'Arm the Dolls'

[WrongKindOfFeminist]

Pictured is Natacha Kennedy of Goldsmiths.

T shirt says 'Arm the Dolls'

I didn’t choose to feel the way I do about my sex

Being on this board is also a choice, just in case anyone needed a reminder.

Yes, when all that "transitioning" actually requires is choosing to say "I identify as a woman" and carry on being a man in different clothing, like Alex wossit with his beard and kilt.

Not everyone goes to the extremes adopted by James Morris, y'know. Or don't you know?

Before the 1980s, chances are you'd have had to grit your teeth and go on being male, whether you liked it or not. Just as girls had to grit their teeth and accept all the horrors of puberty. And somehow the human race survived; even the slightly confused mostly did. For sure, all the girls who had a crush on the PE teacher (it usually was!) grew out of it and developed a crush on one of the Beatles or the Monkees (usually Davy Jones) instead, before meeting someone in real life whom they found attractive.

And why? Because the chances are you would never even have heard of the idea of changing sex except in a science fiction book or the Arabian Nights. So you would have had dealt with reality.

On the subject of 'choice' I have some sympathy.

Compulsions and disorders can be very very difficult to manage and live with.

But of course, many people with 'gender incongruence' don't have dysphoria.

https://academyofideas.org.uk/2024/10/20/meet-the-author-dr-az-hakeem-on-detrans-when-transition-is-not-the-solution/

Az Hakeem is also good, particularly on MtF 'trans' people.

So, if male people don’t have a choice about transitioning, why again are we told that some people who have transgender identities shouldn’t be discusssed as being trans people as if they are not transgender?

We don't choose our feelings. As a rule.

We choose what to do about our feelings.

Men decide that they are happier being a woman, therefore the definition of women changes to accommodate them.

Women talk about the trauma and worry this causes them, and organise to maintain single sex facilities. Meanwhile the men complain about how this discussion and action causes them distress.

How dare women be anything without the permission or inclusion of men.

The fact that men are dumbfounded by how women feel should give them a clue that they know nothing about being a woman.

”The fact that men are dumbfounded by how women feel should give them a clue that they know nothing about being a woman.”

you would think!

Were you around when we had a male poster who literally tried to convince us that he was a woman because he was kind and gracious, and graceful? Within one page he had turned into the very opposite.

Being a woman or girl is all about performing for some male people. That brings to mind Willoughby, and Lavery.

Have we got any answers ever about why being ‘transgender’ is legitimate, but transage is not? Why are those male people not legitimate baby girls? They are treated as if they are baby girls too. What is the difference?

We've never had any answers on that - or trans race or disability or anything else of that ilk. It may only be a matter of time before men decide presenting as women is passé though, and they have to present as women in their teens or twenties in order to feel really really womanly.

I think for some its about wanting people to be 'kind' to them and a feeling that women/men are exempt from some of the angst and problems men face.

Which may be true in some ways and not in others, and in any case its no more possible to 'live as the opposite sex' than it is to defy gravity.

Grass couldn't ever be greener than being something entirely impossible.

I think many of the AGP victims already do hope they are presenting as women in their twenties, don't they?

Decades of research across neurology, psychology, and endocrinology support the legitimacy of transgender identities. No research exists for other things you throw around as gotchas.

Yes - but I'm talking about your common or garden TIMs. It wouldn't surprise me if identifying as a much younger age of woman became mainstream with all the implications that brings. I mean, look how 'far' we've come in the last 20 years - no-one could have predicted this madness.

This is an interesting explanation about language usage.

https://x.com/hothingsgirlsay/status/2074943532666667503/video/1?s=46

Is there? Where?

Obviously you're going to post that one really poor study that the TRAs argue proves the existence of 'lady brain', which if you actually read it does no such thing.

But 'decades' worth? Do share.

A really clear explanation - it's so simple when you hear it set out in that way.

What research is that?

How come Cass didn’t find any research that met the quality standards?

or are you talking about MRI scans?

Here is a criticique of the veracity of of of those:

https://x.com/neurosgs/status/2074532284229668990?s=46

“People often cite this paper as evidence that transgender women have “female brains.” That’s not what the data show.

The MRI classifier correctly identified biological sex in 100% of control women and 93.3% of men. Overall, accuracy dropped to 61.5% in transgender women.

When the sample is split by hormone status, treatment-naive transgender women were classified as male 87.5% of the time (not significantly different from men). By contrast, transgender women receiving cross-sex hormone treatment were classified as male only 50% of the time (see table 4 of the paper).

The pattern suggests that the increased misclassification is associated with cross-sex hormone treatment, rather than transgender status itself.”

rhe study being referred to is:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-020-0666-3

There are flaws pointed out about other too.

And what the fuck do studies of artificial
hormone supplementation prove other than some male people supplement estrogen at female levels. There can be no proof that supplementation of hormones change sex at all.

It's a continuation of the idea of "boo-words" and "hurrah words" that I was taught in the sixties; we used to go through articles in the tabloids hunting to see whether that paper wanted its readers to approve or disapprove of whatever the subject of the article might be. It was an interesting study. You can see the Guardian using boo and hurrah words to this day; it's why my hackles so often rise when I read that particular publication. What I wonder is whether they now even know themselves that they are doing it.

Looking forward to it. It has been a while since I have seen a new sfudy to analyse.

WPATH produce all sorts of 'research '.

She is shockingly good

The decades of research is probably decades of observing people cross dressing.

The Cass Review did not conclude that transgender identities themselves are illegitimate. Instead, it argued for a holistic, psychologically-led approach to care for young people. In fact, Cass believed puberty blockers may be the right option for a subset of young people.

No, I’m not talking about MRI scans or ‘lady brains’. I’m talking about the fact gender dysphoria is a clinically observed and recognised condition. There is decades of research looking at transgender people and gender dysphoria, and treatments and outcomes.

People presented to doctors with distress about their sex. That doesn’t happen for age or race.