- General
- Transgender brain studies, especially those on trans women attracted to women (gynephilic), and those on trans men attracted to men (androphilic), are limited, as they include only a small number of tested individuals. Several studies have found a correlation between gender identity and brain structure. A first-of-its-kind study by Zhou et al. (1995) found that in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region of the brain known for sex and anxiety responses (and which is affected by prenatal androgens),cadavers of six trans women had female-normal BSTc size, similar to the study's cadavers of cisgender women. While the trans women had undergone hormone therapy, and all but one had undergone sex reassignment surgery, this was accounted for by including cadavers of non-trans female and male controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still had sizes typical for their sex. No relationship to sexual orientation was found.
- In a follow-up study, Kruijver et al. (2000) looked at the number of neurons in BSTc instead of volumes. They found the same results as Zhou et al. (1995), but with even more dramatic differences. One transfeminine subject who had never received hormone therapy was also included, and nonetheless matched up with the female neuron counts.
- In 2002, a follow-up study by Chung et al. found that significant sexual dimorphism in BSTc did not establish until adulthood. Chung et al. theorized that changes in fetal hormone levels produce changes in BSTc synaptic density, neuronal activity, or neurochemical content which later lead to size and neuron count changes in BSTc, or alternatively, that the size of BSTc is affected by the generation of a gender identity inconsistent with one's assigned sex.
- It has been suggested that the BSTc differences may be a result of hormone replacement therapy. It has also been suggested that because pedophilic offenders have also been found to have a reduced BSTc, a feminine BSTc may be a marker for paraphilias rather than transgender identity.
- In a review of the evidence in 2006, Gooren considered the earlier research as supporting the concept of gender incongruence as a sexual differentiation disorder of the sexually dimorphic brain. Dick Swaab (2004) concurred.
- In 2008, Garcia-Falgueras & Swaab discovered that the interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH-3), part of the [[hypothalamic uncinate nucleus, had properties similar to the BSTc with respect to sexual dimorphism and gender incongruence. The same method of controlling for hormone usage was used as in Zhou et al. (1995) and Kruijver et al. (2000). The differences were even more pronounced than with BSTc; control males averaged 1.9 times the volume and 2.3 times the neurons as control females, yet regardless of hormone exposure, trans women were within the female range and the trans men within the male range.
- A 2009 MRI study by Luders et al. found that among 24 trans women not treated with hormone therapy, regional gray matter concentrations were more similar to those of cisgender men than of cisgender women, but there was a significantly greater volume of gray matter in the right putamen compared to cisgender men. Like earlier studies, researchers concluded that transgender identity was associated with a distinct cerebral pattern. MRI scanning allows easier study of larger brain structures, but independent nuclei are not visible due to lack of contrast between different neurological tissue types, hence other studies on e.g. BSTc were done by dissecting brains post-mortem.
- Rametti et al. (2011) studied 18 trans men who had not undergone hormone therapy using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), an MRI technique which allows visualizing white matter, the structure of which is sexually dimorphic. Rametti et al. discovered that the trans men's white matter, compared to 19 cisgender gynephilic females, showed higher fractional anisotropy values in posterior part of the right SLF, the forceps minor and corticospinal tract". Compared to 24 cisgender males, they showed only lower FA values in the corticospinal tract. The white matter patterns in trans men were found to be shifted in the direction of non-trans males.
- Hulshoff Pol et al. (2006) studied gross brain volume in 8 trans men and in 6 trans women undergoing hormone therapy. They found that hormones altered the sizes of the hypothalamus in a gender-consistent manner: treatment with masculinizing hormones shifted the hypothalamus towards the male direction in the same way as in male controls, and treatment with feminizing hormones shifted the hypothalamus towards the female direction in the same way as female controls. They concluded: "The findings suggest that, throughout life, gonadal hormones remain essential for maintaining aspects of sex-specific differences in the human brain."
- A 2011 review published in Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology found that "Female INAH3 and BSTc have been found in MtF transsexual persons. The only female-to-male (FtM) transsexual person available to us for study so far had a BSTc and INAH3 with clear male characteristics. (...) These sex reversals were found not to be influenced by circulating hormone levels in adulthood, and seem thus to have arisen during development" and that "All observations that support the neurobiological theory about the origin of transsexuality, i.e. that it is the sizes, the neuron numbers, and the functions and connectivity of brain structures, not the sex of their sexual organs, birth certificates or passports, that match their gender identities".
- A 2015 review reported that two studies found a pattern of white matter microstructure differences away from a transgender person's birth sex, and toward their desired sex. In one of these studies, sexual orientation had no effect on the diffusivity measured.
- A 2016 review agreed with the other reviews[which?] when considering androphilic trans women and gynephilic trans men. It reported that hormone treatment may have large effects on the brain, and that cortical thickness, which is generally thicker in cisgender women's brains than in cisgender men's brains, may also be thicker in trans women's brains, but is present in a different location to cisgender women's brains.[2] It also stated that for both trans women and trans men, "cross-sex hormone treatment affects the gross morphology as well as the white matter microstructure of the brain. Changes are to be expected when hormones reach the brain in pharmacological doses. Consequently, one cannot take hormone-treated transsexual brain patterns as evidence of the transsexual brain phenotype because the treatment alters brain morphology and obscures the pre-treatment brain pattern."
- A 2019 review in Neuropsychopharmacology found that among transgender individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria, "cortical thickness, gray matter volume, white matter microstructure, structural connectivity, and corpus callosum shape have been found to be more similar to cisgender control subjects of the same preferred gender compared with those of the same natal sex."
- A 2020 paper tried to investigate and differentiate between the two competing hypotheses of a neurodevelopmental cortical hypothesis that suggests the existence of different brain phenotypes vs a functional-based hypothesis in relation to regions involved in the own body perception. Trans men, trans women, and cisgender women all had decreased connectivity compared with cisgender men in superior parietal regions, as part of the salience (SN) and the executive control (ECN) networks. Trans men also had weaker connectivity compared with cisgender men between intra-SN regions and weaker inter-network connectivity between regions of the SN, the default mode network (DMN), the ECN and the sensorimotor network. Trans women had lower small-worldness, modularity and clustering coefficient than cisgender men.
