you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I use the term transsexual instead of transgender as it connects me to the strong and resilient women in the past who defied a society that wanted them to not exist and communicates that changing my secondary sex characteristics to be that of the opposite sex is paramount to my condition.

I'm sorry, but this sounds like quite the overstatement. First, who exactly did want people like you not to exist? Disagreeing with your views, even how you view yourselves is not the same as wanting you not to exist. Second, exogenous hormones and elective surgeries can only alter your appearance so much. For some, it may increase the likelihood that other people mistake them for the opposite sex, but only up to a certain point; and I remain skeptical that someone could fool ALL the people ALL the time. IME, people like you not only often overestimate how much they pass irl (which doesn't come up with filters, convenient angles and so on), but they also underestimate how much people are willing to play along whether for thinking is the "polite" thing to do, for fear of negative consequences or for not wanting to go against the flow.

Putting the matter of "passing" aside, there are other things that you've not considered. You focused a lot on how much people like you need all those medical procedures and that you all were/are willing to risk everything for them; unlike the modern "transgender people", who are only following a trend. However, if people like you would have born at the early 19th century, you couldn't have access them not matter what because they didn't exist. So, how much is this need innate? How much has said need arised by the very new existence (in terms of human history) of said procedures?

Furthermore, I disagree that back then there was actual "gatekeeping". I've read the old diagnostic criteria and they still relied on sexist stereotypes, unsurprisingly. It could not have been any other way because once you rule out biology to define who is a woman or a man, you're only left with stereotypes. What is more, any "gatekeeping" could be bypassed if you have enough money and that is how even in the good old days of gatekeeping you had middle aged males who were sexually attract to females, have fathered children and had very "manly" jobs declaring suddenly they were "transsexuals" and got all the hormones and surgeries done. So, how can you tell who is and who is not a "true trans". If there less people like you back then is likely because these procedures were more expensive, less available, less advertised, and less people willing to play along among other things.

All of this, plus the shoddy science done by the doctors working on "gender medicine", the fact that not other mental issue is treated the same way (e.g. nobody recommends liposuction for people with anorexia nervosa) and the well-known health problems produced for these elective surgeries and the usage of exogenous hormones is enough, I think, to question the wisdom of "gender affirmement treatments" for anyone but, ESPECIALLY, for children and teens.

You also complain about other people dismissing the experiences of people like you; however, besides focusing so much on "passability" and overestimating the ability to tell "true trans" apart from the trenders, you're ignoring the fact people will never have the same experiences than females, regardless of how much hormones you take, how many surgeries you undergo or much effort you put on emulating the stereotypical dressing and mannerisms of women, and so on.

But you worry about Republicans and bathrooms. I don't care for Republicans. I don't have any good thing to say about them nor about the Democrats (I'm not American). Yet, by your post it seems you have not considered at all how the bathroom's issue affects women, not only in the US, but in all the other countries where "affirmation" has become the norm. Indeed, it seems you feel threatened by "modern transgender people" because women may assert their boundaries with all trans identified males. Nevertheless trans identified males, BOTH "old school transsexuals" and the "modern transgender people", have inserted themselves in former women-only spaces, not only in public bathrooms, but also changing rooms, spas, sports, hospital wards, refugees, prisons, and so on. Women were not consulted for this and when we tried to assert our boundaries you all (i.e. both groups of trans identified males) you kept going on. You STILL keep going on. In some cases, some of you have responded to dissenting women with threats of rape and violence, trying to get them fired from their jobs or "cancelled", or even with actual violence.

Both groups seems completely disinterested in how much their actions hurts women. Both groups seems completely disinterested on how women may find offensive to be defined based on a bunch of sexist stereotypes or how offensive is to see our biology and our experiences be treated like a costume. Both groups ignore also how much their actions are setting the hard-earned women's rights back. In conclusion, by your post it seems you have more in common with "modern transgender people" than you think.

And yet you won't go to the men's bathrooms. Of course, you all could have lobby for third spaces ages ago. That is the obvious compromise that both the "old school transsexuals" and "the modern transgender people" has ruled out from the very beginning, and they both still treat it as a taboo. Apparently third spaces are othering and akin to racial segregation. Funny, though, how we women don't feel othered by not sharing the bathrooms with men, don't you think?

