Support NeoGAF

[Brian Griffin]

I'm going to have to disagree with everyone chiming in with "great op!" I admit I'm very ignorant when it comes to transgender issues but I want to learn and understand, so I've been wanting a topic like this to pop up here for a while now... but I think it would be nice if everyone involved wouldn't come across as so defensive and snarky when discussing these issues. I mean, I'm sure it gets old replying to people who just don't get it and don't want to get it both online and in real life, but I would enjoy not reading stuff like:

"First, nobody asked you."

"No. It isn't. Trans men are men. Trans women are women. It is not an opinion. It is established scientific fact."

As factual as that may or may not be it just puts me off from reading any further when we can't discuss things in a way that doesn't sound like five year olds arguing on the playground with "Nu-unh dummy! I am right and you are wrong!"

So, uh, in conclusion please be nice. I'd really like to see some great questions and answers here to help me understand.

Those responses that put you off were responses to things that are not up for discussion because there is nothing to discuss. Water is wet, fire is hot, the earth goes around the sun, and trans people are who they say they are.

You say you want to learn and understand so you should feel fortunate that you are amongst many experts on the topic. Just start asking questions. The teaching process might not always be what you want it to be but rest assured you will learn a great deal.

 

[BadWolf]

Thank you for this, learned a lot.

 

[Earthstrike]

Ok So Gender identity defined as "a person's private sense of, and subjective experience of, their own gender. This is generally described as one's private sense of being a man or a woman, consisting primarily of the acceptance of membership into a category of people: male or female"

But the category that the person believes they are in, Is a social Construct. The belief maybe scientific, the category is a social norm.

No, the contents of the category are social norms. The existence of the category is scientific.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

No. It isn't. Trans men are men. Trans women are women. It is not an opinion. It is established scientific fact.

Is it actually an established scientific fact that a trans man is biologically male? And that a trans woman is biologically female?

Genuine question, and I would like to see a research citation.

I'm not being argumentative, but I feel that if you are asking people to change their language and being dismissive, you should post citations.

If population X define male/man as someone of that biological sex, then you either need to:
a) convince them that the person is of that biological sex; or,
b) convince them that biological sex is not the most accurate language choice, and then explain why gender is the superior categorization.

 

[Mr. Sam]

Subscribed. This should come in handy. Thanks!

 

[FoneBone]

Also useful to make some suggestions:

"Tranny" is offensive to many. Don't use it.

"Transgender" and "transgendered" aren't nouns; don't refer to a trans person as "a transgender(ed)".

 

[FelixOrion]

Those responses that put you off were responses to things that are not up for discussion because there is nothing to discuss. Water is wet, fire is hot, the earth goes around the sun, and trans people are who they say they are.

You say you want to learn and understand so you should feel fortunate that you are amongst many experts on the topic. Just start asking questions. The teaching process might not always be what you want it to be but rest assured you will learn a great deal.

The defensive, snarky tone is still unhelpful, regardless.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Those responses that put you off were responses to things that are not up for discussion because there is nothing to discuss. Water is wet, fire is hot, the earth goes around the sun, and trans people are who they say they are.

You say you want to learn and understand so you should feel fortunate that you are amongst many experts on the topic. Just start asking questions. The teaching process might not always be what you want it to be but rest assured you will learn a great deal.

This is fallacious.

 

[Silver_key]

No, the contents of the category are social norms. The existence of the category is scientific.

This may be the crux of some of the discussions. Let me preface by saying that I believe in self-identification. That said, I think that we may be making the same mistake again as far as gender identification. That mistake being making rigid definitions. So instead of relying 100% on from-birth genitalia to define gender, we're now shifting to relying 100% on self-identification.

I think the answer is someone in the middle. I think that in our acceptance of our gay friends we widened our thoughts of what it is to be male and female. With that thought, it would be a natural progression to accept a trans, from-birth male as just a male in a different part of that wide male spectrum.

Again, I'm totally on-track with the original post. Just stoking the intellectual fires.

 

[dream]

The defensive, snarky tone is still unhelpful, regardless.

If you really want to learn about GAF's transgendered community, I would recommend ignoring Billiechu and talk to Shidoshi instead. She's always willing to answer questions without the snark and indignation you're encountering.