- A 2021 review of brain studies published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that "although the majority of neuroanatomical, neurophysiological, and neurometabolic features" in transgender people "resemble those of their natal sex rather than those of their experienced gender", for trans women they found feminine and demasculinized traits, and vice versa for trans men. They stated that due to limitations and conflicting results in the studies that had been done, they could not draw general conclusions or identify-specific features that consistently differed between cisgender and transgender people. The review also found differences when comparing cisgender homosexual and heterosexual people, with the same limitations applying.
- General
The transgenderism debate
Posts
Total:
673
- Androphilic vs. gynephilic trans women
- A 2016 review reported that early-onset androphilic transgender women have a brain structure similar to cisgender women's and unlike cisgender men's, but that they have their own brain phenotype It also reported that gynephilic trans women differ from both cisgender female and male controls in non-dimorphic brain areas. The available research indicates that the brain structure of androphilic trans women with early-onset gender dysphoria is closer to that of cisgender women than that of cisgender men. It also reports that gynephilic trans women differ from both cisgender female and male controls in non-dimorphic brain areas.[2] Cortical thickness, which is generally thicker in cisgender women's brains than in cisgender men's brains, may also be thicker in trans women's brains, but is present in a different location to cisgender women's brains.[2] For trans men, research indicates that those with early-onset gender dysphoria and who are gynephilic have brains that generally correspond to their assigned sex, but that they have their own phenotype with respect to cortical thickness, subcortical structures, and white matter microstructure, especially in the right hemisphere. Hormone therapy can also affect transgender people's brain structure; it can cause transgender women's brains to become closer to those of cisgender women, and morphological changes observed in the brains of trans men might be due to the anabolic effects of testosterone.
- While MRI taken on gynephilic trans women have likewise shown differences in the brain from non-trans people, no feminization of the brain's structure has been identified. Neuroscientists Ivanka Savic and Stefan Arver at the Karolinska Institute used MRI to compare 24 gynephilic trans women with 24 cisgender female and 24 cisgender male controls. None of the study participants were undergoing hormone therapy. The researchers found sex-typical differentiation between the trans women and cisgender females, and the cisgender males; but the gynephilic trans women "displayed also singular features and differed from both control groups by having reduced thalamus and putamen volumes and elevated GM volumes in the right insular and inferior frontal cortex and an area covering the right angular gyrus".
- The researchers concluded that:
- Contrary to the primary hypothesis, no sex-atypical features with signs of 'feminization' were detected in the transsexual group ... The present study does not support the dogma that [male-to-female transsexuals] have atypical sex dimorphism in the brain but confirms the previously reported sex differences. The observed differences between MtF-TR and controls raise the question as to whether gender dysphoria may be associated with changes in multiple structures and involve a network (rather than a single nodal area).
- Berglund et al. (2008) tested the response of gynephilic trans women to two steroids hypothesized to be sex pheromones: the progestin-like 4,16-androstadien-3-one (AND) and the estrogen-like 1,3,5(10),16-tetraen-3-ol (EST). Despite the difference in sexual orientation, the trans women's hypothalamic networks activated in response to the AND pheromone, like the androphilic cis female control groups. Both groups experienced amygdala activation in response to EST. Gynephilic cis male control groups experienced hypothalamic activation in response to EST. However, the trans women also experienced limited hypothalamic activation to EST. The researchers concluded that in terms of pheromone activation, trans women occupy an intermediate position with predominantly female features. The transfeminine subjects had not undergone any hormonal treatment at the time of the study, according to their own declaration beforehand, and confirmed by repeated tests of hormonal levels.
- Gynephilic trans men
- Fewer brain structure studies have been performed on transgender men than on transgender women.[2] A team of neuroscientists, led by Nawata in Japan, used a technique called single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to compare the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) of 11 gynephilic trans men with that of 9 androphilic cis females. Although the study did not include a sample of cisgender males so that a conclusion of "male shift" could be made, the study did reveal that the gynephilic trans men showed significant decrease in blood flow in the left anterior cingulate cortex and a significant increase in the right insula, two brain regions known to respond during sexual arousal.
- A 2016 review reported that the brain structure of early-onset gynephilic trans men generally corresponds to their assigned sex, but that they have their own phenotype with respect to cortical thickness, subcortical structures, and white matter microstructure, especially in the right hemisphere.[2] Morphological increments observed in the brains of trans men might be due to the anabolic effects of testosterone.
- Prenatal androgen exposure
- Prenatal androgen exposure, the lack thereof, or low sensitivity to prenatal androgens are commonly cited as mechanisms to explain the above discoveries. To test this, studies have examined the differences between trans and cisgender individuals in digit ratio (a generally accepted marker for prenatal androgen exposure). A meta-analysis concluded that the effect sizes for this association were small or nonexistent.
- In people with XX chromosomes, congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) results in heightened exposure to prenatal androgens, resulting in masculinization of the genitalia. Individuals with CAH are typically subjected to medical interventions including prenatal hormone treatment[30] and postnatal genital reconstructive surgeries. Such treatments are sometimes criticized by intersex rights organizations as non-consensual, invasive, and unnecessary interventions. Individuals with CAH are usually assigned female and tend to develop similar cognitive abilities to the typical females, including spatial ability, verbal ability, language lateralization, handedness and aggression. Research has shown that people with CAH and XX chromosomes will be more likely to experience same-sex attraction, and at least 5.2% of these individuals develop serious gender dysphoria.
- In males with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency, conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone is disrupted, decreasing the masculinization of genitalia. Individuals with this condition are typically assigned female and raised as girls due to their feminine appearance at a young age. However, more than half of males with this condition raised as females come to identify as male later in life. Scientists speculate that the definition of masculine characteristics during puberty and the increased social status afforded to men are two possible motivations for a female-to-male transition.