Edit: yeah, I guess I'm once again able to write a long post discussing this topic after a long, and very needed, "rest".

[–]rainynights[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

(1/4) Firstly I want to thank you for taking the time to write out your perspective on this issue. You have written a lot that I want to reply to so apologies in advance for how long this comment is. I don’t expect anyone to read it all if I’m going to be completely honest but it is out there as a sequel to my original post :-). I’ve had to break it into multiple comments. We definitely disagree and hopefully you are alright with that. Seeing that there is a lot of emotion and vitriol tied up in discussions of transgenderism I don’t plan on changing any opinions. I sure think you will have a hard time changing mine since I have gone to hell and back to live in this world and am at peace with my life. I understand and respect your position but will never agree with it since my life experiences have informed me otherwise. I do not expect those that haven’t experienced something similar to fully understand the issues that are central to a trans person’s life. I want to both listen and share my perspective as well as have a good back and forth.

Something that I think is very common is for people to dehumanize trans individuals and see them as characters or some kind of unified collective. I could be wrong but I sense this sentiment in your post with your usage of statements like “people like you”. Trans people are individuals and we are driven by the condition of gender dysphoria. I very strongly believe that if you personally faced the same issues and reality that a transsexual woman faced you would also transition and want to stand up for yourself in society since we are all humans with different experiences and starting points in this life.

It is my opinion that the trans population conceptually lives on many different fault line boundaries. These boundaries demarcate ideas in language, society, and socialization. Central to the GC/TS debate are the differences between male and female in the aforementioned categories. In many cases trans people don’t fit perfectly on exactly one side of these boundaries and exist on both. Society has been built upon these boundaries and cracks start to form when people such as transsexuals feel like we have no choice but to live our life eschewing them. I believe that there will always be disagreements for how to deal with transsexuals since the situation is complex.

I'm sorry, but this sounds like quite the overstatement. First, who exactly did want people like you not to exist? Disagreeing with your views [...] is not the same as wanting you not to exist.

A lot of people are not aware of, have not experienced, or have forgotten how bad things used to be for trans people in the United States. I can’t speak for those in other countries since that is not my experience but have heard frightening stories from people in South America. This extends to LGBT people in general but trans women especially had unique problems and were also not welcomed in LGB spaces in the past since they “didn’t know what to do” with us. These issues were not merely disagreements but significant obstacles that trans women had to overcome. When trans women such as Caroline Cossey[1], Octavia St. Laurent[2], Roberta Close[3], Janet Mock[4], April Ashley[5], and Amanda Lepore[6] overcame these obstacles and made it big it was amazing to us who never thought we could achieve something so fantastical in life as trans women.

Not too long ago it was very common to get let go from jobs if a trans person’s trans status was revealed. In fact, I have experienced this first hand. The same goes for housing. Many trans individuals were forced into survival sex work and that image has persisted with trans women being strongly associated with porn. The 1980s and 90s were particularly unforgiving to trans women with the majority of us living in bad situations. Even today trans women are among the lowest if not the lowest income group of people in the United States. It was not uncommon for police to give you a hard time as a transsexual and many police forces flat out refused to investigate trans murders deeply if at all. Many men have gotten away with killing and attacking trans women in the past and our murders were relegated to being just “another dead tranny hooker” not worthy of serious investigation. This wasn’t “only” relegated to trans sex workers either since it is quite common to explain away these deaths as them “asking for it” by those who dislike the trans population. Even someone as famous as Eddy Murphy, a known chaser and abuser of trans sex workers within the trans community, got away with the murder of a trans woman named Shalimar Seiuli. As recently as the early 00s and especially back in the 1980s and 90s I personally know of cases where doctors would refuse to treat trans women because they didn't want to be associated with trans patients. Trans people were seen as untrustworthy for not being honest about their sex; what else could they be lying about? Doctors didn’t want to deal with that and it sounds like perhaps you could still agree with this viewpoint. Many trans women were refused treatment when presenting with cases of AIDs, cancer, complications with injections of free floating silicone, etc. This caused a significant amount of deaths in the trans community that is not well talked about today.

