What is "trans" and why does it justify undoing sex in law, society, culture and history?

[FlirtsWithRhinos]

In the Trolls thread @Tandora and I discovered that in a recent thread she had thought she was very clear about what "trans" is while I thought she was simply describing symptoms that could have many causes and did not justify why these symptoms should be treated as actual material facts by others.

• Trolls thread with our interaction on this page: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5420701-a-little-piece-of-insight?page=15&reply=147554941

• my question on the earlier thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5420701-a-little-piece-of-insight?page=15&reply=147554941

Clearly I missed something in that earlier thread but I can't go back because it has reached its post limit, so rather than derail the trolls thread, I am restating my question here.

Looking forward to @Tandora engaging with my questions to help me understand what I missed about her position in the original thread.

__
Tandora · 02/10/2025 21:28
Right- this is your question. which is why im trying to explain what being trans is. It's entirely relevant, the reason people can't comprehend the issue is that they simply can't comprehend what it is to be trans.
_

FlirtsWithRhinos · 02/10/2025 23:13
But Tandora you haven't explained what being trans is. All you've done is played the old TRA game of "Not that" when anyone else tries suggest an definition, any definition at all, that appears to fit the random claims you are making that feeling very wrong in the sex you actually are is somehow interchangeable with being the sex you are not, or that a characteristic of the mind somehow overrides the reality and consequences of differences of the body for both the trans person and for others.

You have made all sort of hand wringing emotional claims on behalf of trans people, and roundly insulted everyone who doesn't accept your argument of "they just are, alright" as closed minded and uneducated (which frankly would be hilarious to anyone who'd ever met me), and yet never once explained exactly why this thing makes the differences of sex and the social consequences of those differences, facts that are entirely and unproblematically accepted as real in all other circumstances, suddenly inconsequential and irrelevant in the face of a trans person's mental self image.

So I'll ask you again.

What is "being trans" Tandora?
Is it being one sex but with a deep and aching wish you were the other sex, maybe like a blind person has a deep and aching wish to see, or a lonely little girl has a deep and aching wish that she had been born as one of the popular kids instead?

Or is it actually being, in an innate mental way, in ways we don't yet understand, the other sex, implying that sex is not in fact a descriptor of the body but of the mind?

Because take away the emotional manipulation and neither definition actually justifies the demands being made of women in its name.

Neither definition changes the fact that people with female bodies do exist and do face social and physical consequences because of those bodies, and neither a man's deep feeling that he should have had a female body, nor a man's deep feeling that women don't need to have a female body, changes the embodied experiences and needs and self knowledge of the people who actually have a female body one iota.

Because these are things that are entirely to do with the experiences of women, and so no experience or feeling, no matter how genuine, of a man is relevant to them.

And regardless of which definition you go for, in fact regardless of any definition you go for that places more weight on a man's idea of himself as a woman than the embodied fact of female existence, outside his own mind he is simply not relevant to who women in the original female sense are and what women in the original female sense need at all.

No definition of woman that is stretched to include male people is more relevant to the needs and experiences and reality of female people than the simple old fashioned sex based definition and there is sinply no way round that.
face of a trans person's mental self image.

So I'll ask you again.

What is "being trans" Tandora?

Is it being one sex but with a deep and aching wish you were the other sex, maybe like a blind person has a deep and aching wish to see, or a lonely little girl has a deep and aching wish that she had been born as one of the popular kids instead?

Or is it actually being, in an innate mental way, in ways we don't yet understand, the other sex, implying that sex is not in fact a descriptor of the body but of the mind?

Because take away the emotional manipulation and neither definition actually justifies the demands being made of women in its name.

Neither definition changes the fact that people with female bodies do exist and do face social and physical consequences because of those bodies, and neither a man's deep feeling that he should have had a female body, nor a man's deep feeling that women don't need to have a female body, changes the embodied experiences and needs and self knowledge of the people who actually have a female body one iota.

Because these are things that are entirely to do with the experiences of women, and so no experience or feeling, no matter how genuine, of a man is relevant to them.

And regardless of which definition you go for, in fact regardless of any definition you go for that places more weight on a man's idea of himself as a woman than the embodied fact of female existence, outside his own mind he is simply not relevant to who women in the original female sense are and what women in the original female sense need at all.