Ok give me one example of a male biologically changing into a female, or vice versa.- That is a bad misunderstanding of biologist's claims. No biologist or transgendered person claims this is the process of transgenderism.
The article also says that there is no difference between the female brain and the male brain, so.................yea.- Again, your reading profeciency is quite poor and/or you are a liar. The SA article gives multiple examples of differences between male and female brains.
- For example,
- Let’s just take the most famous example of sexual dimorphism in the brain: the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the preoptic area (sdnPOA). This tiny brain area with a disproportionately sized name is slightly larger in males than in females. But it’s unclear if that size difference indicates distinctly wired sdnPOAs in males versus females, or if—as with the bipotential primordium—the same wiring is functionally weighted toward opposite ends of a spectrum. Throw in the observation that the sdnPOA in gay men is closer to that of straight females than straight males, and the idea of “the male brain” falls apart.
- That is there isn't just a male and female brain but many degrees of distinction. Not just a male brain but perhaps a gay male brain different from a straight brain, etc.
- Damn, did you read that wrong.
Two things. Babys receiving a sex, proves that a binary exists.- Babies don't receive a sex, they develop one slowly over the first six weeks, according to a complex interplay of different genes.
And intersex is literally not another sex, it is a disorder/development issue.- The relevant notion is that there is a spectrum between male and female as there is a specturm between black and white with intersex representing one known natural shade of grey.
It would be like someone being born with one leg,- It's more like being born with one leg and cruel religious folk calling you unnatural and passing laws against one-legged people in public. If you're born with it, god made it, right? What's the point of trying to eradicate one-legged folks by making up some story about one-legged idelology?
- Androphilic vs. gynephilic trans women
-->
@TWS1405_2
🐓 💩
Ug, me no like words, sentences too hard, me use pictures, ug.
I'll take "Androphilic vs. gynephilic" for six hundred Alex
-->
@Greyparrot
I just had a huge fight with my roommate because he was trying to convince me that all 100% humans will be extinct soon because of global warming of 4 degrees.sigh.
Guns don't kill people, global warming kills people.
More guns, more guns, more guns!
-->
@oromagi
- Behind a paywall but the title suggests that there are ideologies regarding gender, not that the condition of Transgenderism itself is itself an ideology. Do you see the difference?
Transgenderism is an ideology. Trans people currently bang the pots and pans about "trans issues" and "the trans perspective". Trans people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of transgenderism. Trans people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of transgenderism.
Christianity is an ideology. Christian people currently bang the pots and pans about "Christian issues" and "the Christian perspective". Christian people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of Christianity. Christian people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of Christianity.
Transgenderism is functionally a political ideology.
Please don't pretend you want to discuss the modern scientific perspective and then introduce the Southern Baptists as a legit source. We Americans officially don't have to give one single fuck what the Southern Baptists.
This is all Ad hominem and you should do better.
Also, you don't speak for all of America. Not every American is a degenerate shitlib. Plenty of Americans are proud Christians.
- Well, then you agree with me that transgenderism is not an ideology and we are both just waiting for you to remove your head from your ass..
He shouldn't agree with you because transgenderism is an ideology -- it has precisely the same function as one.
- As a mattter of public policy, people may choose their gender identity and pursue their happiness therein as they see fit
They may not "choose their gender identity" because that concept makes no sense. You can't extract "gender" from "biological sex" and have the former make any sense. You are born with a biological sex and that's the origin of gender norm constructions.
For example, caretaking, gentleness, emotions etc. gender norms are typically associated with females because the human female has biological chemistry that often lends itself to that behaviour (through greater interhemispheric connectivity, larger tear ducts, estrogen etc.) It doesn't mean all human females are precisely all of those things 100% of the time in equal amounts, but that's generally the behavior we expect from women based on their biology, women generally live up to those expectations, and thus we construct notions like gender roles to help females be productive to society in a meaningful way.
Yes, I know, you're thinking 'not all women are like that', and that's partially true. Sometimes, women are tomboys who do typically masculine things, *but overall*, their wholistic behavior will gravitate towards gender conceptions (due to the biological underpinnings). Gender notions don't come out of thin air.
When you divorce gender from the underpinnings of biological reality, you almost always leap into fantasy, and that's precisely what choosing "gender identity" does.
- If you were to more directly ask biologists if transgenderims is a biological, most biologists say yes but to an unkown degree... A 2008 study compared the genes of 112 trans women who were mostly already undergoing hormone treatment...
Transgenderism is biological in the sense that schizophrenia is biological. Yes, the "transgender" people will have cognitive and genetic makeups which will differ from normality, but that isn't an excuse to label it as a "gender identity" when 'mental disorder' is a far more appropriate term. In a similar vain, we don't start recognizing the voices in schizophrenic's heads as real people, so we shouldn't recognize the rogue feelings of transgender people as being legitimate.
- Gender incongruence among twins
- In 2013, a twin study combined a survey of pairs of twins where one or both had undergone...
Yes and bipolar disorder is heritable, too.
It's good that shitlibbery is no longer wild enough to question the validity of twin studies, though. I'm glad we've made some progress in regards to genetics.
-->
@ludofl3x
Also, teaching kids [...............................] about their genitals has nothing to do with transgenderism.
Well it does when one is discussing Trannies.
Women trannies want a penis while they were born with virgina.
Men trannies want a virgina while they were born with a penis.
The problem for the tranny is neither can have the other.
-->
@Sidewalker
Thank god I have you to cheer me up.
-->
@Kaitlyn
The whole notion of "feminine" is a conscious extrapolation of the biological female
Agreed, except that the concept of "biological female" we are extrapolating from is based entirely on observable characteristics such as genetillia and physical traits like soft facial features or non muscular arms.
No one arguing that biological sex is all about chromosomes has ever wandered around town measuring people's chromosomes before committing to address them as a he or a she. The only reason we know any of this is because we learned it in a text book but now "anti-transgenderism" advocates are pretending like this is what they've always been talking about with regards to gender. That's absurd.
