The Gender Non-binary debate.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

This article is a year old now, but it just popped up on my Facebook "memories" as I posted it a year ago on my Facebook wall.

https://tomsimsblog.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/what-...

There are some interesting points made, not least how a lot of the anti-trans rhetoric we see at the moment closely mirrors the anti-gay rhetoric of 30 years ago.

I particularly liked the comparison with left-handedness, and how the reason more people are left-handed these days is "not because more people have become naturally left handed, [nor] because being left handed has become cool. It’s because we’ve stopped beating children in school and forcing them to write with their right hand"

[Halb]

THe left hand thing is pretty sick. It's quite surreal to look back at how barbaric society was in some respects within a few generations over things that, forget about being trivial, it's just nowhere on the radar even!

[Randy Winkman]

And from Alan Turing being chemically castrated and committing suicide to being voted The Greatest Icon of the 20th Century on a BBC TV programme.

[anonymous-user]

Halb said:

THe left hand thing is pretty sick. It's quite surreal to look back at how barbaric society was in some respects within a few generations over things that, forget about being trivial, it's just nowhere on the radar even!

In 1987 the prime minister said this:

"Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay," she said.

"All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life. Yes, cheated."

Sick indeed.

[Fermit and Sexy Sarah]

desolate said:

Halb said:

THe left hand thing is pretty sick. It's quite surreal to look back at how barbaric society was in some respects within a few generations over things that, forget about being trivial, it's just nowhere on the radar even!

In 1987 the prime minister said this:

"Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay," she said.

"All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life. Yes, cheated."

Sick indeed.

Indeed. Section 28 was a wicked piece of legislation.

[gregs656]

That article covers many of the issues discussed multiple times here. I suspect if you took the best discussions on here and distilled them you would get something quite similar.

Sadly I suspect it will mostly be preaching to the converted.

[j_4m]

gregs656 said:

That article covers many of the issues discussed multiple times here. I suspect if you took the best discussions on here and distilled them you would get something quite similar.

Sadly I suspect it will mostly be preaching to the converted.

I agree with the general sentiment of the article, but not all of the points. I still don’t think you can equate a transgender woman with a biological woman. I accept their right to exist and live however they want, but the line for me is that one’s sex is their birth sex.

[Randy Winkman]

j_4m said:

gregs656 said:

That article covers many of the issues discussed multiple times here. I suspect if you took the best discussions on here and distilled them you would get something quite similar.

Sadly I suspect it will mostly be preaching to the converted.

I agree with the general sentiment of the article, but not all of the points. I still don’t think you can equate a transgender woman with a biological woman. I accept their right to exist and live however they want, but the line for me is that one’s sex is their birth sex.

I agree. But I also think that in most cases, the need to differentiate between male and female is largely theoretical and irrelevant. I think that often it's used in an unhelpful way by people looking for problems that mostly don't exist.

[gregs656]

j_4m said:

I agree with the general sentiment of the article, but not all of the points. I still don’t think you can equate a transgender woman with a biological woman. I accept their right to exist and live however they want, but the line for me is that one’s sex is their birth sex.

Then you run into the same problem the article states.

The only thing you can mean is ‘observable at birth sex’ IE sexual organs, because no baby is subject to the types of tests that might through up any inconsistency with their observable birth sex.

I am sure you routinely accept ‘invisible’ (to the naked eye) evidence from medicine all the time.

This isn’t really any different. The biological differences in trans individuals are often invisible to the naked eye. It doesn’t mean they’re not there, or that they weren’t born with them.

[j_4m]

gregs656 said:

Then you run into the same problem the article states.

The only thing you can mean is ‘observable at birth sex’ IE sexual organs, because no baby is subject to the types of tests that might through up any inconsistency with their observable birth sex.

I am sure you routinely accept ‘invisible’ (to the naked eye) evidence from medicine all the time.

This isn’t really any different. The biological differences in trans individuals are often invisible to the naked eye. It doesn’t mean they’re not there, or that they weren’t born with them.

There’s more to sex than genitals (har-har). A person who goes through puberty pumped full of oestrogen will be different to one with testosterone, even discounting social influences.

[8.4L 154]

Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:

desolate said:

Halb said:

THe left hand thing is pretty sick. It's quite surreal to look back at how barbaric society was in some respects within a few generations over things that, forget about being trivial, it's just nowhere on the radar even!

In 1987 the prime minister said this:

"Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay," she said.

"All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life. Yes, cheated."

Sick indeed.

Indeed. Section 28 was a wicked piece of legislation.

And yet here we are in 2019 and echos of the exact same arguments are being used against trans people.

[gregs656]

j_4m said:

There’s more to sex than genitals (har-har). A person who goes through puberty pumped full of oestrogen will be different to one with testosterone, even discounting social influences.

If there is more to sex than genitals then I’m not sure how you are identifying the biological sex of trans babies, if you are not taking invisible to the naked eye factors you accept exist into account.

To be clear I am not suggesting we should do any tests, as the vast majority of the time genitals and gender align, but not always.

Not all trans women have gone through puberty pumped full of testosterone.