No definition of woman that is stretched to include male people is more relevant to the needs and experiences and reality of female people than the simple old fashioned sex based definition and there is sinply no way round that.

_

@Tandora I don't have much free time this afternoon. Please don't take slow replies as bad faith and be assured I will be coming back to this thread when I have to engage properly as I really appreciate you wanting to explain this to me.

Yes, PPs on this thread have repeatedly called my opinions and statements disgusting.
I hear you. You think what I have to say is disgusting. The feelings are quite mutual.

Shall we say this to each other all day long, or shall will have a productive exchange about the topic at hand?

You don’t know anything about what I believe but continue inferring 👍🏻

So I am transphobic because I don’t want to share WSSS with a trans person who was born male but now identifies as female? And the only way that can be measured is inside their head and I have no idea when they enter the WSSS what sort of trans or not trans person they are. Indeed, there is no requirement to present as female - the person may look and present as a male person in body but inside their mind they feel female and I’m supposed to determine that how?

To summarise.

Trans is knowing that actual sex is different from the sex of the body. (It was a profound feeling for two or so pages, but no longer the case).

There's a possibility its neurological dervived.

A diagnosis isnt needed because to be trans is to know you are trans. Similarly to sexuality.

Its not feasible to accomated trans people as their body sex because to be trans means that they have to be accommodated and treated as their brain/feeling/knowing sex. To deny them this is to deny their transness.

If single sex spaces exist, trans people need to have the option to use them to exist as trans people.

The issue many on here have is not the feeling sex or the reasons, its the practicalities.

Practically, there would be no control of the 'single sex spaces'. Any man could claim this 'feeling sex' and use the facilities.

Men regardless of if they are trans are not too bothered about this because their need for the space isnt the same as womens. Women need space away from men, in a way men dont need space away from women

Women need it for saftey and dignity, men for dignity, trans to live as trans.

For the trans person, if the female space stops existing, it doesnt create a problem. Its only a problem if it exists and they cant use it. If that was not the case, trans people would be gatekeeping who is trans.

Its a similar situation for opportunities, statistics, sports.

My goodness, that's just what you're not doing.

You never do.

No that's not an accurate description of anything I've ever said or thought.
Do you even have a clue what @Plastictreees thinks on this topic? I'm not even sure she fully agrees with me.

Well exactly, and I feel the same.

Let me be very clear. I don’t give a chuff whether the man in the WSSS identifies as trans or not.

Trans is irrelevant.

I don’t want a man - any person born male- in a WSSS with me because I will be traumatised.

There are a lot of people on this thread who use their experiences of SGBV as a justification for transphobia.

i think that says all we need to know

I find that appalling.

Wow, patronising tripe. I have not said anything offensive as far as I am aware. You, on the other hand...

I think it would be difficult to be a survivor of SA without also being made more fearful of men.

You are using your belief, that a tiny group of men must, to spare them psychological distress, be treated exactly as if they are women, to justify misogyny against SA survivors, who must surely be greater in number.

Why the mismatch?

There are a lot of people on this thread who use their experiences of SGBV as a justification for transphobia.

If your conclusion is this, and not that these women are worried about sharing spaces with men, then I find it difficult to understand how you have found work in scientific research.

It's tempting to report it, but I think it needs to stay so we all know what she really thinks.

Oh wow.

It's important that Tandora's horrific posts stand.

We need to know who they truly are.

In the context of a job being available only to a trans person, do you think it unimportant to make any attempt to verify the trans status of applicants or at least the person who is offered the job?

I should certainly say your posts tend to leave me not much the wiser about your thoughts sadly

Can you talk us through your thinking, because I am having difficulty understanding your logic.

It is very clear that women are concerned about sharing spaces with men, and their gender identity is not relevant.

How is that transphobic?

Do you believe that a woman who doesn't want trans identified men in a female single sex spaces is transphobic?

to summarise.

Trans is knowing that actual sex is different from the sex of the body sex as observed at birth based on observable physical sexual characteristics. (It was a profound feeling for two or so pages, but no longer the case).

There's a possibility its neurological dervived. It's a naturally occurring type of cognitive/ neurodevelopmental difference, with complex genetic, biologic, environmental causes.

A diagnosis isnt needed because to be trans is to know you are trans. Similarly to sexuality. Being trans is separate to whether someone has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is the clinically significant distress that can result as a consequence of being trans.