I could show you plenty of naked photos of women right now that you would look at and, absent the context of this conversation, would easily accept is a women. So don't pretend what you learned in a biology text book is what society has always been talking about with regards to these terms.
In other words, people (at birth) not fitting into either the XX or XY category are quite low, and people can be placed into XX or XY after birth with various behavioural observations.
The frequency of occurrence is not relevant to the point. There are only two sexes because we have only defined two sexes. That's a human construct. It is based of off biology but biology includes many other variations, so when one claims there can only be two genders because that's what biology says they are just factually wrong.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Really? Because I go off of transgender people's argument
No, you go off of transgender people's words... After redefining them back into the definitions you accept. That's not communication. And after being explained this over and over again and still doing the same thing it demonstrates a fundamental unseriousness about advancing the conversation.
If someone is born with one arm, even though humans are typically born with two, does that mean that there is now a spectrum of arms?
There are and have always been a spectrum of armed people in our society. We just don't label them because that serves us no practical purpose.
If a third sex were to exist, it would have to have a purpose. Us as humans reproduce with a male and a female, and that's all we need. If another sex were to exist, what would its purpose be, and if it didn't have a purpose, then why didn't evolution take it out?
Purpose is something we as thinking agents invented. It has absolutely no place in any conversation about evolution and biology.
Evolution is about one thing: survival. That which is well suited to survive will. That which is not well speed to survive will not. It's that simple.
-->
@Double_R
The whole notion of "feminine" is a conscious extrapolation of the biological femaleAgreed, except that the concept of "biological female" we are extrapolating from is based entirely on observable characteristics such as genetillia and physical traits like soft facial features or non muscular arms.
Not just observable, physical characteristics, but also behavioral ones. That's why we have gendered concepts such as 'mother nature', as nature gives birth and that's one of the essential functions of a mother (i.e. female). That's why nurturing is typically associated with females. There are plenty examples of typical female behavior extending into gendered notions.
No one arguing that biological sex is all about chromosomes has ever wandered around town measuring people's chromosomes before committing to address them as a he or a she. The only reason we know any of this is because we learned it in a text book but now "anti-transgenderism" advocates are pretending like this is what they've always been talking about with regards to gender. That's absurd.I could show you plenty of naked photos of women right now that you would look at and, absent the context of this conversation, would easily accept is a women. So don't pretend what you learned in a biology text book is what society has always been talking about with regards to these terms.
Sure, previously, we didn't have the litany of research to scientifically determine what is the issue with transgender people.
My point of contention isn't that transgender people could never 'pass', despite the biological reality misaligning with their outward physical transformation. Hell, I'm sure you could layer a man with makeup, add eyelash and hair extensions, and many people would think he is a woman.
My point is that transgenderism is a mental illness that shouldn't be indulged in -- just because you can look like the opposite sex doesn't mean you should. By allowing transgender people to engage in their mental illness, you're doing as much harm as telling a schizophrenic that the voices in their head are real and should be listened to.
In other words, people (at birth) not fitting into either the XX or XY category are quite low, and people can be placed into XX or XY after birth with various behavioural observations.The frequency of occurrence is not relevant to the point. There are only two sexes because we have only defined two sexes. That's a human construct. It is based of off biology but biology includes many other variations, so when one claims there can only be two genders because that's what biology says they are just factually wrong.
It is relevant because, for example, genetic mutations don't necessarily constitute taxonomic differences. We don't crown a new species of 'three-headed snakes' just because one is born with three heads.
Similarly, we don't crown bipolar disorder as a 'lifestyle', 'different way of viewing the world' or 'perfectly normal identity'. It's a mental disorder and should be categorized as such.
Classifications of biological sex are a "human construct", sure, but that doesn't give license to classify or term things however you want. As I've already said, there is a biological underpinning to gender that is generated through biological sex differences in humans, and since transgenderism is a mental illness rather than a biological sex, we shouldn't generate new genders from it.
-->
@oromagi
Transgenderism is an ideology and is also a political point of view and, there are many sources to prove this if you would like to check them out:
- Behind a paywall but the title suggests that there are ideologies regarding gender, not that the condition of Transgenderism itself is itself an ideology. Do you see the difference?
- Please don't pretend you want to discuss the modern scientific perspective and then introduce the Southern Baptists as a legit source. We Americans officially don't have to give one single fuck what the Southern Baptists. Those magical claims have no business in any serious discussion of public policy. If we were able to ask the Transgender community whether the Southern Baptists are a legitimate institution to be consulted for an accuate definition of the Transgender experience what do you think the answer would be? If we were to ask the Scientfic community whehter the Southern Baptists are a legitimate institution to be consulted for an accurate definition of the Transgender experience what do you think the answer would be. SInce both groups would obviously say, "oh hell no" let's agree that religious hangups about sex and sex control disqualify all religious opinion from an accurately scientific perspective.
- Behind a paywall but I doubt the Grey Lady would mistake any adjective for an ideology.
Basically to wrap this up, you basically just said they were paid to say this, and they are probably not being truthful.
So that's on you to not see the empirical evidence.
- In fact, I'm fairly confident that the notion of an ideology of transgenderism originates with the Heritage Foundation.
- Let's agree that any organizaton that backed Trump's big lie about the 2020 election knowing that the fraud was on Trump's side can no longer be treated as an objective reporter of American political fact.
- Organizations like the Heritage Foundation have never pretended to objectivity and may not cited as an objective source for defintion
- WIKIPEDIA: The Heritage Foundation has engaged in several activities in opposition to transgender rights, including hosting several anti-transgender rights events, developing and supporting legislation templates against transgender rights, and making claims about transgender youth healthcare and suicide rates based on internal research, contrary to the findings of peer-reviewed scientific studies.
- Making up your own internal research, that is truly anti-scientific. Mainstream science rejects the Heritage Foundation's phony research.
