Some clarity in how the trans movement became so embedded, so preeminent

[MarcTheGenderSkeptic]

Despite being called a conspiracist here by a TRA, actually I work very hard to continually interrogate my thought processes, and not fall into easy generalisations etc.
So, I was reading Róisín Michaux and her fascinating conversation with someone high up in HIV funding, and the push in the last 20 years is to get everyone in the tent on retrovirals, meaning reaching out to not just gays and addicts, but sex workers (incl trans) and critically, the "third genders" who have migrated to the West in large numbers to end up as sex workers. And the decision was made to go for maximum anti stigmatization, which means zero messaging on personal behaviour, and critically deciding to accept these men as women. Don't blame them, get more onside.
Guess who has to move aside, and accept the messaging on health grounds that biological men can be women? Made even worse by the increase in HIV in European women who are the partners of men who use the services of these "third genders".
Then yesterday I read the amazing post from Hellofabore about how for 30 years plus, the sports authorities including IOC and FIFA decided to make total inclusion the policy, phasing out gender testing, primarily to allow the male DSDs from Africa mainly to be included, as they were IDd as female at birth, and the cruelty to deny they're still female is wrong.
Again, the overwhelming need is to not stigmatize these individuals. Of course a huge group (we know who) are stigmatized for objecting to losing sports opportunities.
And then back to Róisín Michaux again, her illuminating the revolution in psychiatric medicine, where men back in the day were diagnosed with transvestic disorder, a pure paraphylia, again to stop judging and be more inclusive, underwent massive de-stigmatisation and de-pathologisation, from paraphylia, to dysphoria, now to common all garden "sexual health category".
Three enormous areas where the drive to include men, to destigmatise their plight, to bring them in from the cold, couldn't happen in a vacuum. Society organised along sex-based lines couldn't be simply recategorised, no, a large population group (51% XX) was expected to move over, make their definition porous, extend the collective hand of kindness and inclusion, to this hardcore of men who were deemed most at risk, and needing most help.
At the same time, this blurring of definitions and imposed inclusivity spread from sport and medicine to law and education, the most motivated men worked hard to get the Gender Recognition Act on the statute book, and via Stonewall culture, "social training" and the "trans child" escalated as concepts and then real world consequences as noone in polite society other than a very brave few said anything.
So now we have developing nations male DSDs and "third genders", socially incorporated transvestites/transsexuals, and queer culture first world transgenders in the mix, a political culture in the West frozen into aquiescence and policy drift, and the only light of realism and sanity, an army of women fighting back, with amazing results re SC ruling, banishing self ID into the long grass, and medical and sports bodies tacking back to sanity.
But reading the almost scary analogousness of how health brought in trans and third genders at the expense of women, sport brought in male DSDs at the expense of women, psychiatry brought in transvestites from the cold at the expense of women, you can then see how the most motivated men got the Gender Recognition Act on the statute book to turbo charge the social trans/trans child revolution.
For me, I can now see the past as it travels into the future.

Just because we don't have an objective "test" to prove someone is trans, doesn't mean there is no medical evidence of the condition!!!! You realise we don't have medical "tests" that prove all sorts of well known medical conditions

