teenage years not knowing where we are going to land sexually as an adult. Most won’t admit it and would never contemplate it but attraction is a very strong emotion.

Being GC is not wrong. Celebrate the fact that you are a critical thinker. But pick your arguments. Don’t try and convince anyone in their early 20s they have been thoroughly brainwashed. However those in their late teens are much more cynical about gender politics. Being isolated during those years when it’s easy to be indoctrinated has made them critical thinkers.

Being shouted down by a 24 yr old who despite having an A level in biology firmly believes that transitioning changes your genetic karyotype and therefore changes you from biological male to biological female is truly mind blowing.

DS was in a year where there were two trans pupils. The trans boy was not obvious and I think she decided to wait until uni to fully transition. The trans girl gradually transitioned over a number of years. School handled it well. Most parents were unaware and safeguarding was put in place. The trans girl was not a big character, they spent most of their time with a female friendship group. The odd one or two boys would try bullying but they were usually admonished by their peer group. I know that if the trans girl found themselves in difficulty and any of their year were around, the boys would have no problem wading in and defending them. As a generation they are so much more grown up about sexuality and gender.

Did people ever say it was biologically impossible to be attracted to someone of the same sex?

I know they said it shouldn’t happen but did they say it couldn’t. Why would people feign attraction knowing they would be persecuted?

I may well be wrong about that, but if I’m not that might be one way to shut that down

I heard years ago that the reason why laws against homosexually only applied to males was because Queen Victoria didn't believe lesbianism was possible. But this could be complete BS!

What I always say to this argument is that someone's claimed sense of who they are internally should have no effect on anyone else. A man might genuinely believe he's a woman inside but that's absolutely no reason for me, or anyone else, to pretend he's a woman when I know quite well he's not.

The other thing is that it's fallacious logic.
Because argument A bears a (superficial at best) resemblance to argument B, which happens to be bogus, does not mean argument A is bogus.

We have two fallacies in one here, the first being that it is a false analogy. It is false because sexual orientation and biological sex are not equivalent.

The other is the package deal fallacy- the person is treating different things as similiar when they are actually not, in order to claim that both are either baseless (in this case) or that both have merit.

Alan Turing was punished for bring gay by having to take cross-sex hormones to suppress his sexual attraction to men. He committed suicide. Being trans is not illegal and gay boys are being told they are probably really girls and being prescribed cross-sex hormones. Same shit, different century.

Are they perhaps tryong to say that evolutionarily same sex attraction should have died out? That if there were 'gay gene' - it is less likely to be passed on - as gay people less likely to have children?

It is an overly simplistic understanding of human genetics

I’m pretty sure- although an actual feminist historian (or someone with more knowledge than me) would know facts- that women throughout history have been locked up for mental health conditions they didn’t have, just for being different in some way.

The fact that that is wrong doesn’t mean MH conditions eg anorexia, body dysmorphia and so on, aren’t real and need treating.

People were wrong to call homosexuality a mental illness- it’s not, but believing yourself something you are not in any other way would warrant support rather than affirmation.

‘well they used to think it was biologically impossible to be attracted to and have sex with a same sex partner’.

Sexuality has nothing to do with biology, there is nothing in DNA or any special gay gene to determine someone’s sexuality. When it comes to men and women it is to do with biology that can’t be changed. XX and XY cannot be changed

Even if there was zero biological basis for being gay, and it was merely considered a choice, and a sinful one at that, there is no aspect of homosexuality that subverts reality.

In pursuing sex or a relationship, gay people demonstrate what they say they are ie. same-sex attracted. Even if you disbelieved the reason for homosexuality as being due to attraction, and attributed it to mental illness or whatever, as they did in the past, homosexual activity is still occurring. If you see two men kissing on a bench, whether you attribute it to love/sin/illness, nothing about reality is changing.

On the other hand, by attempting to resemble or appropriate the opposite sex, you cannot demonstrate that you are the opposite sex, only that you feel it. If you see a man dressed up as a woman, nothing about reality changes if he says 'I feel that I am a woman'. However, if he says 'and therefore I am a woman' then he is denying biological reality, because sex is determined at conception and cannot be changed.