- The Heritage Foundation defintion claims:
- Proponents of the ideology believe that
- gender identity is as important as biological sex (I've never met anybody who makes this claim)
- and
- that trans people should be regarded as the gender with which they identify (basic courtesey, only true assholes fail to respect every citizen's right to name themselves and customize their identity. In America, one's identify is one's own).
- So just objectively, Heritage foundation's totally biased definition layers one accusation that's generally false on top of one common courtesy on assholes don't do.
Ok first of all, if your going to say that any organization that lyes shouldn't be trustworthy ever, then you are going to have to account for all the leftist news organizations that lie all the time and get away with it. Also, using wikipedia isn't always bad, but using it to support your theory, and not to define something isn't the smartest idea. Making up your own research is essential to finding the truth. Just because someone did their own research doesn't mean they are using biased materials in that research. Im sure you would be able to find their evidence for this research with a little deep dive into the heritage foundation. Also, I have met many transgender supporting and transgender peoples, saying that gender is of the utmost importance. All of their arguments have to do with gender. Gender is the base of their ideology. So I think it is safe to say that this is a truth. Also when they say transgender people should be regarded as the gender with which they identify they are saying that that is what the ideology believes, they are not saying that is what transgender people should believe. Again they are reporting on the beliefs of the ideology, not what the ideology should believe. You have no empirical evidence to tie your theory of the Heritage foundation to being lying a**holes.
Yes, this is true that not all transgender people view their actions and beliefs and healthy or normal. That is also true for many other beliefs, hobby's, addictions, etc.
- Well, then you agree with me that transgenderism is not an ideology and we are both just waiting for you to remove your head from your ass..
The people who involve themselves in the ideology, do not represent the ideology. This is basic knowledge. The idea of the ideology defines it. Just as pedophilic preists don't represent Catholicism, no person or group of people represent Catholicism. The ideology defines it. I thought you of all people would be able to grasp this basic concept.
I did not claim that all people who share one psychological trait must also share one political viewpoint. I didn't even claim that all transgender identifying people share the same political viewpoint.
- That is what you are claiming when you call it transgender ideology or an ideology of transgenderism, that's like defining white supremacy as white ideology or the ideology of white people.
Politics don't hold every ideology. Religious ideologies have within them different political viewpoints. Just because you have the same basic belief or ideology as someone else, doesn't mean you have to have the same political opinions on how society should be run to a T. You can be a Christian, with Christian beliefs, and still be a democrat or republican.
I only described and defined the transgender ideology (idea).
- False. IF we follow Heritage and say the ideology you oppose claims something like: "gender identity is as important as biological sex," than that's a pretty vague and at least superficially false statement. I don't know anybody who claims the like.
They belief that gender identity (the gender in which you want to identify) is as important as biological sex (what you were born as). Now as for getting into details of that claim, you can break it down easily, but when someone asks what they belief and you say that, they have an answer. Simple.
- Now, say you were to change that to:
- As a mattter of public policy, people may choose their gender identity and pursue their happiness therein as they see fit
- You might call that ideology but as I've said before, that is the US Constitution and upholders of the US Constitution ought not be properly referred to as "transgendered"
Public policy? The right to choose what you want to do with your life is up to you. So if you want to live in fantasy land, then you have every right to. That's a constitutional right. The Transgender ideology is not part of the constitution. The constitution gives you the right to fit into other ideologies that you deem fit. Again, how are you not grasping this simple concept.
- Let's take a look at how big a problem this ideology you speak of really is. Please provide 3 examples of political expression of the idea that "gender identity is as important as biological sex," that is not merely expressing the idea "that transgender people are entitled to the same civil rights as any other citizen."
Their are many examples:
- You just agreed with me that not all transpeople share the same set of beliefs. You forgot to explain what fault you found with my reasoning and you sould also explain why you agree with my faulty reasoning.
.............The people apart of the ideology do not represent the ideology. The ideology represents itself.
This is common knowledge.
- But we just agreed that not all transgendered people hold any one belief in common, so how can it be just to eradicate a people based on an ideology held by only some, or even perhaps none?
Dude. Did you not read what I wrote. I said that I am against the IDEOLOGY not the people that follow that ideology. I want the idea eradicated not the people eradicated.
and it is just a coincidence that you think that the ideology and the people are one thing?
I DON'T!
the ideology of the Transgenders?
Excuse me? I said the "transgender ideology." Do you understand the difference between a belief, and the people who believe that? Ideas are not the same as individual people. Ideas define themselves. How are you not able to grasp this?
If you're going to be part of honest conversation, at least present my position correctly.
Dude........................you are literally doing that exact thing to me right now.
- "The ideology of transgenderism" is your phony claim, not mine.
- If you were to more directly ask biologists if transgenderims is a biological, most biologists say yes but to an unkown degree.
Yes. There is a mental illness called gender dysphoria. So either it's an ideology or a mental illness. Which one is it?
-->
@oromagi
A 2008 study compared the genes of 112 trans women who were mostly already undergoing hormone treatment, with 258 cisgender male controls. Trans women were more likely than cisgender males to have a longer version of a receptor gene (longer repetitions of the gene) for the sex hormone androgen, which reduced its effectiveness at binding testosterone. The androgen receptor (NR3C4) is activated by the binding of testosterone or dihydrotestosterone, where it plays a critical role in the forming of primary and secondary male sex characteristics. The research weakly suggests reduced androgen and androgen signaling contributes to trans women's identity.
Ok, first of all, can you provide me the study?
Second of all, weakly is the key word in this paragraph.
. The authors say that a decrease in testosterone levels in the brain during development might prevent complete masculinization of trans women's brains, thereby causing a more feminized brain and a female gender identity.
Therefore, we have the mental illness called gender dysphoria.
if transgenderims is a biological, most biologists say yes but to an unkown degree.
Give me a statistic on how many biologists claim this, because I'm pretty sure you mean some biologists, not most. Because most real biologists would claim that your sex is unchangeable.