 

[Valhelm]

Great thread! As a hardened Tumblr veteran, I like to think that I'm rather familiar with trans* issues, and I've been surprised quite regularly at the ignorance, confusion, or even outright hate towards transgendered people on this site. Hopefully this will prevent future embarrassments!

 

[Pai Pai Master]

Thanks for the info. Glad people are putting stuff like this out so posters can inform themselves and be more inclusive. It's what makes GAF great. Except holy wars, who was being a dick in pants.

 

[tearsofash]

You might be able to get some better help at The Trans-GAF thread.

I used to post there.

 

[Monocle]

This is a timely thread. Kudos to thatbox for putting so much important information in an organized format for easy reference.

 

[Platy]

Only missing in Op is why terms like ladyboy and tranny should be avoided by all costs

Is it actually an established scientific fact that a trans man is biologically male? And that a trans woman is biologically female?

Genuine question, and I would like to see a research citation.

There really is a problem with that because people treat biology as black and white while it is MUCH more complicated than that.

For example :
A Clownfish who changed sex spontanialy is seen biologicaly as a member of the sex it changed, not the sex it has on it's cromossomes... but then again someone can claim that the "biological sex" means the chromossome, wich we all go to discuss chromossomatic alterations and how even saying "heterosomic" and "homosomic" (not sure if these are the correct english terms) works, because there are sets of animals (bees for example) wich the heterosomic is a female, while the homosomic is a male ... wich is the completly opposite from humans ... and then we get to the platypuses, wich has a CONSIDERABLE amount of sexual chromossomes and it's sexual diferention on this level is insanely complicated.
And lets not forget that testosterone rejection thing that makes XY people be born and live their entire lives don't even knowing they have an Y cromossome that is always posted on threads like this

But then again, Neuroscience is related to biology and there is absolutly NO way to denial that a transman has a male brain.

If you mean biology in "science in general" ... you can count, in a very sumarized way :

Antropology has mixed like biology, but considering how other cultures even created new "sexes" for transgendered people * , you can pretty much see that the problem with seeing transgender people with the gender they were assigned at birth is much rare when you take the amounts of culturee avaliable.

Feminists groups pretty much setted for transwoman = woman ... with very few sub-feminist groups disagreing with that (they usualy say that having a childhood with society seeing you as a female is important to womanhood .... so the problem is solved when people acept trans people when they are little and hormones are used as soon as possible)
A more transgendered focused feminist branch is called transfeminism

Legaly, it depends on the country, but it is not rare to see that a transman can be seen as a male and have your name changed without surgery and other medical interventions.


But my biggest problem is that even when you give such a simple and superficial description of those insanely complex themes, people don't even TRY to go against those stuff with actual theory (even non sourced like this simple post) and just say "meh that shemale it is a man" =P


* How good is this is actualy debatable, since they are basicaly doing the "white bathrom/black bathrom", but then again transgender people are in a position that even JUST being recognized is a good thing =P

 

[Milchjon]

Good read, thanks.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Only missing in Op is why terms like ladyboy and tranny should be avoided by all costs



There really is a problem with that because people treat biology as black and white while it is MUCH more complicated than that.

For example :
A Clownfish who changed sex spontanialy is seen biologicaly as a member of the sex it changed, not the sex it has on it's cromossomes... but then again someone can claim that the "biological sex" means the chromossome, wich we all go to discuss chromossomatic alterations and how even saying "heterosomic" and "homosomic" (not sure if these are the correct english terms) works, because there are sets of animals (bees for example) wich the heterosomic is a female, while the homosomic is a male ... wich is the completly opposite from humans ... and then we get to the platypuses, wich has a CONSIDERABLE amount of sexual chromossomes and it's sexual diferention on this level is insanely complicated.
And lets not forget that testosterone rejection thing that makes XY people be born and live their entire lives don't even knowing they have an Y cromossome that is always posted on threads like this

But then again, Neuroscience is related to biology and there is absolutly NO way to denial that a transman has a male brain.

If you mean biology in "science in general" ... you can count, in a very sumarized way :

Antropology has mixed like biology, but considering how other cultures even created new "sexes" for transgendered people * , you can pretty much see that the problem with seeing transgender people with the gender they were assigned at birth is much rare when you take the amounts of culturee avaliable.

