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.

@Tandora can you please explain why you deem the distress of trans people above mine. Thank you.

@Tandora
Can we assume it's not a valuable use of your time to answer @taztoy 's question?

Oh give it a rest. People are allowed to react, get angry and swear.

It's the tagline of Mumsnet in case you didn't know. The one with all the swearing.

When you're claiming being trans is a DSD, or is like autism, and women are watching men wank off in their toilets, threatening women with violence, and reporting them to the police for non-crimes, anger is the appropriate response.

And, as I'm sure you're very well aware, studiously ignoring women like Taztoy for what is it now, ten posts? Is blatantly a passive aggressive version of mud slinging.

Tandora · Yesterday 14:59

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

This post of yours yesterday confirmed that "trans people" are suffering from a delusion that they are members of the opposite sex.

Why should society be turned upside down pandering to those suffering from the "trans" delusion rather than treating individuals suffering from delusion?

Somebody who is not the opposite sex cannot know what it feels like to be the opposite sex because they have never been the opposite sex.

They can have a visceral dislike of their body parts (which is not uncommon and not restricted to genitalia and breasts) and they can want to present at the feminine end of the gender spectrum, but a person born male can never know what it feels like to be a woman.

.

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

I have to say, it's quite scary that people can say things like this and expect people to believe it's NOT a delusion.

And To say that someone believes they are something they clearly are not, and we should all go along with the pretence is just as deluded.

It does give one an insight into the likes of Susie Green, Jazz Jennings, etc, tho.

This is what you said:

Brains are plastic, humans make developmental changes. The fact that children may no longer meet diagnostic criteria may not mean that those children were "never autistic" it may be that they have ways other ways of managing or compensating for their differences.

You're implying that they are no longer autistic. Either that or you're saying that the diagnostic tests are so poor that they can't pick up when someone is compensating for their autism.

If you find that people tend to misunderstand what you say, it's worth reflecting about how clear your language is.

I also think you should open your dictionary and discover the meaning of empathy and apply some when talking to parents on this site who are dealing with difficult situations with their children. This isn't just an intellectual exercise for many of the people posting here.

You can shout at me that I'm uninformed but I'm not. I'm a scientist who has dedicated decades of her life to studying this.

Dedicating decades to research doesn't mean you are right though. I had a front row seat to the biggest battle of the past 50 years in systematics and the scientists who had also dedicated decades to their studies but have been proved to be wrong are pretty much forgotten now. Fellow scientist that are a few years younger than I am mostly never even heard of those dedicated scientists who were wrong or that there had been a debate in the first place. Persistence doesn't always make you right. Not every scientist turns out to be Galileo.

"Only successful prophets are remembered" to quote Thomas Cromwell (via Hilary Mantel)

Tandora has to change the meaning of sex in order to explain what she calls "recognition" of sex. While simultaneously relying on the accepted understanding of sex to explain the dissonance. That's why her whole argument is a non-starter.

Is that fair comment, MNers?

What do I think? I think TRAs really don’t like hearing the word no.

Tandora · Yesterday 14:59

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

Tandora, could you give an example of, say, three main things that makes a man believe they're the opposite sex? Just three. If it's as profound, pervasive and unrelenting as you say, it must fill their every waking moment. And having studied it for decades, you will have a good idea.

Quite. Trofim Lysenko also dedicated decades to research. Look where that got him in the end.

Totally.

It's the same argument they use when they invoke homophobia. Claiming that transphobia is exactly the same, whilst simultaneously supporting an ideology that doesn't believe in homosexuality.

They want all the rights and spaces belonging to a category of sex, whilst claiming that sex categories can be based on desire, rather than biology.

see also claiming to be women, wanting to be women, whilst having zero affinity for actual women.

Do you understand what empathy is?

@Tandora I have not, by any stretch of the imagination, engaged in mud slinging. I’d just like an answer to a simple question.