In the media trans people were commonly the subject of jokes and not taken seriously. It was hard to move beyond stereotypes that made trans women out to be some kind of pornographic concept as well as murderers and people that shouldn’t be trusted. The late Jerry Springer, another famous piece of trans-sex-worker-consuming trade, made a lot of money exploiting poor trans women to come onto his show and make fools of themselves for a quick buck. A lot of the stereotypes about being deceivers, in my opinion, are directly tied to the release of the book The Transsexual Empire which significantly hurt the image and standing of transsexuals in the US in the late 1970s due to anti-trans activism. I view this activism as contributing to the death of many trans women in the late 20th century through the various avenues I have previously outlined.

All of this combined created an environment where I am comfortable saying that there are times in the not-too-distant past where large swaths of American society did not want transsexual people to exist and would rather ignore any issues they had. Things have changed very dramatically in the past couple decades but the true nature of people is still there.

Second, exogenous hormones and elective surgeries can only alter your appearance so much. [...] I remain skeptical that someone could fool ALL the people ALL the time. IME, people like you not only often overestimate how much they pass irl [...] but they also underestimate how much people are willing to play along [...]

This view has helped many transsexuals blend into the woodwork in the past and it will continue to help us into the future. Certainly what you said is true for many trans people but it can be surprising. In the 80s and 90s trans girls self medicated on the streets with DES, Premarin, or if you were so lucky, the black market German Estradiol Valerate being peddled in 1990s NYC that had rave reviews. After a while you could see a doctor and blow their mind with how you looked enough to get them to write a prescription of legitimate hormones. It was known that if you could walk with no makeup in a bad neighborhood during the day in the past you were not going to get clocked so easily.

[–]rainynights[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

(2/4)

You focused a lot on how much people like you need all those medical procedures and that you all were/are willing to risk everything for them; unlike the modern "transgender people", who are only following a trend. However, if people like you would have born at the early 19th century, you couldn't have access them not matter what because they didn't exist. So, how much is this need innate? How much has said need arised by the very new existence (in terms of human history) of said procedures?

I think that there are lots of trans women today that are not following trends. However I do see a second kind of person who is claiming to be a part of this condition when it is very clearly not their experience or the correct thing in life for them. Gender dysphoria and changing one's secondary sex characteristics is central to a transsexuals life and saying you are trans and speaking for all transsexuals in the public without it is deeply offensive to those who have died or otherwise been seriously affected as a result of this condition.

Regardless of what you think of Magnus Hirschfeld, the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft certainly collected sexology works describing peoples with gender non conforming presentation dating back in the 19th century which were subsequently all burned by the Nazis. There have been books written about (what I will refer to as) gender-variant experiences in the late 19th century New York such as Autobiography of an Androgyne. Additionally, even throughout western history we can see cross-sex identities which have historically been classified as “just” being “more homosexual history” rather than as a separate idea. While we cannot color these historical accounts with modern language certainly there have always been people who would take hormone therapy if it existed that have been around since the beginning of history. We can see both gender-variant male and female sexed peoples documented in many Sumerian writings which are among the oldest written works that we have in general, regardless of the trans topic. In the early 20th century in Russia and Germany there have been documented medical procedures for trans people (this is not confusing these operations with intersex ones).

To this end there will always be trans people who transition and have medical procedures. Trans care originated because trans people were not able to do these things legitimately and were acting out of desperation. This isn’t something new or will ever change. I have witnessed horrific side effects from bad medical care in the trans community and pushing it backwards to how it was previously is extremely short sighted. I have seen brow bones that were shaved down so thin that the sinus shattered when bumping into someone else. There are many cases of holes being left in the sinus bone that caused the skin to bulge up due to air bubbles when breathing through the nose. Jaw bones and gums disintegrating causing all of a trans woman’s bottom teeth to fall out from being poorly shaved. Countless complications and even deaths from silicone injections. Strokes from shoddy doctors, the list goes on and on. I haven’t even mentioned SRS surgery and the horrors that manipulative doctors have inflicted on the trans population. My own best friend took her life as a result of a botched SRS surgery that she was pressured into having on a budget. Contrary to the beliefs of lots of GC people, many trans people are satisfied with their SRS results… I am myself personally. All of these were because trans people were desperate enough to seek care from doctors that weren’t well trained, didn’t care, and wanted to exploit trans women since they are an easy target. Almost all of these surgeries happened outside of the US by unqualified doctors that trans women felt desperate enough to turn to.