Feminists groups pretty much setted for transwoman = woman ... with very few sub-feminist groups disagreing with that (they usualy say that having a childhood with society seeing you as a female is important to womanhood .... so the problem is solved when people acept trans people when they are little and hormones are used as soon as possible)
A more transgendered focused feminist branch is called transfeminism

Legaly, it depends on the country, but it is not rare to see that a transman can be seen as a male and have your name changed without surgery and other medical interventions.


But my biggest problem is that even when you give such a simple and superficial description of those insanely complex themes, people don't even TRY to go against those stuff and just say "meh that shemale it is a man" =P


* How good is this is actualy debatable, since they are basicaly doing the "white bathrom/black bathrom", but then again transgender people are in a position that even JUST being recognized is a good thing =P

First off: I identify people by their gender (i.e., I'm trans friendly).

Second: My issue is with people snidely stating that things are 'scientific fact' in this thread, when I haven't seen any cited research with humans (we aren't clownfish) stating that biological sex is actually changed for transgender people.

Yes, there are people who are in the middle; yes, gender and even sex isn't a binary in every case.

However, for the specific case of a person who is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain, my question is, "Is there a cited article which states: This person is biologically female."

People in this thread are dismissing those that are using biological sex determinism to make the classification of male vs female. I do not think you can dismiss that position as being 'wrong' without proof or significantly more explanation.

I don't happen to share that opinion, but I think it is unproductive to just say, "You're wrong. Nope."

 

[Brian Griffin]

Platy's post reminded me to point out that "shemale" is also very offensive, although I hope that goes without saying.

It's disappointing that most transgender porn is plastered with the word because I've really grown to like it in the past year or so. I actually have to give credit to trans porn for helping me really understand that trans women are just as much women as their cis counterparts, just with different equipment. It may sound weird but it's true.

 

[Arksy]

First off: I identify people by their gender (i.e., I'm trans friendly).

Second: My issue is with people snidely stating that things are 'scientific fact' in this thread, when I haven't seen any cited research with humans (we aren't clownfish) stating that biological sex is actually changed for transgender people.

Yes, there are people who are in the middle; yes, gender and even sex isn't a binary in every case.

However, for the specific case of a person who is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain, my question is, "Is there a cited article which states: This person is biologically female."

People in this thread are dismissing those that are using biological sex determinism to make the classification of male vs female. I do not think you can dismiss that position as being 'wrong' without proof or significantly more explanation.

I don't happen to share that opinion, but I think it is unproductive to just say, "You're wrong. Nope."

You have a very good point. The onus of proof is on the people asserting that position. I personally don't really care about the science, I'll call people whatever they wish to be called out of respect.

 

[soco]

Platy's post reminded me to point out that "shemale" is also very offensive, although I hope that goes without saying.

can someone update the OP with offensive terms that shouldn't be used, and the more accepted terms.

GAF is pretty international and as we saw in the other thread, there's a lot of misinformation about what's considered offensive and what's not.

 

[Gaborn]

First off: I identify people by their gender (i.e., I'm trans friendly).

Second: My issue is with people snidely stating that things are 'scientific fact' in this thread, when I haven't seen any cited research with humans (we aren't clownfish) stating that biological sex is actually changed for transgender people.

Yes, there are people who are in the middle; yes, gender and even sex isn't a binary in every case.

However, for the specific case of a person who is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain, my question is, "Is there a cited article which states: This person is biologically female."

People in this thread are dismissing those that are using biological sex determinism to make the classification of male vs female. I do not think you can dismiss that position as being 'wrong' without proof or significantly more explanation.

I don't happen to share that opinion, but I think it is unproductive to just say, "You're wrong. Nope."

Here's the problem: Suppose that you're dating a woman. A beautiful woman. She was born with a vagina. She has sex with you and you're both completely compatible. You love each other and want to spend your lives together. You get a fertility test and you're fine... but she has an anomaly. So she undergoes some more tests and it turns out she has AIS, that is, she was an XY baby that was immune to testosterone and so she developed as a completely normal and healthy girl and no one ever knew, including her.

Would it make a difference? People who claim that "biology" and "DNA" matters aren't coming off honestly because they're coming across as if 1. that they intend to impregnate every woman they date and the inability to do so is the reason they refuse to date and 2. That they honestly are interested in testing their date's chromosomes, that its EXTREMELY important that their chromosomes are XY for some reason they're not very clear on.

 

[thatbox]

First off: I identify people by their gender (i.e., I'm trans friendly).

