Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

[TomB]

Speaking of dating sites, Tom's example made me think of a moral dilemma.

Suppose that, like Tom and a lot of people, my self image of myself is more youthful than the reality of my body.

If I have to enter my birthdate into my profile for the dating site, should I use a birthdate that more closely aligns with my maturity identification, or should I use the birthdate that was assigned to me at birth?

Hmm...I see your point. However, the mismatch inherent in my self-image is not of the sort that causes dysphoria. It's also not so much that my image is that I am 30, but that I can do the same things I did when I was 30 despite being 50. It would not make sense to list my age as 30, because my self-image isn't about the number, it's about the state of my body.

And I think there are people who do that. Not because their self-image is that they are thirty, but because their self-image is that they would be perceived as thirty, and therefore thirty year olds should be interested in them if they get past the age filter. I think those people are stupid, but won't go further down that line.

But anyway, to circle back, I don't think an age incongruence causes dysphoria to the same extent as gender incongruence. Or if it does, it has less of an effect on the outside world. If an old guy wears young clothes and listens to top 40, we might see him as trying to be hip. Hell, we might even feed it: every night club I've been in when I was younger had at least one older guy who was a regular. They got a lot of (positive) attention and everyone was their friend, though I don't recall anyone actually taking them home. But there aren't age segregated spaces. Maybe sports. But playing in a younger league (as an adult) may actually be allowed sometimes as advanced age is a disadvantage, not an advantage. (Punching up would be playing in a younger age league.)

If there were no significant ways in which men and women presented, expression of trans-identity would not be an issue to others. But then, without the differences, it also might not provide relief from dysphoria.

I'm rambling here, but if:

• We lived in a society that treated men and women the same. (No need for affirmative action, scholarships, etc.)
• All facilities were unisex and safe.
• Fashions and styles were not sex/gender specific.
• The popular sports of the day were all virtual, and there were no physical advantages (thus no mens/womens sports).

Would gender dysphoria still exist? Perhaps under another name? How would it be relieved short of surgery?

 

[Collin237]

I'm rambling here, but if:

• We lived in a society that treated men and women the same. (No need for affirmative action, scholarships, etc.)
• All facilities were unisex and safe.
• Fashions and styles were not sex/gender specific.
• The popular sports of the day were all virtual, and there were no physical advantages (thus no mens/womens sports).

Would gender dysphoria still exist? Perhaps under another name? How would it be relieved short of surgery?

That reminds me of a movie from many years ago. I can't remember the title; something like Mentors or Monitors, but I couldn't find it listed. Benevolent aliens were trying to perfect human society, and eventually gave up and left. And there was a voice-over at the end, saying something like if we didn't have all our problems, we wouldn't be human.

 

[TomB]

It's a relief, then, that the people who are actually qualified to pass judgement on this matter have definitively done so.


(And I think it's still fashionable in certain quarters to look for the "gay gene" as a way of quantifying homosexuality.....)

[sigh]
From what I've read in the DSM-5, they have a set of criteria. Those criteria are somewhat subjective and require judgement to decide if someone truly meets them and to what extent. That's not a criticism, it's the nature of psychology. Very little can be directly tested.

My point is simply that we do not have a clear objective definitive test for this condition. Which is far from unique. It's even common in physical medicine. My sister-in-law was recently diagnosed with Parkinson's for which there is also no specific test. But gosh, wouldn't it be nice if there were?

The implication I get from your comment is that you think referring to some sort of biological test for gender dysphoria is some means of questioning the validity of the condition rooted in some sort of bigotry. If this is you're stance, you are completely wrong and need to re-calibrate your logic.

But since I'm addressing you, let me touch on your continued reference to the DSM-5.

Unless I'm missing something, no one is disputing the contents of the DSM-5. I'll add to this the caveat that I don't have complete access to the DSM-5 as, not being a psychologist I don't feel the need to pay for it, and it's hard to tell from psychology web sites if I'm reading an excerpt or a summary.