I asked chat GPT for a quick list of some examples

• Migraine — clinical diagnosis; no blood test or scan confirms migraine.
• Tension-type headache — diagnosed from the headache pattern and symptoms.
• Cluster headache — clinical diagnostic criteria.
• Fibromyalgia — clinical diagnosis based on widespread pain and associated symptoms; no confirmatory biomarker.
• Chronic fatigue syndrome / ME (ME/CFS) — clinical criteria; tests largely exclude other explanations.
• Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) — symptom-based diagnostic criteria; no definitive test.
• Functional dyspepsia — diagnosed clinically after appropriate exclusion of other causes.
• Functional abdominal pain disorders — predominantly symptom-based diagnosis.
• Functional neurological disorder (FND) — diagnosed clinically from characteristic neurological features; there is no blood test or scan that establishes it.
• Persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) — clinical criteria.
• Restless legs syndrome — principally clinical diagnosis.
• Primary insomnia / insomnia disorder — clinical diagnosis; a sleep study is usually unnecessary.
• Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) — primarily history and clinical examination.
• Most uncomplicated low-back pain — usually a clinical diagnosis; imaging frequently doesn’t identify a specific cause.
• Mechanical neck pain — generally clinical.
• Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) — clinical criteria; no definitive diagnostic test.
• Chronic primary pain — diagnosis based on clinical assessment rather than a biomarker.
• Interstitial cystitis / bladder pain syndrome — no single definitive test; diagnosis involves symptoms and exclusion of alternatives.
• Vulvodynia — clinical diagnosis, principally from symptoms and examination.
• Premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) — diagnosed from the timing and pattern of symptoms, usually prospectively recorded; no hormone test confirms it.
• Primary dysmenorrhoea — usually a clinical diagnosis.
• Hyperemesis gravidarum — diagnosed clinically from symptoms and their effects; there is no specific confirmatory test.
• Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) — diagnosed through history and characteristic responses to positional examination rather than a laboratory test.
• Ménière’s disease — clinical/audiological criteria; there is no single definitive biomarker.
• Tinnitus — the experience itself is generally identified from the patient’s report, although testing can investigate causes and hearing.
• Tourette syndrome — diagnosed from observed/reported motor and vocal tics over time.
• Essential tremor — clinical diagnosis.
• Developmental coordination disorder (dyspraxia/DCD) — clinical/developmental assessment rather than a medical biomarker.
• Autism spectrum disorder — behavioural/developmental clinical diagnosis; no blood, genetic or brain scan can diagnose autism.
• ADHD — clinical diagnosis from developmental history, symptoms and impairment across contexts; no blood test, brain scan or computer test establishes ADHD.
• Dyslexia — identified through developmental and educational/psychological assessment, not a medical test.
• Specific language disorder / developmental language disorder — diagnosed through developmental and language assessment.
• Intellectual disability — based on assessment of intellectual functioning and adaptive functioning, not a biological diagnostic test.

And the same principle applies particularly strongly across psychiatry:

• Major depressive disorder
• Persistent depressive disorder
• Generalised anxiety disorder
• Panic disorder
• Agoraphobia
• Social anxiety disorder
• Specific phobias
• Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD)
• Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
• Complex PTSD
• Separation anxiety disorder
• Selective mutism
• Bipolar I disorder
• Bipolar II disorder
• Cyclothymic disorder
• Schizophrenia
• Schizoaffective disorder
• Delusional disorder
• Brief psychotic disorder
• Anorexia nervosa
• Bulimia nervosa
• Binge-eating disorder
• Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID)
• Body dysmorphic disorder
• Illness anxiety disorder
• Somatic symptom disorder
• Dissociative identity disorder
• Depersonalisation/derealisation disorder
• Borderline personality disorder
• Avoidant personality disorder
• Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder
• Antisocial personality disorder and other personality disorders

All of those conditions have a set of clear diagnostic criteria. What is the diagnostic criteria for being trans?

There is diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria as you are well aware.

And that is not a necessary element to being trans as you are well aware.

As we keep being told by the TRAs, the only thing required to be trans is that you believe yourself to be trans.

Anyway I am not going to persuade you that being trans is a real condition because you are determined that it isn't.

Just maybe ask yourself, whether it's possible- at least possible? - that it could be. Do you have definitive proof that it isn't? So what if you are wrong?

And remember @lacksie, it must be the same criteria for anyone claiming to be trans.

But that diagnosis relies on “feelings”. So we’re back to square one….

If new evidence emerges then of course that would be considered. But you have provided none.

But to reiterate, psychological conditions do not change a persons sex. A man who thinks he’s a woman will always be a man, even a specific psychological condition can be pinpointed.

We should treat that condition as we treat any other. Not give him access to women’s spaces.

So you are saying there is no medical evidence? Quelle surprise

Look maybe there are lots of people claiming they are trans when they dont have a genuine condition of gender incongruence . I can't imagine why they would, but of course they could. Just like a person could claim to have adhd or be gay, or have ME or chronic back pain. Who knows. None of that means those conditions aren't real for many other people. In the same way, if there are people claiming trans identity that doesn't mean that gender incongruence isn't, for many people, a very real, neurocognitive/ psychological condition

but then we are back to, how do we know someone is trans without reference to external sources. You claimed it was a genuine medical condition. Now you are saying that it is not, and people can be trans without a medical diagnosis. So back to er….. feelings again. So no, men who “feel” like a woman are still in fact men.

@Lacksie we are in the throes of a social engineering experiment. Queer theory is at the root of it as is capitalism. Patients for life equals guaranteed profit.

Disagree and you are a bigot.

Share your evidence not theoretical evidence.

It boils down to a very simple point @Lacksie

Women's have rughts to specific spaces and services based on their sex.

No human being can change sex, therefore it would never be justified to allow a certain group of men into these spaces, for any reason.