Second: My issue is with people snidely stating that things are 'scientific fact' in this thread, when I haven't seen any cited research with humans (we aren't clownfish) stating that biological sex is actually changed for transgender people.

Yes, there are people who are in the middle; yes, gender and even sex isn't a binary in every case.

However, for the specific case of a person who is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain, my question is, "Is there a cited article which states: This person is biologically female."

People in this thread are dismissing those that are using biological sex determinism to make the classification of male vs female. I do not think you can dismiss that position as being 'wrong' without proof or significantly more explanation.

I don't happen to share that opinion, but I think it is unproductive to just say, "You're wrong. Nope."

Well, it depends on what you mean by "biological." We can't change chromosomes, but why would we have to? We can change the endocrine system, which is all that chromosomes do in the first place. We can address pretty much everything that matters for interpersonal relationships, and I don't think it's healthy to take the view that you won't refer to someone with the correct words unless they produce their papers.

 

[JessicaPadkin]

Only missing in Op is why terms like ladyboy and tranny should be avoided by all costs

Platy's post reminded me to point out that "shemale" is also very offensive, although I hope that goes without saying.

The whole "trap" routine needs to die a death too. I can at least buy that someone might use the above phrases in ignorance, but the trap thing is mean-spirited no matter how you slice it.

 

[Arksy]

Well, it depends on what you mean by "biological." We can't change chromosomes, but why would we have to? We can change the endocrine system, which is all that chromosomes do in the first place. We can address pretty much everything that matters for interpersonal relationships, and I don't think it's healthy to take the view that you won't refer to someone with the correct words unless they produce their papers.

I agree with your sentiments, but they're exactly that, sentiments. They don't in and of their own prove anything. If you wish to espouse a point of view which you deem is factually correct and scientific fact you should be able to provide some evidence for why this is the case.

Edit: By no means trying to be offensive. You also argued it's a matter of courtesy and you would be correct on that point. I'm only asking about the science.

 

[gblues]

Something I don't see addressed in the OP (unless I'm blind) is what "cis" means. It just jumps into cis-this and cis-that. I figured it out with context, but something more explicit would be preferable.

 

[Zoe]

Here's the problem: Suppose that you're dating a woman. A beautiful woman. She was born with a vagina. She has sex with you and you're both completely compatible. You love each other and want to spend your lives together. You get a fertility test and you're fine... but she has an anomaly. So she undergoes some more tests and it turns out she has AIS, that is, she was an XY baby that was immune to testosterone and so she developed as a completely normal and healthy girl and no one ever knew, including her.

Is that even a plausible scenario? Wouldn't something have appeared amiss by never menstruating with puberty?

 

[Lancehead]

Something I don't see addressed in the OP (unless I'm blind) is what "cis" means. It just jumps into cis-this and cis-that. I figured it out with context, but something more explicit would be preferable.

It is?

Most people are cisgender, which means that they were fortunate enough to be born with bodies that match their gender identities - when you know you're a guy and you have a masculine body.

 

[Brian Griffin]

Something I don't see addressed in the OP (unless I'm blind) is what "cis" means. It just jumps into cis-this and cis-that. I figured it out with context, but something more explicit would be preferable.

I have some terrible news..... you're blind.

Most people are cisgender, which means that they were fortunate enough to be born with bodies that match their gender identities - when you know you're a guy and you have a masculine body. Cis people usually do not have a strong conscious awareness of being cis, because they aren't faced with a disconnect to bring the concept of gender identity to their attention.

Cisgender is like heterosexual. We don't say there are "normal" people and "gay" people, there are heterosexual and homosexual people just like there are cisgender and transgender people.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Here's the problem: Suppose that you're dating a woman. A beautiful woman. She was born with a vagina. She has sex with you and you're both completely compatible. You love each other and want to spend your lives together. You get a fertility test and you're fine... but she has an anomaly. So she undergoes some more tests and it turns out she has AIS, that is, she was an XY baby that was immune to testosterone and so she developed as a completely normal and healthy girl and no one ever knew, including her.

Would it make a difference? People who claim that "biology" and "DNA" matters aren't coming off honestly because they're coming across as if 1. that they intend to impregnate every woman they date and the inability to do so is the reason they refuse to date and 2. That they honestly are interested in testing their date's chromosomes, that its EXTREMELY important that their chromosomes are XY for some reason they're not very clear on.