Hormones are powerful anyway, HRH is literally transformative.

[j_4m]

gregs656 said:

If there is more to sex than genitals then I’m not sure how you are identifying the biological sex of trans babies, if you are not taking invisible to the naked eye factors you accept exist into account.

To be clear I am not suggesting we should do any tests, as the vast majority of the time genitals and gender align, but not always.

Not all trans women have gone through puberty pumped full of testosterone.

Hormones are powerful anyway, HRH is literally transformative.

I don’t think it’s possible to have a transgender baby, I don’t think babies have enough going on in their brains to have a perception of their own sexual identity or exhibit any sexual dimorphism beyond genitals. Gender becomes a combination of biology and socialisation, sex is set by your biology but becomes more apparent as your body develops. I reject the idea that you can be an adult woman/man without experiencing it from birth.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

j_4m said:

I don’t think it’s possible to have a transgender baby, I don’t think babies have enough going on in their brains to have a perception of their own sexual identity or exhibit any sexual dimorphism beyond genitals. Gender becomes a combination of biology and socialisation, sex is set by your biology but becomes more apparent as your body develops. I reject the idea that you can be an adult woman/man without experiencing it from birth.

And yet people cast in stone the gender role of the baby at birth. We don't do that on sexuality so why do we do that with gender?

All you can tell from looking at the genitals of a baby is what genitals they have.

[j_4m]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

And yet people cast in stone the gender role of the baby at birth. We don't do that on sexuality so why do we do that with gender?

All you can tell from looking at the genitals of a baby is what genitals they have.

The vast majority of people have a gender identity that aligns with their sex. If you see a penis then there’s a very good chance you’re looking at someone who will grow up identifying as male.

I don’t personally see any end to this debate as it’s fundamentally impossible to know another person’s mind, to know truly if a transgender woman has a woman’s mind or even if there is actually any difference between the male and female mind. I suspect there is given the measurable differences there are in the brain and the effects male and female hormones have on behaviour.

[8.4L 154]

j_4m said:

gregs656 said:

If there is more to sex than genitals then I’m not sure how you are identifying the biological sex of trans babies, if you are not taking invisible to the naked eye factors you accept exist into account.

To be clear I am not suggesting we should do any tests, as the vast majority of the time genitals and gender align, but not always.

Not all trans women have gone through puberty pumped full of testosterone.

Hormones are powerful anyway, HRH is literally transformative.

I don’t think it’s possible to have a transgender baby, I don’t think babies have enough going on in their brains to have a perception of their own sexual identity or exhibit any sexual dimorphism beyond genitals. Gender becomes a combination of biology and socialisation, sex is set by your biology but becomes more apparent as your body develops. I reject the idea that you can be an adult woman/man without experiencing it from birth.

But trans people do experience their sex and gender identity from birth. Its just it takes a while for them to realise and communicate that what people are telling them about their sex and gender identity based on an assumed assignment at birth is wrong and that this is who they are. For many it forms part of their earliest memories, but it always takes some time to develop their own understanding of themselves, the means to communicate the fact and also the confidence to speak out.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

j_4m said:

The vast majority of people have a gender identity that aligns with their sex. If you see a penis then there’s a very good chance you’re looking at someone who will grow up identifying as male.

Yes, a majority. But not all. And yet some people think that is the end of it - it is fixed in stone at birth regardless of whether it is correct or incorrect. Because biology (apparently - even though no biological tests are performed).

j_4m said:

I don’t personally see any end to this debate as it’s fundamentally impossible to know another person’s mind, to know truly if a transgender woman has a woman’s mind or even if there is actually any difference between the male and female mind. I suspect there is given the measurable differences there are in the brain and the effects male and female hormones have on behaviour.

I don't see why someone's gender identity is even up for debate. As you say, nobody knows another's mind; yet the debate continues.

[j_4m]

8.4L 154 said:

But trans people do experience their sex and gender identity from birth. Its just it takes a while for them to realise and communicate that what people are telling them about their sex and gender identity based on an assumed assignment at birth is wrong and that this is who they are. For many it forms part of their earliest memories, but it always takes some time to develop their own understanding of themselves, the means to communicate the fact and also the confidence to speak out.

And that’s fine, I’m not debating that transgender people exist, just that a transgendered person of a given sex is exactly the same as a cisgendered person of that sex.

[anonymous-user]

j_4m said:

And that’s fine, I’m not debating that transgender people exist, just that a transgendered person of a given sex is exactly the same as a cisgendered person of that sex.

Given the fact that everybody, cis, trans or agender experiences, understands and expresses gender slightly differently, how are trans people 'Not the same' as a cis person, when everyone will have totally different concepts as to what it means to be their gender?

And when does this difference occur?

[Clockwork Cupcake]

WorldBoss said:

Given the fact that everybody, cis, trans or agender experiences, understands and expresses gender slightly differently, how are trans people 'Not the same' as a cis person, when everyone will have totally different concepts as to what it means to be their gender?

And when does this difference occur?

Quite.

And a middle class heterosexual white guy is going to have a different experience of maleness than a black gay guy growing up in a rough part of London.