You have gone to extraordinary lengths in this thread to tell us we are wrong to want to uphold our sex based rights. Why? Do you not believe women deserve them?

There is no evidence for people 'being trans'. But some people appear to suffer from the medical condition gender dysphoria, which is very similar to another disorder, Body integrity dysphoria (BID) or Body integrity identity disorder (BIID). This causes people to have a persistent desire to have a physical disability. They sometimes seek surgical removal of body parts such as limbs as a result of this condition.

Both conditions appear to cause great distress to sufferers, but there is no good evidence that amputating limbs or surgical modification of genitalia actually relieves the suffering. It's also not clear why there is such a different view of the two conditions by society: limb amputation for BID patients is not seen as aan acceptable solution, but body modification for patients with gender dysphoria is.

So to refer to my earlier question, what practical impact does this have? Are you proposing that people who don’t wish to pursue a diagnosis of gender dysphoria should not have legal protections against discrimination?

A diagnosis of gender dysphoria explains a psychological condition but does not change somebody’s sex, so what practical impact do you think it should have?

Arguing the toss on MN won’t do anything to advance the rights of trans people who already have protections under the EA, but if you think the EA should be changed, what are you proposing instead?

I don't understand how you think your logic makes any sense at all,

Bavk pain in a real medical condition. There is no "test" that can prove someone has back pain. Someone could of course claim they have back pain when they don't , but that doesn't mean that no one else really does have back pain. If someone goes to the doctor saying they have back pain there is a start g assumption that they are telling the truth and then the doctor will do a clinical assessment . It's not "prove it to me or I will disbelieve you". There's a vast medical literature on back pain.

All of these things are exactly equivalent for gender incongruence- except the presumption of belief.

Even WPATH had to admit in court recently they were making it all up as they went along.

I am sorry to have to tel you this but it is you that has to ask yourself, whether it's possible- at least possible? - that it could be made up nonsense. Do you have definitive proof that it isn't?

You'e been had. And it isn't even funny.

I have asked my self that many many many times, and considered and thought and researched. And talked to people.
And I still ask myself that.

So if you are making a comparison to back pain, you are arguing that all trans people should provide evidence of diagnosis before receiving protection against discrimination? That seems quite controversial and would afford less protection than is currently afforded under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

Yes…. And doctors do tests to find the cause of said back pain or that the patient is lying. What tests are there would a doctor do to prove someone is trans?

A doctor will do investigation to find out the root cause of the back pain and if a medical reason is found, will offer medical treatment. If no medical reason found, no medical treatment is offered and the person just has to deal with it in other ways.
Society, such as employers, don't have to take a non proven backpain into account. For you can't get a disability badge or accommodation at work for self identified back pain.
So not sure your analogy works.

A diagnosis requires two or more of the following criteria to experienced:

A significant incongruence between one's experienced or expressed gender and one's sexual characteristics
A strong desire to be rid of one's sexual characteristics due to incongruence with one's experienced or expressed gender
A strong desire for the sexual characteristics of a gender other than one's assigned gender
A strong desire to be of a gender other than one's assigned gender
A strong desire to be treated as a gender other than one's assigned gender
A strong conviction that one has the typical reactions and feelings of a gender other than one's assigned gender

Pure pseudoscience.

its actually bonkers that you think that if there isn't a test to prove something it can't be a real condition and we shouldn't recognise / treat it. You would dismantle a huge proportion of healthcare if you applied that principle generally

Gently, I think you are confusing MH misery - which is real and painful - with an entire set of apparently unquestionable causes and extreme treatment plans. How have you managed to not notice that all someone in MH crisis has to do is to declare themselves trans to be put on a no-questions-asked transition plan? That there has been a concerted push over the past few years to make it illegal for MH professionals to even vaguely question what other things might be contributing to the MH crisis?

Anyone who has had to deal with a loved one having a MH crisis knows how awful it is and how desperate people can be to understand why it’s happening and what will “fix” it. And that is yet another of the things that has made me question transactivism, as I know it’s promoted quite hard online to vulnerable people (just go read trans Reddit and see how keen people are to “crack eggs”), so attributing pain to “being trans” has been made very easy while working to identify root causes has been steadily made very difficult indeed.

And then I remind you it didn’t have to be like this. The past 15 years could have been spent campaigning to broaden acceptance of gender nonconformity at work and in public positions outside the arts, but instead all this effort has been spent on policing pronouns, persecuting women for not wanting to get changed in front of their male colleagues, and trying to convince parents that sex changes for extremely troubled young teens are acts of kindness.