Why do you place the rights of transgender people above mine?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Mistook_His_Wife_for_a_Hat

This wiki page lists examples of people mentioned in the Oliver Sacks book referred to by Tandora

The comparable examples tend to relate to people who have suffered some kind of brain trauma or disease, and the sense is that Sacks is trying to cure his patients. (I have read the book, but decades ago).

It's really not clear how this relates to the wider trans umbrella, or why people suffering from a psychological condition should be accommodated by endorsement of a psychosis - and that's before you query how many trans people believe they are suffering from a psychological condition. I don't think Dr Upton would agree with this analysis.

Is the argument that trans people who object to the 'Oliver Sacks' analsyis are not trans, or that they are in denial of their psychological disorder?

Tandora, i dont think you appreciate what you are asking of others.

Regardless of the reasons, trans people want others to treat them as if they are the other sex. But that isnt as simple or innocent as they want it to be.

All the risk analysis is based on sex - men are more likely to sexually assault, women and girls more likely to be the victims. Actual body sex, not brain sex. As a result, we have established customs and spaces to help address this. Not perfect, but not only do they allow women space away from men, there are constant reminders of why. Its socially unacceptable for men to enter these spaces.

Trans people want to keep this analysis, but at the very last point, replace single sex spaces for gendered spaces. If gender is the risk factor, not sex, the onus is on the men wanting this to prove it true. The use of the phrase 'moral panic' indicates they havent.

For a start, no one can determine with any certainty who is what gender. Its only what people declare and everyone can have a different definition.

What the solution seems to be is allow men to use womens spaces, and use the law to punish them if they commit a crime. Thats not safeguarding.

There's also the idea that if they use womens spaces, they will learn, through exposure, how to behave more like women.

So these men are using male aggression, manipulation, their positions in society, to force their way into womens spaces, to learn what it is to be the sex that doesnt have a say in who uses the single sex spaces?

Well, the MN image degradation was rather disappointing. I should have remembered... Anyway here is the transcript

AU COURANT

Mo: Hey, cool boots, Lois.
Lois: Yeah. I got 'em from an Australian shot-putter at the games.

Lois: I swapped her my Doc Martens. I was glad to get rid of 'em now that every suburban mall crawler has a pair.
Mo: ! (Standing behind the counter, looking at her own pair 🤣)

Mo: Oh, jeez. Here's a submission for "Madwimmin Read" from someone named Jillian who identifies as a transsexual lesbian.
Lois: Cool.

Mo: The cover letter says: "I hope you'll consider changing the name of your reading series for local lesbian writers to be inclusive of transgender and bisexual women writers too." Oh, man!
Lois: Guess it's time to get with the program, huh?

Mo: What am I supposed to do? Have bi women and drag queens come in here and read about schtupping their boyfriends?

Lois: Why not? I'm sure they'd have a unique perspective on the topic.
Mo: Lois, I'm still trying to adjust to lesbians using dildos! What am I supposed to make of a man who became a woman who's attracted to women?!

Lois: Love is a many-gendered thing, pal. Get used to it.
Mo: Well fine. Let people do what they want. But I'm not gonna add this unwieldy "Bisexual and transgender" business to the name of my reading series. I don't even know what transgender means.

Lois: It's sort of an evolving concept. I mean, we haven't had any language for people you can't neatly peg as either boy or girl.

Lois: Like cross-dressers, transsexuals, people who live as the opposite sex but don't have surgery, drag queens and kings, and all kinds of other transgressive folks. "Transgender" is a way to unite everyone into a group, even though all these people might not self-identify as transgender.

Lois: In fact, the point is that we're all just ourselves, and not categories. Instead of two rigid genders, there's an infinite sexual continuum! Cool huh?
Mo: How do you know all this stuff?

Lois: From hanging out with Jillian at Lesbian Avengers meetings. She told me she was gonna send this to you.
Mo: You love to watch me squirm don't you?