- In 2013, a twin study combined a survey of pairs of twins where one or both had undergone, or had plans and medical approval to undergo, gender transition, with a literature review of published reports of transgender twins. The study found that one third of identical twin pairs in the sample were both transgender: 13 of 39 (33%) monozygotic or identical pairs of assigned males and 8 of 35 (22.8%) pairs of assigned females. Among dizygotic or genetically non-identical twin pairs, there was only 1 of 38 (2.6%) pairs where both twins were trans.[8] The significant percent of identical twin pairs in which both twins are trans and the virtual absence of dizygotic twins (raised in the same family at the same time) in which both were trans would provide evidence that transgender identity is significantly influenced by genetics if both sets were raised in different families.
This is just citing common knowledge. Yes if you start gender reassignment surgeries' on kids, they are more likely to become transgender. This is obvious.
It's completely blatantly obvious from your last couple of posts on this topic that you are not interested in a deep discussion about transgenderism itself, and you are only interested in trying to fact check everyone, and play with definitions. If you continue to challenge basic biological definitions without providing evidence for them, and you can't understand the simple concept of an ideology, no one is going to take you seriously.
but biology includes many other variations
True as some species naturally have asexual reproduction, some species naturally have no herd instincts etc...
But none of that applies to the human species. Humans naturally have 2 sexes as a reproductive function.
While we can asexually reproduce in a lab by cloning, it isn't feasible yet, so the natural functions are still relevant and vital for survival.
Gender as a social construct to define natural attraction and the chemical processes that trigger attraction are only scientifically important as it pertains to the reproduction function. This includes homosexual brain chemistry in some cases that could also be used to help nurture the young or strengthen the herd. Any other observations beyond this simply can't be classified as "fit" from a purely scientific observation of adapting to the environment and promoting reproduction. Both of those criteria are essential for all life. Almost all of our morality stems from this construct of biological fitness.
-->
@Double_R
No, you go off of transgender people's words... After redefining them back into the definitions you accept.
Did, I accept biological fact? Yes, because it is biological fact.............
I don't accept them because I believe its true. I accept it because I know it's true. It is true.
And we have gone down this path before, so I am just going to stop you here and say that you are living in fantasy land if you really think that biology is a ideology as well as transgenderism is.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Well, animals don't have their own plastic surgeons to perform genital reassignment surgeries, but if they did, I'm sure some would like it.
-->
@FLRW
Well, animals don't have their own plastic surgeons to perform genital reassignment surgeries, but if they did, I'm sure some would like it.
You're sure are you? Because of homosexual behavior?
You know what I think, and what I've thought for quite a while?
The attempt to reassign gender is a capitulation to gender roles, not the act of an independent liberal but the act of a desperate person who seeks validation from others. That to encourage this behavior (in the young and vulnerable) is the most vile form of sexism and conservatism imaginable.
Where are all the young homosexuals and bisexuals? They're transitioning. They are changing clothes and mutilating themselves instead of accepting the body and desires they have.
They are doing this because people like you think homosexual tendencies are a sign of gender dysphoria.
Maybe a young man who wants to take it in the rear shouldn't cut his penis off. Maybe he just likes other men and there is no need to suggest that he's a she writhing in torment in his own body. Maybe he should just be a homosexual.
Just a thought.
-->
@FLRW
Well, animals don't have their own plastic surgeons to perform genital reassignment surgeries
but if they did, I'm sure some would like it.
When you can lick your balls like a dog can, we can reassess this idea.
-->
@Greyparrot
Allow me to translate for the dog: When will I get down? When will this ridiculous white thing come off? Why can't humans focus on the critical issues of fetch, tug of war, and meat?
-->
@Greyparrot
Humans naturally have 2 sexes as a reproductive function.
Yes. The reproduction happens when male and female unite. There are no other sexes, because nothing else results in reproduction.
Cloning isnt exactly realistic on mass scale. If cloning was possible, then there would be 3 sexes: male, female and cloning.
None of that would make it possible to change sex. Male who cuts off his penis wouldnt make himself female, since he would lose reproductive abilities of male but he would not gain reproductive abilities of a female, and the cloning ability would remain the same irrelevant of if someone castrates himself or not.
-->
@Greyparrot
Actually, like Trump, I pay Stormy to do it for me.
-->
@oromagi
Also took a long time to read all of that, ( I don't know if you did, or just laid a bunch of random information) but it doesn't scientifically and biologically support transgenderism still. It says that it is still not sure, meaning that these biologists have a goal of supporting it, but still havent. Having a goal does not mean it is supported. Biology as we know it does not support transgenderism.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Well, Jesus could have been transgender, according to a University of Cambridge dean.
Dr Michael Banner, the dean of Trinity College, said such a view was “legitimate”.
Dr Michael Banner, the dean of Trinity College, said such a view was “legitimate”.
-->
@FLRW
Well, Jesus could have been transgender, according to a University of Cambridge dean.Dr Michael Banner, the dean of Trinity College, said such a view was “legitimate”.
Explain your reasoning. Jesus was most definitely not transgender.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
I have no idea, check Dr Michael Banner's reasoning.
-->
@Kaitlyn
Transgenderism is an ideology. Trans people currently bang the pots and pans about "trans issues" and "the trans perspective". Trans people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of transgenderism. Trans people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of transgenderism.Christianity is an ideology. Christian people currently bang the pots and pans about "Christian issues" and "the Christian perspective". Christian people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of Christianity. Christian people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of Christianity.
- The obvious difference is that nobody is born a Christian, they are made Christian by their belief. If we accept the science, then transgenders are born transgender, no what beliefs they hold about their condition. Just as there is no ideology of left-handed peoples there is no ideology of transgenderpeople. Left handed people can deny their left-handedness, train themselves to no follow their nature, but such supression should be unnecessary in any free society. A left-handed American may claim the same rights as any other American and the asshole who seeks to eradicate left-handedness in American society is an anti-American villain.
- To say that left-handedness is the exact same thing as right-handedness is inaccurate, but that is not what left-handed people are claiming when they claim to enjoy civil right under the law as everybody else. They are only claiming they are the same before the law. Likewise, a transman is not claiming to be a man, he is claiming he has the same civil rights as any man in America.
