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.

PrettyDamnCosmic wins Best Post for me.

@Tandora It is literally just that - to have a pervasive , profound, unrelenting recognition of self as being the opposite sex.

@PrettyDamnCosmic What you are describing is a delusion.
A delusion is a firm, fixed, false belief, maintained despite clear evidence to the contrary, and not explained by the person's culture. These are symptoms of a mental, neurological, or medical disorder.

The definitions are identical.

See also: Somatic delusion is a type of delusion that makes a person believe there is something wrong with their body, either internally or externally.

So society is sexist and patriarchal and devalues women, but we send the big strong men who are physically better suited to war than women because we value men less? Is that the argument?

There's a reason so many sex realists support "Operation Let Them Speak" and it's not because we're worried that trans people have a coherent, reasoned, evidence based and compassionate position, rather the reverse.

So on this thread we have had:

trans people are who Tan says are trans - and people like Izzard aren’t, but for the rest of us, unless we can check with Tan first, we have no idea of whether the 6ft male queuing in the ladies’ loo or stripping off in the changing room is the right kind of trans

being trans is neurological (but apparently there is no actual contemporary research paper to explain this to us)

whilst also being neurologically evidenced in these mythical papers, no, being trans is simply about the pervasive sense of self (though distressed Alzheimer patients clearly also have impaired and transient senses of their selves, given they keep forgetting they’re trans)

that being trans is a bit like the bloke who mistook his wife for a hat (which was a neurological condition, observable on scans) but I forget now whether the trans person is the hat or the hat’s husband

autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder that, due to brain plasticity, children can grow out of

oh and now, it is insulting and misogynistic to women to acknowledge the wealth of research that highlights the physiological differences between men/boys and women/girls because those are probably wrong too?

The blatant lack of scientific understanding, or ability to critical read and assess scientific data and statistics displayed to underpin some PP’s comments is shocking and what I would expect of an 11 year old informed by the university of TikTok.

It's a cult that causes a grossly distorted world view applied to the self. I previously had a colleague who was a young Earth creationist. But at least he didn't think that palæontologists are all Nazis.

Before the end of this thread a question please

Does anyone know if there is an internationally agreed definition of 'Trans' that is used in research

I.e. is there a WHO one, an international concensus document, a CDC / NIH a NICE one?

This is not strictly true.

Women's gymnastics requires a higher degree of flexibility/balance compared to male gymnastics, which prioritises upper body strength and power

It's one of the only sports that really thinks about the differences between male and female bodies and how to showcase the physical abilities women have that can surpass men.

So men would outdo women on vault and tumbling on floor (though difficulty levels are close), but would not compete well against women on the other aspects required on floor and beam.

The bars component for each is different, with men's bars prioritising big swings and release and catch moves and women's A/bars requiring the same, but also more nimble connections between bars.

However it is true to say that women would be extremely uncompetitive with men on their big strength events like the rings or the parallel bars.

Sweet lord alive I thought you were supposed to be a scientist!

Female humans are more genetically robust that male humans (coz XX v XY, copies of gene etc) they are not more physically robust (coz thinner, lighter bones, different muscle fibres etc) Were you off sick then day they taught science in science 🙄

I am genuinely curious... "Olympic Champions React to MEN DOING WOMEN'S GYMNASTICS" on youtube... can you (DM fine!) tell me how that video has mislead me (and I am open to the fact it might have).

It's not misleading, it's just not the whole picture. These are isolated elements, not full routines with full requirements.

Almost a full thread and it pretty much boils down to

“Trans is what it is, just because [shrug].”

And TRAs wonder why they keep losing in court when they have arguments like this to make their point 🙄.

They’re so predictable.

Yes and I think it depends on the measurement of robustness. Men tend to die younger and get critically ill younger than women. They are physically tougher in raw strength but that's not everything.

I have seen female olympians reacting to men doing women's routines and being blown away that a twenty something man is doing something that they could do as a young child but couldn't do as an adult, something that they assumed was easier for women.
If women have any gymnastic advantage over men it is about grace, not flexibility or basic ability to do the move in question.

God. I despair.

I think that video is brilliant in showing the power differences in male people in gymnastics. And the differences in balance are between the sexes.

But if you take a sport that prioritises male physical attributes, weightlifting for example, there is not a chance that the male records will be surpassed by the female records. There's a huge difference and it's because of how female and male bodies develop differently.

I mean look at Laurel Hubbard, that male who was in women's weightlifting for a while. Middle-aged, unfit, nursing a chronic injury and still beat the best of the best elite female weightlifters in terms of the amount he could lift. It should be easy to see why sports like that are separated by sex.

I'm sorry, do you think there are no physical differences in capabilties between men and women (original sex based meaning obviously)?

Do you think the difference in male and female sporting records is a great big conspiracy or something?

To be clear, I don't like that this difference exists. I would love to have the same strength and speed as the guys I share some hobbies with. Nevertheless, reality is what it is.

And FWIW, the same applies to single sex spaces and provisions. I would love to live in a world where the presence of male people did not threaten, trigger or inhibit female people, where my sex didn't affect the opportunities I have and the credibility I am given, where my body wasn't treated as both a shorthand and a vector for male sexual responses and desires, where I could be confident that politicians and leaders of either sex would see my needs as clearly as those of men and prioritise them as fairly.

Nevertheless, reality is what it is.

But if you take a sport that prioritises male physical attributes, weightlifting for example, there is not a chance that the male records will be surpassed by the female records.

Of course! What we need is a range of more variable/ nuanced categories tailored to the specific sport, like in the Paralympics. I reckon this would also diversify the types of sports and bodies that are celebrated.

@eatfigs for what it's worth I fundamentally disagree with you on trans issues, but I appreciate actually being able to have a coherent exchange with you.

That sounds great. I have no issues with it.

When you look at your specially tailored groups, whatever criteria you are splitting by you'll find you have segregated by sex anyway.

Maybe you'll have some more subclasses. Maybe you'll have a middle group with excellent women and mediocre men. Maybe you'll have more mixed team sports with requirements that teams have a set number of players from different classifications. Maybe no one will ever ever admit to noticing how closely your nuanced categories correlate to plain ol' body sex.

But nevertheless, reality will out.

Well it's misleading by ommission!

You are saying that the video shows that isolated elements of women's gymnastics can be done very well by men, but that an unbiased video that showed the whole picture would reveal men to be unable to do lots of what women gymnasts do.

I would be curious to see evidence of your position, and in the meantime note your warning that I am being mislead by ommission.

In any case it does seem to suggest that even when one looks at something where the layperson might think "obviously women's gymnastics, with the splits and poise and grace being so important, is something men have no chance in" but the truth being slightly different

Surely we already have all this - not all men who play football get to play in the PL. Some player in lower leagues, some in amateur leagues and some have to make do with an informal kick-around with their friends or kids.

There already are sub groups. Laurel Hubbard could compete in the masters competition for middle aged men in his 40 whatever age category.

I and others have asked you what these categories that don’t currently exist would look like. Would you like to suggest them?

No we don’t need those categories.

Some people need to learn to take ‘no’ for an answer.