LIME LIGHT

Mo: Thank you, Jillian, for that fascinating, uh, transsexual version of the Oedipus legend, "Oedipal ComPLEX." Thanks also to Miko Takagi and Deirdre Trivelpiece for sharing their work with us tonight, and to our ASL interpreter, Jo Palmer.

Mo: And thanks to all of you for coming out to support our local authors, and making this first event in our "Madwimmin Read" series a success. Please stick around for refreshments, and come back again next month.

Jezanna (bookstore owner): Huh! You pulled it off! Nice work, Mo. And look at all these people! I better get up to the register. You go schmooze.
Thea (coworker at book store): Very impressive. No one would ever suspect you were a shy person, the way you ran the show.

Attendee #1: Excuse me. I just need to say I was really shocked that you let a MAN read here tonight. Men have access to the whole world. Why should we share our meager resources with them?
Mo: Uh... Well, first of all, he's not a man, he's a lesbian. I mean SHE'S a lesbian. And second, I want this series to be inclusive, and not some private club. I mean who am I to question someone else's identity?

Attendee #1: Hmph. I suppose you think "lesbians" who sleep with men are dykes TOO.
Mo: Uh... Well...

Attendee #2: Excuse me, Mo. I'm MJ, the arts editor at the ten percent tribune. Great event you put together tonight. Listen, we're looking for a new book reviewer, and I wonder if you'd be at all interested?
Mo: Uh... Me? Write book reviews? For the Newspaper?!

Flora: Mo, sorry to interrupt. I'm Flora, from the Queer vegan society. When you get a chance, let's talk about some non-animal product alternatives to the CHEESE you're serving here.
Mo: Uh... Okay.

Attendee #4: Hey, thanks for including Jillian's work tonight. I'm gonna tell my fried Biff to send you some of his poems. He's been writing GREAT stuff about his female-to-male transitioning.
Mo: Uh... Biff?

Deirdre: Mo, this was wonderful. Thanks a lot for making it happen. I never read in public before. Could you tell how nervous i was?!
Mo: Uh... Not at all, Deirdre. you were great. I don't think anyone noticed you read that one page twice.

Deirdre: So, I know you're probably really busy and all, but would you maybe like to do something sometime? Like, I dunno. A movie?
Flora: Here you go. Check out these recipes for meat, egg, and dairy-free hors d'oeuvres. The pickled tofu cheese is my particular favorite.

Trans is a power-grab by academic sociologists who have discovered that male libido can be harvested to undo traditional structures, leaving them in charge.

Human casualties don't matter.

Being trans is a naturally occurring form of neurodevelopmental difference.

Looking forward to reading the evidence @Tandora Lots of us on here are scientists. Robust evidence is the way to convert us to any pov

@Tandora
Before you put your considerable expertise to answering my questions ( in case you missed them - why is trans no longer a DSD when a few weeks ago you had 'evidence' it was? Where does Eddie/Susie fit in under your definition of trans?) please do answer Taztoy's question first. She has been unfailingly polite and patient, not a speck of mud thrown and it is kind of a version of the third question of mine that you have ignored on this thread (why should women lose safe sport to make a minority of men happy?).

I'm a scientist who has dedicated decades of her life to studying this.

You have dedicated 'decades' of academic research to understanding gender identity Tandora ? Decades?

I also would like to see this finally answered.

Why do you place the rights of transgender people above mine?

I don't. It doesn't need to be an either/ or.
We need to find ways of organising society so that we can accommodate a diversity of different needs. That is what it is to live in a decent society.

We cannot do that it we don't even understand , recognise, appreciate or value the needs of trans people. No one is suggesting that your trauma isn't real, that your experiences aren't real, that they didn't happen.

But this is what mumsnetters say all the time about being trans.

This thread is about what 'trans is' and why it matters because so many mumsnetters insist that it's not real thing and there's no way to describe it coherently, and or dismiss it as being trivial / absurd (oh they like to put on lipstick and call themselves Nancy).

In case it's missed.