Transgenderism is functionally a political ideology.
- Your opinion is powerless to force somebody to believe an ideology they don't. If somebody tells you they are not a Christian, good social behavior is to accept the claim. Telling people that you know that they are secret Christians when they assure they are not is anti-social menacing. Likewise, when the trans community says, "No we are not an ideology" you can either be civil and accept that claim or be an asshole and insist that they believe things that they deny believing.
-->
@FLRW
You have a link?
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Basically to wrap this up, you basically just said they were paid to say this,
- False, that's not what paywall means
and they are probably not being truthful.
- False, opposite. I consider the NYT a reasonably well considered source. I'm just saying you have yet to provide a NYT article that backs your claim.
Ok first of all, if your going to say that any organization that lyes shouldn't be trustworthy ever,
- False, stupid preverification on your part. I am saying that any source of information that deliberately distorted the outcome of the US Election in pursuit of polticial has lost their right to be trusted. The Heritage Foundation knew the truth of the 2020 election and deliberately concealed that truth from the American public for more than a year. That is not a simple mistake or lie. That is treason. The Heritage Foundation knew that Biden had democratically and tried to overthrow the rightful popular government of the United States and replace it with rule be a religious minority. The Heritage Foundation cannot come back a few years later and pretend it has America's best interest at heart. We have established beyond any doubt that all such institution smust not be trusted with American public policy or American History. The Heritage Foundation is an open enemy to American Democracy and must be treated as such.
Also, I have met many transgender supporting and transgender peoples, saying that gender is of the utmost importance. All of their arguments have to do with gender. Gender is the base of their ideology.
- I don't believe this. If there is an ideology, you should be able to find thousands of transgender people expressing the notion that "gender is of the utmost importance, more important that raising the next generaton of children.' But trans people don't say that in real life, only trans haters say that transpeople say that.
Also when they say transgender people should be regarded as the gender with which they identify
- Ony in the context civil rights, where men and women have the same and equal rights.
You have no empirical evidence to tie your theory of the Heritage foundation to being lying a**holes.
- You are also being exactly that same asshole, trying to force labels and ideologies on to people who don't accept you false mischaracterizations driven by a call for eradication. Your misconduct in this forum is evidence enough for anybody.
The idea of the ideology defines it. Just as pedophilic preists don't represent Catholicism, no person or group of people represent Catholicism. The ideology defines it. I thought you of all people would be able to grasp this basic concept.
- But then obviously, just as it would be evil of you to refer to all Catholics as pedophiles and who believe in an pedophilism ideology that you mysteriously call Catholicism, it is exactlyh the same evil to refer to all transgender people when you are attempting to label some extremist minority opinion.
- Let's agree that the belief that transgendered people are physically the same in every respect as cisgendered would qualify as an ideology but an ideology in need of an appropriate name like "Anti-lxamism" My point is that calling an ideology that YOU KNOW FOR A FACT does not represent transgendered people "TRANSGENDERISM" is every bit as socially unaceptable a renaming pedophilia Catholicism.
I did not claim that all people who share one psychological trait must also share one political viewpoint. I didn't even claim that all transgender identifying people share the same political viewpoint.
- That is what you are claiming when you call it transgender ideology or an ideology of transgenderism, that's like defining white supremacy as white ideology or the ideology of white people.
Politics don't hold every ideology. Religious ideologies have within them different political viewpoints. Just because you have the same basic belief or ideology as someone else, doesn't mean you have to have the same political opinions on how society should be run to a T. You can be a Christian, with Christian beliefs, and still be a democrat or republican.
- So why in hell would you call some notion "transgender ideology" when you understand that it does not represent transgendered people?
I only described and defined the transgender ideology (idea).
- False. IF we follow Heritage and say the ideology you oppose claims something like: "gender identity is as important as biological sex," than that's a pretty vague and at least superficially false statement. I don't know anybody who claims the like.
- They belief that gender identity (the gender in which you want to identify) is as important as biological sex (what you were born as). Now as for getting into details of that claim, you can break it down easily, but when someone asks what they belief and you say that, they have an answer. Simple.
The right to choose what you want to do with your life is up to you. So if you want to live in fantasy land, then you have every right to. That's a constitutional right. The constitution gives you the right to fit into other ideologies that you deem fit.
- You're just repeating what I said.
Please provide 3 examples of political expression of the idea that "gender identity is as important as biological sex," that is not merely expressing the idea "that transgender people are entitled to the same civil rights as any other citizen."
Their are many examples:
FAIL: Tony Perkins is the ultra-right wing leader of the ultra-right Family Research Council and he does not believe that "gender identity is as important as biological sex," who you trying to kid?
FAIL: This PEW survey never asks whether "gender identity is as important as biological sex"
FAIL: Zachary Farias is a right-wing sports writer who does not believe that "gender identify is as importan as biological sex."
Let's stop the back and forth and place 100% resposibility on you to prove that there are in fact many public figures who believe
"gender identify is as important as biological sex."
We already know that there are plenty right-wingers who SAY that this is a popular ideology they want "transder ideology"
You say you want to eradicate this ideology but then you fail to come up with one single, solitary example of somebody who believes this ideology you've gone to war with?
Either come up with three mainstream media examples of Americans expressing the belief ""gender identify is as important as biological sex." or apologize for wasting everybody's time with your hysterical right-wing fearmongering about a thing that does not exist.
-->
@oromagi
You've responded to like 15% of what I wrote. I guess you agree with everything else I wrote.
Transgenderism is an ideology. Trans people currently bang the pots and pans about "trans issues" and "the trans perspective". Trans people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of transgenderism. Trans people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of transgenderism.Christianity is an ideology. Christian people currently bang the pots and pans about "Christian issues" and "the Christian perspective". Christian people group up and collectively bargain for political rights under the umbrella term of Christianity. Christian people assume that their perspective, of which is hotly contested, is valid, and will argue in favor of their perception of Christianity.