DSM-5 describes a condition. It sets guidelines for diagnosis of the condition, which require professional judgment. For treatment, I see this repeated apparently word-for-word on several sites:

Treatment for Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents and Adults DSM-5 302.85 F64.1

When an individual is diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria sooner, it helps in lessening depression, distress and the possibility of attempts of committing suicide. (It is important to note that Gender Dysphoria is not the same as homosexuality.) Each person is different, and some are happy to cross dress, and other people may seek a total change, such as surgery to change the gender assignment.

Therapy should focus on how the individual is able to manage the problems he most probably will face with Gender Dysphoria. The individual should have a network of family members and others close to him for support.

Couples therapy helps, especially because it provides safe surroundings to be able to talk about the difficulties and distress the individual and his partner encounter. Group therapy is helpful, because the person has a network of others to support him and understand his difficulties. It also provides a setting that allows him to feel less isolated.

In addition, hormone therapy may be a benefit.

https://thriveworks.com/blog/gender-dysphoria-adolescents-adults/

I presume that that's either lifted from the text or a pretty good summary.

Things it does not appear to say:

1. Trans-women are women.
2. Trans-women are not women.
3. Trans-women should play in women's sports leagues.
4. Trans-women should not play in women's sports leagues.
5. Trans-women should use women's bathrooms.
6. Trans-women should not use women's bathrooms.
7. Trans-women should use women's locker rooms.
8. Trans-women should not use women's locker rooms.
9. Trans-women should be treated at all times like women.
10. Trans-women should not be treated at all times like women.

You get my point?

Unless you can quote a specific section that I'm not finding referenced, the DSM-5 does not prescribe how society should handle trans-people in daily situations. It prescribes actions that the trans-person can take to relieve dysphoria and notes that a support network can be helpful.

Again, if I'm wrong, please quote the relevant text. If you are referring to the works of psychologists outside the DSM-5, then please quote the specific expert's article where they say that.

But be aware that even researchers who agree on what is in DSM-5 may come to disparate conclusions about aspects of gender dysphoria. I work in the environmental field with a lot of climate scientists. I know first hand that agreement that global warming is happening does not mean there isn't a lot of debate about aspects of global warming.

 

[Collin237]

I don't see why not. You espoused positions that are trans-exclusionary. That will make you a TERF in the eyes on the TRAs.

I just changed my mind. I no longer support separate housing for trans people in prisons and shelters.

 

[theprestige]

Also the DSM is not intended to enable laymen to make diagnoses. It's intended to give trained professionals enough to go on, if they bring their professional training and experience to bear on the question.

Kind of like how patents aren't supposed to be complete schematics for the layman. They're supposed to be enough for someone "skilled in the art" to figure out what's going on and how to do it.

So I am categorically opposed to arguments based on the premise that all we need to do is read the DSM. No. That's all a trained and competent mental health professional needs to do. That, and apply their training and competence to what they read there. The rest of us need to do a hell of a lot more than read the DSM. Or we need to defer to the experts who have already done that work, and are qualified to apply the DSM.

This is why it's so heartening when LondonJohn asserts that the experts have reached sound and documented conclusions about all of this.

And this is why it's so disheartening when LondonJohn consistently does not cite any of the documented conclusions from the experts, to the questions we're asking.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What I don't get is: I'm liberal, centrist, universalist, etc.. You're a TERF. And yet we agree. How's that possible?

Probably because I'm not a TERF

I'm a centrist, split between a variety of liberal and conservative positions, mostly socially liberal mostly fiscally conservative, pragmatist, and borderline-autism-spectrum literalist who frequently doesn't get the joke.

 

[Meadmaker]

Hmm...I see your point. However, the mismatch inherent in my self-image is not of the sort that causes dysphoria. It's also not so much that my image is that I am 30, but that I can do the same things I did when I was 30 despite being 50. It would not make sense to list my age as 30, because my self-image isn't about the number, it's about the state of my body.

And I think there are people who do that. Not because their self-image is that they are thirty, but because their self-image is that they would be perceived as thirty, and therefore thirty year olds should be interested in them if they get past the age filter. I think those people are stupid, but won't go further down that line.