I disagree that back then there was actual "gatekeeping". I've read the old diagnostic criteria and they still relied on sexist stereotypes, unsurprisingly. [...] once you rule out biology to define who is a woman or a man, you're only left with stereotypes. [...] "gatekeeping" could be bypassed if you have enough money and [...] middle aged males who were sexually attract to females, have fathered children and had very "manly" jobs declaring suddenly they were "transsexuals" and got all the hormones and surgeries done. So, how can you tell who is and who is not a "true trans".

The Harry Benjamin Standards of Care did include sexist stereotypes. However, adding more checks and balances to the transition process is something that we could benefit from in many places that provide trans care. It will always be possible for trans people to self medicate with hormones but in the ideal scenario some semblance of psychological oversight is not a bad thing. I think that even though it wasn’t perfect there were some good elements of the gender care protocols of yesteryear.

I do not agree with transitioning after having children and being married. I don’t think that’s right but that is not something that I have experience with since I have only ever been with men my entire life. While it seems to be clear to me that you don’t accept trans people as being a separate group from “normal men”, I have come to know that we are. I don’t have the answers to solve everything but I do know that we are a real group of people and while there are problems right now but we aren’t going to go away.

I think that it is easy to classify all trans people as being in one or two buckets such as what Ray Blanchard does with the HSTS/AGP distinction but I think that is reductive to the condition. I think that there are many causes for transsexualism that we don’t fully understand yet and it’s not just one or two simple conditions. Much of the sexological research on trans people has been done by men with questionable motives. I think that we are an extremely varied group of people and it is reductive to simplify the condition down to an easy to digest number of causes.

Historically in the transsexual community the mentality was that you either “got it or you don’t” based on energy one gives off. The nebulous “know it when I see it” mentality is caused by trans people facing the mystery of our condition. From a first person perspective living this life does have an element of nebulousness that needs to be accepted. It’s difficult to navigate and fully realize yourself while trying to deal with the “why” of gender dysphoria during the first decade of transition. People always want a simple explanation like “they must have been molested as a child” or “they’re just a self hating gay” but I have come to realize that is much too simple.

All of this, plus the shoddy science done by the doctors working on "gender medicine", the fact that not other mental issue is treated the same way (e.g. nobody recommends liposuction for people with anorexia nervosa) and the well-known health problems produced for these elective surgeries and the usage of exogenous hormones is enough, I think, to question the wisdom of "gender affirmement treatments" for anyone but, ESPECIALLY, for children and teens.

Trans healthcare started being standardized because trans women will go to any length to get these procedures out of desperation. To many trans people there is nothing more important than these things in their life. When a person is pushed to that level of desperation things get ugly when doctors that are known to exploit the trans population get involved. That isn’t something that is going to change and throwing up your hands saying you don’t like it and not providing any alternatives to that, I don’t think, is the right solution to a problem that isn’t going to go away. In the past trans women had to travel to other countries to get operations done and many still do. That’s been the case even since the days of the French Le Carrousel.

I want to reduce people’s harm, not increase it because transsexuals will continue to exist regardless of what legislation happens. In the 1980s when crossdressing laws were in effect we just got arrested over and over and hoping that wearing a male watch with the clothes we wanted was sufficient enough to say we were in male clothing. The rule of thumb for jail that I was always told by other trans women who have gone was that you have a couple days to find a man to be your boyfriend to have protection so that you wouldn’t get forcibly raped but could at least prepare for sex with the man that is protecting you. This isn’t me exaggerating but rather relaying true facts from trans women of the past. That is if they let you into gen pop and didn’t keep you in solitary. I have heard of trans women going insane because of being raped too many times in prison and being put alone in solitary for years at a time. This was in the early 2000s.