Its not feasible to accomated trans people as their body sex because to be trans means that they have to be accommodated and treated as their brain/feeling/knowing sex.
To be trans is to have a profound cognitive experience of self as being other to birth sex. Because of this, to insist to a trans person that they are, and must be treated according to, their birth sex causes profound psychological distress and disorientation. It can result in confusion, self-doubt, depression, anxiety, disassociation and even psychosis.

To deny them this a trans person recognition of their experience of sex is to deny their transness.

If single sex spaces exist, trans people need to have the option to use them to exist as trans people. Trans people need to have access to basic services like toilets and changing rooms, in accordance with their dignity, privacy, mental health and wellbeing.

The issue many on here have is not the feeling sex or the reasons, its the practicalities. I didn't understand this sentence.

Practically, there would be no control of the 'single sex spaces'. Any man could claim this 'feeling sex' and can use the facilities. They are open access, policed only through social convention. There is no logical basis (or evidence base) for believing a man with predatory intentions would pretend to be trans to access these facilities. Why?

Didn't understand the rest:

Men regardless of if they are trans are not too bothered about this because their need for the space isnt the same as womens. Women need space away from men, in a way men dont need space away from women
Women need it for saftey and dignity, men for dignity, trans to live as trans.
For the trans person, if the female space stops existing, it doesnt create a problem. Its only a problem if it exists and they cant use it. If that was not the case, trans people would be gatekeeping who is trans.
Its a similar situation for opportunities, statistics, sports.

The thread has moved a lot but I'm coming back to this paper:
Genetic Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Sex Hormone Signaling - PubMed
I'm not an epidemiologist but I read epidemiology papers for work so I have good understanding of how these papers are structured.
The authors have a cohort of males and a cohort of people with the diagnosis of transsexualism or gender dysphoria according to the DSM.
They find a link between variations of some genes linked to hormonal response and an increased frequency of diagnosis. As an example, one of the most probable links they found in the paper is between the TC variant of the SULT2A1 gene and the propensity of having a diagnosis: 37% of transexual have it. However, also 27% of the non-transexual males have the same variation, so yes, it might be a factor, but definitely with a complex interplay of other genetic and environmental factors. (The authors are honest in describing the data and don't overstate them).

Some comments:
The links are statistically significant but not very strong - every variant is present at high levels also in the control (non-transexual) cohort.
There isn't a correction for multiple comparisons (adjusted p value, FDR), so it might be that the statistical significance is overstated.
One limitation highlighted by the authors is that "patients and control subjects were obtained from two sites, one each in Australia and the United States, and therefore likely represent genetically different populations"
There isn't an attempt to consider the sexual orientation of the participants: if one of the genetic variations is predictive of attraction to men (which we know has a biological, polygenic basis), and the transexual cohort has a higher number of male-attracted people, this factor is not considered at all in the paper.

Finally, from the discussion of the paper: "More importantly, such knowledge can be used to improve diagnosis and treatment of transgender people (e.g., differentiating which children with gender dysphoria will persist into adulthood, vs which will remit).". So the authors themselves acknowledge that gender dysphoria in children can be transient, and better tools are needed to understand persistence vs. desistance.

I don't have access to the other paper, while the Nature one has already been discussed upthread, and refers only to DSD.

I'm not native speaker so apologies for the mistakes.

So why exactly are you on more than one thread, despite hating FWR, the regulars and its reputation (which is beyond repair apparently)?

Absolutely, all scientific studies/ papers have their limitations, which is why I recommended to pps that they read as widely and as much as possible.

There is no single article or research paper that I can share with here that will definitively prove what it is to be trans, that it's a real thing, and/or what causes it. It is the weight of the total body of evidence that shows very clearly that being trans is real, what it is, and that it likely (as with all other neurodevelopmental differences) has complex environmental, biologic, developmental and genetic causes.

I suggest that pps read as much as they can, if you do, you will find that almost all of the peer reviewed research (bioscientific, psychological, medical, social) is consistent with what I am trying to share with you about being trans on this thread.

It was repeatedly insisted to me that I suggest some articles for people to read as a starting point. So I did.

You might not be a native speaker, but you do give the impression of being a knowledgeable person capable of analysing and explaining a scientific paper.

This is the kind of analysis that I was hoping Tandora would be able to give.