But anyway, to circle back, I don't think an age incongruence causes dysphoria to the same extent as gender incongruence. Or if it does, it has less of an effect on the outside world. If an old guy wears young clothes and listens to top 40, we might see him as trying to be hip. Hell, we might even feed it: every night club I've been in when I was younger had at least one older guy who was a regular. They got a lot of (positive) attention and everyone was their friend, though I don't recall anyone actually taking them home. But there aren't age segregated spaces. Maybe sports. But playing in a younger league (as an adult) may actually be allowed sometimes as advanced age is a disadvantage, not an advantage. (Punching up would be playing in a younger age league.)

If there were no significant ways in which men and women presented, expression of trans-identity would not be an issue to others. But then, without the differences, it also might not provide relief from dysphoria.

I'm rambling here, but if:

• We lived in a society that treated men and women the same. (No need for affirmative action, scholarships, etc.)
• All facilities were unisex and safe.
• Fashions and styles were not sex/gender specific.
• The popular sports of the day were all virtual, and there were no physical advantages (thus no mens/womens sports).

Would gender dysphoria still exist? Perhaps under another name? How would it be relieved short of surgery?

I think such a society would be incompatible with the current state of evolution in our species.

Whether we like it or not, both age and sex are very important to human beings. When someone experiences dysphoria about some aspect of their body, be it age, sex, intelligence, or something else, it can be very uncomfortable for them. When they insist that other people honor their internal self image rather than their measurable reality, it causes discomfort for others.

ETA: And I get that most people are willing to accept a small amount of discomfort in order to relieve some of the dysphoric person's discomfort, but there are limits.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think the whole definition thing is a meaningless waste of time, and I know the question wasn't directed at me, but how about this:

Female: of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes.

Male: of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
(https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=female+definition#dobs=female)

Woman: A person whose internal self-image is that of being female regardless of their physical phenotype.

Man: A person whose internal self-image is that of being female regardless of their physical phenotype.

I know the next question is going to be something along the lines of: "But in what way is this feeling of being a woman the same as the feeling of womanhood that Rolfe and Emily have?" The answer is that it may not be. But then, Rolfe and Emily may not actually feel being a woman in the same way either. I don't know and, if honest, neither do they. Just like I don't know how my feeling of manhood lines up with Meadmaker's feeling of manhood. They are amorphous concepts that can't readily be described, let alone measured or compared.

And that's why I think it's a waste of time to chase them.

And yes, yes, the historical meanings...

The concept of a self-image separate from sex was developed and inconveniently termed gender, which was already used. And as an extension man/women were redefined to refer to gender classifications. There is no way to reconcile the old and new definitions, and it's useless to try.

But a rose by any other name is still a rose. Somehow the particular words used have become more important than the concepts they describe. So the new "woman" is a group that includes the women (historical definition, less trans-men) and trans-women. And we're still fighting about defining the indefinable five threads later.

That's where the distinction was several years ago, with a clear distinction between sex and gender. And I'm content to continue with that distinction.

The problem arises when some people take the position that gender should replace sex as a protected characteristic, and that places/services/etc. that are currently sex-segregated should be changed to be gender-segregated.

 

[Collin237]

Probably because I'm not a TERF

I'm a centrist, split between a variety of liberal and conservative positions, mostly socially liberal mostly fiscally conservative, pragmatist, and borderline-autism-spectrum literalist who frequently doesn't get the joke.

The same as me. Except I have no fiscal position because economics bores me.

Also, I'm not much of a pragmatist. I like to have the slack ropes of knowledge neatly tied up in speculation, confident that I can rethink things when new information arrives.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I still count myself against all those people. Phobia isn't a policy position. It's a style of argumentation.

Similarly, I hate the BDS campaign for being antisemitic. But I also hate Netanyahu and the Likud party and I support Palestinian rights. I see no contradiction.

When I meet someone who is actually transphobic, I'm right there with you.

There's an entire discussion in place right now about the use of terms being used as slurs, and whether or not they're acceptable. I land on the "no, it's not okay" side of thing. Others have a different view.

The label of TERF and Transphobe gets thrown around a lot when it doesn't apply. It's gotten to a point where people (almost exclusively female people) get labeled transphobe and TERF for expressing the exact same views you do, in non-controversial ways. People (usually female) get labeled TERFs simply for refusing to accept the anti-science narrative that biological sex is a spectrum, or that biological sex is a social construct.