[–]BiologyIsReal 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

My point was that the technology for making exogenous hormones and performing cosmetic surgeries on secondary sex characteristics is pretty new. People at early 19th century or even more earlier couldn't risk everything for something that was not possible. I think you're projecting a lot of modern experiences and concepts in ancient people. What is even "gender-variant people" and what Sumerians could know about them when until mid 20th century gender was a grammar concept? It was either John Money or Robert Stoller who reapplied the term for how someone self-perceives in the form of "gender identity" in their questionable researchers. Then some English speaking feminists thought it was a good idea talking about "gender" instead of sex-based roles and stereotypes. Also, English speakers, especially American, gradually became more and more uncomfortable using the word "sex" when talking about biological sex and started using "gender" as an euphemism. And because English is the most studied and influential language in the world and, probably, also the most translated language, these newer uses of the word "gender" extended far beyond the borders of English speaking countries.

And speaking of language, I think it's telling that, while you can find a word for a woman or a man in every language, even ancient languages, there are no ancient equivalent for "transsexuals" or "transgender". At most, you may find some words for so called "third genders" in certain cultures (like the hijra in India), that are not equivalent with each other because said terms are culture-specific, which suggest "transsexual status" or lack thereof is not something universal and fundamental like being a woman or a man. Furthermore, I've see no evidence that cultures with so called "third genders" recognized and treated said people as the opposite sex.

The Myths about the Mythical Indian Hijra

The sex binary is not a ‘Western construct,’ gender identity is

You were the one who classified trans identified people in two groups, those who are legitimate as yourself and the ones who are just following a trend and were ruining it for the "legitimate" ones. I was just following your lead here. Funny, you mention Ray Blanchard because, despite being so maligned by transactivists of either group, he actually thinks AGP transidentified males are "true trans", who suffer from the most painful gender dysphoria and he neither thought about asking women what we think about it. So, who can tell who is a "true trans"? Even you admit there is not an objective test and is a matter of given off the right "energy"? That is not scientific at all and the inability to determine who has actually gender dysphoria is the first crack in the field.

Something you have not addressed is how gender dysphoria is treated very differently from any other mental health issue. People with anorexia nervosa go to great lengths in their self-destructive behavior; however, nobody thinks is wise to recommend them for a liposuction or assist them by any other means in their search for their "perfect" weight. Some people want their healthy arm or leg amputated, sometimes they ampute them themselves with all the risks that it implies. Yet, you won't find many people recommending amputation as an aceptable "treatment for said people. So, why should we act differently regarding gender dysphoria? Especially because there is no way for humans to change one's sex, neither naturally nor artificially. Sex is determined at conception and you cannot reverse all the changes that are triggered because of it. Everyone is either female or male, even people with DSDs (intersex is an outdated and misleading term), many of which are not misidentified at birth.

Finally, regarding the supposed standards for this field of medicine, doctors working on it are notorious for their bad designed experiments and the big rates of drop-out. Sometimes they cannot even keep basic data from their patients, as we've seen in the judicial review of the Tavistock clinic brought by Keira Bell in the UK. Even after decades prescribing hormones, there is still no proof they work as a treatment for gender dysphoria. GnRH agonists (aka "puberty blockers") are prescribed off-labeled for trans identified minors ignoring their serious potential and reported side effects. What is worse, they are described as "reversible" despite this claim defies all we know about pharmacology or human development. The only basis for this bold claim is their use for patients with central precocious puberty, which is a very different population, for which there are objective diagnostic criteria and its usage is very different, too. But the fact children with precocious puberty will resume puberty after stop taking GnRH agonists is not the same as these drugs not having side effects. Surgeries are even worse because experimentation is more rampant in that field.

Moreover, there is a total lack of curiosity for the changing demography of patients with gender dysphoria. Also, there is anecdotal evidence that detransitioners often don't go back to their doctors. This suggest there needs to be more research on this area. Unfortunately, academics and professionals questioning the official script are often prevented from doing their jobs.