- The obvious difference is that nobody is born a Christian, they are made Christian by their belief.
That's actually a similarity, not a difference.
The notion that people can be born into the wrong gender/biological sex is an acceptable interpretation, and not a mental illness, isn't a notion people are born with. The biological reality of neurologically different brains in transgender people is fine, but you lump the ideology of 'it's not a mental illness; people can choose their gender/biological sex' and call them both "science", when the latter is an ideology.
If we accept the science, then transgenders are born transgender, no what beliefs they hold about their condition.
They're born with/develop different brains, but that doesn't mean their feeling to change is anything but a mental illness. Again, we can accept the science of the former without accepting the "science" of the latter.
Stop conflating the two.
- Just as there is no ideology of left-handed peoples there is no ideology of transgenderpeople. Left handed people can deny their left-handedness, train themselves to no follow their nature, but such supression should be unnecessary in any free society. A left-handed American may claim the same rights as any other American and the asshole who seeks to eradicate left-handedness in American society is an anti-American villain.
- To say that left-handedness is the exact same thing as right-handedness is inaccurate, but that is not what left-handed people are claiming when they claim to enjoy civil right under the law as everybody else. They are only claiming they are the same before the law. Likewise, a transman is not claiming to be a man, he is claiming he has the same civil rights as any man in America.
There's the genetic reality of left handed people, sure. But if left handed people started to bang the pots and pans about how their left handedness was bestowed to them by God, then they become ideological.
There's the genetic reality of transgender people, sure. But if transgender people started to bang the pots and pans about how their transgenderism is anything but a mental illness, then they become ideological.
Transgenderism is functionally a political ideology.
- Your opinion is powerless to force somebody to believe an ideology they don't. If somebody tells you they are not a Christian, good social behavior is to accept the claim. Telling people that you know that they are secret Christians when they assure they are not is anti-social menacing. Likewise, when the trans community says, "No we are not an ideology" you can either be civil and accept that claim or be an asshole and insist that they believe things that they deny believing.
Saying "No we are not an ideology" doesn't make it reality lol. We don't beat cancer by saying "I've beaten cancer". The reality of the situation exists independently of their spoken word.
I've presented arguments and analogies to demonstrate how transgenderism is an ideology. No amount of 'I'm upset; you're mean' from you is sufficient as a counter-argument.
-->
@oromagi
- False, opposite. I consider the NYT a reasonably well considered source. I'm just saying you have yet to provide a NYT article that backs your claim.
So, The New York Times is the only reliable source, and I must get my evidence from there.
I just provided for you a bunch of sources, but you didn't like their opinions, so you said they are not reliable. A lot of biased sources can be reliable if they claim they have studies to back it up, and not just opinionated blabbering.
Ok first of all, if your going to say that any organization that lyes shouldn't be trustworthy ever,
- False, stupid preverification on your part. I am saying that any source of information that deliberately distorted the outcome of the US Election in pursuit of polticial has lost their right to be trusted.
So, true. I you did say that. Also, how about you address the hunter Biden laptop story. Didn't the hiding away of that distort the election? Also, all the democrats who changed voting rules and regulations at the time of the election.
I don't believe this.
Ok, well thats on you.
I literally provided you many sources saying exactly to a T, that transgenderism is an ideology. The fact that it is an ideology isn't bad, so I don't know why you are arguing against it. Now I don't agree with this ideology.
You're claiming that if a news source or media source distorted any election for any political view, then you can't trust them to say that transgenderism is an ideology?
Well, I'm pretty sure that all media sources at one point or another didn't touch on certain things in elections for a political reason. This could be defined as distorting. So, we aren't to trust any media at all.
You have no empirical evidence to tie your theory of the Heritage foundation to being lying a**holes.
- You are also being exactly that same asshole, trying to force labels and ideologies on to people who don't accept you false mischaracterizations driven by a call for eradication. Your misconduct in this forum is evidence enough for anybody.
Not refuting what I said.
- But then obviously, just as it would be evil of you to refer to all Catholics as pedophiles and who believe in an pedophilism ideology that you mysteriously call Catholicism, it is exactlyh the same evil to refer to all transgender people when you are attempting to label some extremist minority opinion.
Ok, I am going to say this one more time. Not all transgender people are pedophilic. The ideology itself promotes pedophilia, but not all of them are. It's very concerning that you can't understand this simple concept.
My point is that calling an ideology that YOU KNOW FOR A FACT does not represent transgendered people "TRANSGENDERISM" is every bit as socially unaceptable a renaming pedophilia Catholicism.
It does though, because even transgender people in real life and spokespersons for this ideology have claimed this is true. Just watch Matt Walsh's documentary What is a Woman? It shows you that this is what they believe. Do you think I am just pulling beliefs out of my hat? No, I am getting these claims and ideas from the exact ideology that promotes it.
Politics don't hold every ideology. Religious ideologies have within them different political viewpoints. Just because you have the same basic belief or ideology as someone else, doesn't mean you have to have the same political opinions on how society should be run to a T. You can be a Christian, with Christian beliefs, and still be a democrat or republican.
- So why in hell would you call some notion "transgender ideology" when you understand that it does not represent transgendered people?
Read what I said. Then read what you said.
What you said has nothing to do with what I said. You need to work on staying on topic, or at least responding correctly.
- They belief that gender identity (the gender in which you want to identify) is as important as biological sex (what you were born as). Now as for getting into details of that claim, you can break it down easily, but when someone asks what they belief and you say that, they have an answer. Simple.
Well, I'm flattered that you are using my reasoning, but at least quote it next time.
- You're just repeating what I said.
No you literally are.
Please provide 3 examples of political expression of the idea that "gender identity is as important as biological sex," that is not merely expressing the idea "that transgender people are entitled to the same civil rights as any other citizen."Their are many examples:
Ok, so now you are answering your own, questions? LMAO, and you provided sources for your own backlash. This couldn't get any better.