Well, it depends on what you mean by "biological." We can't change chromosomes, but why would we have to? We can change the endocrine system, which is all that chromosomes do in the first place. We can address pretty much everything that matters for interpersonal relationships, and I don't think it's healthy to take the view that you won't refer to someone with the correct words unless they produce their papers.

Neither of these responses answer my question.

I'm not asking whether there is a sliding scale and whether there are exceptions.
I'm also not arguing whether something 'matters' or not, or whether it should matter, or to whom it should matter.
Furthermore, my question had nothing to do with 'showing your papers' or respectfulness. I think it is completely disrespectful and apathetic for you to disregard someone's identity.

But semantically, you can't dismiss others as being wrong when they aren't. You either need to convince them to use your lexicon, or show them how their terminology is factually incorrect.

So, if we are talking about this case:

A person is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain.

Is there a cited hard science article which states: "This person is biologically female"?

If not, then you are asking people to accept a different paradigm than they correctly learned, so it shouldn't be stated with snark or condescension. That almost never serves to forward your cause or change minds.

And I'm also genuinely curious to read that paper for my own interest.

 

[injurai]

it's a good thing we got this thread. That other thread was a nightmare to read through.

 

[jaxword]

Did you get any angry pms or emails, thatbox?

 

[Gaborn]

Neither of these responses answer my question.

I'm not asking whether there is a sliding scale and whether there are exceptions.
I'm also not arguing whether something 'matters' or not, or whether it should matter, or to whom it should matter.
Furthermore, my question had nothing to do with 'showing your papers' or respectfulness. I think it is completely disrespectful and apathetic for you to disregard someone's identity.

But semantically, you can't dismiss others as being wrong when they aren't. You either need to convince them to use your lexicon, or show them how their terminology is factually incorrect.

So, if we are talking about this case:

A person is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain.

Is there a cited hard science article which states: "This person is biologically female"?

If not, then you are asking people to accept a different paradigm than they correctly learned, so it shouldn't be stated with snark or condescension. That almost never serves to forward your cause or change minds.

And I'm also genuinely curious to read that paper for my own interest.

No, but that's part of why science has long separated SEX and GENDER. It's also why for example "sex change" has gone out of favor as a term. Although there is research out there that suggests trans peoples brains are more similar to their gender than their sex, that is, a trans woman's brain will be more similar to a cis woman's brain than a male brain even though she's a genetic male herself. Same with trans men.

 

[Mumei]

But semantically, you can't dismiss others as being wrong when they aren't. You either need to convince them to use your lexicon, or show them how their terminology is factually incorrect.

Insofar as you agree with the statement that, "I think it is completely disrespectful and apathetic for you to disregard someone's identity," it seems that their position - which is to be respectful of the person's identity and use the nomenclature that they wish for you to use when referring to them - is already one you should agree with, even if you are not convinced that it is factually correct to use "male" or "female" in a particular instance because you think a different paradigm is more accurate.

 

[Deleted member 47027]

Cisgender is like heterosexual. We don't say there are "normal" people and "gay" people, there are heterosexual and homosexual people just like there are cisgender and transgender people.

I've had cisgender thrown at me like a slur, I don't even know how I'm supposed to feel but I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable at being myself.

 

[Emitan]

I've had cisgender thrown at me like a slur, I don't even know how I'm supposed to feel but I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable at being myself.

Really? That's... weird.

 

[Brian Griffin]

I've had cisgender thrown at me like a slur, I don't even know how I'm supposed to feel but I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable at being myself.

I used to call me little brother a "human" as an insult. I was like 10 though... sooo.... yeah, weird.

 

[Hop]

I've had cisgender thrown at me like a slur, I don't even know how I'm supposed to feel but I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable at being myself.

There are, absolutely, trans folk with an outward anger towards the heteronormative, cis-focused world. And usually, they have outward anger towards everything else, because they're assholes. I knew a trans girl like that and even trans-friendly folk couldn't stand her at all. (Hell I can't stand her.)

 

[Keru_Shiri]

I've had cisgender thrown at me like a slur, I don't even know how I'm supposed to feel but I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable at being myself.

I wonder if that person knew what cisgender meant. Devoid of context, I imagine it could look or sound like a slur. Hell, my Firefox doesn't even have the term in its spellchecker, and thinks I meant to say "transgender."