A live experiment on children': Mail on Sunday publishes the shocking physicians' testimony that led a High Court judge to ban NHS's Tavistock clinic from giving puberty blocking drugs to youngsters as young as 10 who want to change sex

Antiandrogen or estradiol treatment or both during hormone therapy in transitioning transgender women - spoiler, the authors of this review couldn't find any study that could pass their inclusion criteria and point out the big gap between research and clinical practice.

New Systematic Reviews of Puberty Blockers and Cross-Sex Hormones Published by NICE

Top Trans Doctors Blow the Whistle on ‘Sloppy’ Care

One Year Since Finland Broke with WPATH "Standards of Care"

All Six of Sweden's Pediatric Clinics Meet to Discuss a Cautious Stance Toward Pediatric Gender Transitions

As a Former Dean of Harvard Medical School, I Question Brown’s Failure to Defend Lisa Littman - about the woman who coined the term Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.

We Need Balance When It Comes To Gender Dysphoric Kids. I Would Know | Opinion (by Scott Newgent)

Detransition-Related Needs and Support: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey

Proposal to research 'trans regret' rejected by university for fear of backlash, claims psychotherapist

AAP 'Silencing Debate' on Gender Dysphoria, Says Doctor Group

[–]rainynights[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Unfortunately I don’t have time to go into depth about my views of trans/gender variant people in history. I will try and reply tomorrow with some more of my thoughts.

It was either John Money or Robert Stoller who reapplied the term for how someone self-perceives in the form of "gender identity" in their questionable researchers. Then some English speaking feminists thought it was a good idea talking about "gender" instead of sex-based roles and stereotypes.

Trans people have existed before the term transsexual and the identity-aligning concepts it came with when it began to be used. People who attended drag balls and those who usually worked as exotic show girls a la Coccinelle, Bambi, and Amanda Lear when they were a part of the Le Carrousel act in the 1950 were usual suspects. Even before there was a well defined concept for transgender people transitioned and lived with this condition.

After my entire life of hearing how trans people were just mentally ill men in dresses from the media and society, hearing this view yet again is not going to change my mind. Many feminist women complain about men being reductive to the female experience and speaking about things that they will never understand. It seems like many GC women will say this yet then talk about knowing trans people better than they know themselves. I believe that this kind of behavior is not just applicable to men but also to people talking about trans issues. It’s very easy to reduce the TS condition down to something that can easily be lumped in with the jackhammer wielding burly construction worker if he donned a dress but to me that isn’t something that can be taken seriously.

It’s very easy to question whether or not trans people should be put on hormones as an outsider. To be honest, if I wasn’t trans I probably would be thinking along the same lines. However, I’ve known plenty of people who have been destroyed as teenagers as a result of alternative therapies I see a lot of proposals for. Electroshock therapy used to be more common in the 90s for trans people. Non-affirmative therapy (more akin to conversion therapy) was as well. As a teenager I saw these things destroy numerous people. It’s not something that I’m going to say should be used instead. We know how to take care of ourselves by self medicating and we will do so if needed. I never took puberty blockers since they didn’t exist when I started, I just did the classic route of taking enough hormones to get the job done. You might know more about them than me.

Regarding detransitioners, in many decades I only ever knew one destransitioner and they re-transitioned. I think that in the past those that knew they needed treatment sought it out and it wasn’t as popularized or in vogue. It’ll probably go back to being like that again eventually I would imagine.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You say I can't talk about trans identified people because I lack the "necessary" personal experience. If we follow this premise to its logical consequence, then history quickly becomes a off-ground subject. So why have you be talking about the experiences of historical groups of people with such an authoritative voice? Have you been there to back up your claims? How do you know people "transitioned" before there was a concept of "transgender"? How could they "transition" when there were no exogenous hormones or surgeries (other than castration) available?

I suggest you give a read at the links in my comment above. Transactivists often project modern ideas on ancient people and misrepresent other cultures. I guess it must be reassuring to think that there has always been trans identified people as we understand it now; but there is little, if any evidence, for such claims.

Also, you have no answered why we don't give liposuction to patients with anorexia nervosa nor why we don't amputate healthy arms for people who desperately want to get rid of them. What does make trans identified people so different that we must go against what would be regarded as common sense in any other mental health issue?