I have been called a TERF and a transphobe for refusing to refer to a transwoman who posted in this thread as a female, regardless of the fact that I was extremely consistent in using her preferred pronouns. She herself said she has a penis, but she insists that because she is "female" because of her gender identity, her penis is no longer a male organ, and everything about her body is now female... thus acknowledging that she is biological male was considered "hate speech" by her.

 

[Butter!]

I just changed my mind. I no longer support separate housing for trans people in prisons and shelters.

Based on what?

 

[Collin237]

People (usually female) get labeled TERFs simply for refusing to accept the anti-science narrative that biological sex is a spectrum, or that biological sex is a social construct.

Of course, biological sex is not a social construct. It is, however, a construct of evolution. Like all evolved traits, it's good enough for survival but not perfect. There are people who differ in some ways from the biological binary -- I think it's been mentioned in the thread a few times. It makes no difference to evolution as long as it doesn't stop reproduction from happening.

 

[Collin237]

Based on what?

Based on SuburbanTurkey's argument.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Wrong! I'm 49 years old, and I'm very brainy!

It's a play on an old joke: If you're young and you aren't a liberal, you have no heart; if you're old and you're not a conservative, you have no brain. It wasn't intended as a judgement on you personally. It's using the "aggregate you".

You'll also see that show yo as (g)you or you(g) sometimes.

 

[Emily's Cat]

How do you know? You can't read anyone's mind. I've had some pretty bizarre "internal images" myself occasionally. I certainly would never share them with someone I think might hate me!

My internal image of myself is about 4 inches taller than I actually am. I'm frequently surprised when I can't reach things.

Low grade body dysmorphia that doesn't reach the level of a disorder is incredibly common. As in... like 99% of all humans have an internal image of themselves that differs form objective reality.

It's just that for most of us, we don't experience distress from it. Most of us acknowledge that it's our brains that are wrong, and we can ignore that part of our stupid-brains. For some people, that part of their brains are a whole lot louder, and can't be ignored as well. Then they experience distress and it can reach the level of a behavioral disorder.

Anorexia and bulimia both fall into the category of a disorder, based on that body dysmorphia, because the patient is causing harm to themselves. People who get a lot of cosmetic surgery done, though, usually don't rise the the level of a disorder, because it's cosmetic and doesn't cause health problems. But some people do end up reaching a clinical level, they're essentially "addicted" to cosmetic surgeries, seeking to adapt their faces or their bodies to an internal representation that isn't achievable in reality.

 

[Emily's Cat]

A feeling that one knows to be imaginary is NOT a delusion!

You're not exactly wrong, I'm just not sure where you draw the line?

For example, if a transman knows very well that their body is female, they are a girl or a woman by every understanding of the term... but they also believe themselves to be a man (this transman)... is that a feeling that they know to be imaginary or is that a delusion? Or is it something else altogether?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I would say "they have the right to schedule their sex lives by day of the month like women, rather than by hour of the day like men". I would never even mention the word "egg". That's what I mean by style of argumentation.

Some of the comments we make are intended as humor - that was one of them. Some are also references to prior parts of the discussion. I know it's tough to catch when you're new, give it time, and just bear in mind that sometimes people aren't actually serious.

I'm a fan of the old-school "Can't tell if serious... " when someone says something that seems outlandish or out of character or just plain weird.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Irrelevant.

Well, yeah, most jokes are irrelevant in that they aren't part of an argument. Just some having fun with friends things.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No. Anti trans rights activism is toxic. There's plenty evidence of that right here in this thread, and it's still going on. I mean seriously, "egg production"? WTF?

When you find yourself monumentally bored with several hours on your hands, it's worth going back and re-reading all of the prior 4 volumes of this thread.

There are some very WTAF kinds of arguments made. Some of them are real head-scratchers, some result in accidentally spitting coffee out of your nose when you unexpectedly laugh.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What's the point of fighting for his right to produce eggs if he can't produce eggs?

They want to obligate other people to treat them as if they can produce eggs, even if they can't? And also, obligate society to grant them entitlements to egg-related services?

I dunno. We're kind of moving off into some twilight zone territory with this one.