I'm curious, what is the etymology of the "cis" prefix? (at work, so I'm caution about using google)

 

[Empty]

the 'how do people know they're trans?' section was interesting. can anyone recommend a book or even a film looking at the experience and emotions of having gender dysphoria. i have difficulties fully understanding and relating to trans issues as those feelings are so alien to me and i don't know any transgender people irl.

 

[Aeana]

I wonder if that person knew what cisgender meant. Devoid of context, I imagine it could look or sound like a slur. Hell, my Firefox doesn't even have the term in its spellchecker, and thinks I meant to say "transgender."

I'm curious, what is the etymology of the "cis" prefix? (at work, so I'm caution about using google)

Cis is the opposite of trans in Latin. The primary place you'll run into it these days is in chemistry, in reference to isomers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis–trans_isomerism

 

[abusori]

Excellent thread OP, thanks for writing this up.

 

[Emitan]

I wonder if that person knew what cisgender meant. Devoid of context, I imagine it could look or sound like a slur. Hell, my Firefox doesn't even have the term in its spellchecker, and thinks I meant to say "transgender."

I'm curious, what is the etymology of the "cis" prefix? (at work, so I'm caution about using google)

Roughly means "the same side" as opposed to trans meaning "across". So gender and sex being the same instead of opposite like a trans person.

 

[Femmeworth]

Good job, thatbox.

Nitpick: While terms such as "male" and "female" can refer to gender, I think they should be only used when talking about biological sex.

 

[Levyne]

nvm

 

[Keru_Shiri]

Cis is the opposite of trans in Latin. The primary place you'll run into it these days is in chemistry, in reference to isomers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis–trans_isomerism

Roughly means "the same side" as opposed to trans meaning "across". So gender and sex being the same instead of opposite like a trans person.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the responses!

Edit: And let me echo the praise towards the OP. Very informative.

 

[Deleted member 47027]

There are, absolutely, trans folk with an outward anger towards the heteronormative, cis-focused world. And usually, they have outward anger towards everything else, because they're assholes. I knew a trans girl like that and even trans-friendly folk couldn't stand her at all. (Hell I can't stand her.)

Context is everything, but I think I just know a bunch of trans assholes too, so that might be part of it. Left me feeling shamed and dirty though.

 

[PhoenixDark]

No, but that's part of why science has long separated SEX and GENDER. It's also why for example "sex change" has gone out of favor as a term. Although there is research out there that suggests trans peoples brains are more similar to their gender than their sex, that is, a trans woman's brain will be more similar to a cis woman's brain than a male brain even though she's a genetic male herself. Same with trans men.

Yet sex and gender and constantly blurred in these threads. The SEX of a mtf transsexual is male in the vast majority of cases, yet they identify with the female gender. But in more than a few threads, people have denied scientific facts about sex and instead argued identity (or, gender) trumps sex and if you don't agree you are wrong (at best) or a bigot (at worst)

I am not denying that transpeople should be called whatever pronoun they identify with, but I am troubled by the almost buffet approach to biological science on display whenever this subject arises

 

[Gaborn]

Yet sex and gender and constantly blurred in these threads. The SEX of a mtf transsexual is male in the vast majority of cases, yet they identify with the female gender. But in more than a few threads, people have denied scientific facts about sex and instead argued identity (or, gender) trumps sex.

I am not denying that transpeople should be called whatever pronoun they identify with, but I am troubled by the almost buffet approach to biological science on display whenever this subject arises

It does in all but a tiny number of medical cases. You have NO idea whether your last GF was chromosomally female, its simply not something that is tested unless there is a reason to suspect a problem medically.

 

[Devolution]

Yet sex and gender and constantly blurred in these threads. The SEX of a mtf transsexual is male in the vast majority of cases, yet they identify with the female gender. But in more than a few threads, people have denied scientific facts about sex and instead argued identity (or, gender) trumps sex.

I am not denying that transpeople should be called whatever pronoun they identify with, but I am troubled by the almost buffet approach to biological science on display whenever this subject arises

What would you like the biological science to be about?

 

[Emitan]

Context is everything, but I think I just know a bunch of trans assholes too, so that might be part of it. Left me feeling shamed and dirty though.

You shouldn't feel that way

Someone was just being an asshole.