Science Supports Trans People - Here is why

The world and medicine does not care what you accept. Autism and gender are a spectrum.

Wave your fist all you like, that fact isn't changing.

Why is being trans such a f**king issue? What's with the countless threads?

Wanna know the harsh reality of life? No one gives a bollocks. You could drop dead in the street and no one would care. So no one cares if you're trans or gay or whatever.

No one cares if "science supports trans" but like most threads on boards it's all hot air.

I suppose the idea is based on the fact that there are variations in the normal XX and XY karyotype, such as XXX and XXY. The mistake is to assume these variations represent other sexes though. They don't, as XXX is clearly female and XXY is clearly male. There are ambiguous exceptions, like people with androgen insensitivity or the woman in that Nature article, who has both male and female cells in her body but cases like that are incredibly rare and you can't really describe them as other sexes. They are exceptions to the normal binary rule.

Again I will repeat the basis for this line of argument is to say that there can only be two distinct genders based up your birth sex. It's a direct attempt to delegitimise the lived experience of people who have undergone gender reassigent and to slam the door in the face of those planning to do so in the future.

It's a direct attack on trans people's lives.

Hm.

Can you identify some of the points on this spectrum?

Obviously we all know there is Male and Female at either end. We've talked enough about trans-men and trans-women and I assume the goal of transition is to go from one end of the spectrum to the other? I would say that "non-binary" doesn't really count as creating a distinction between "binary" and "non-binary" is in itself a binary.

So can you name a few of the landmark points on the spectrum? How many are there?

Why don't we just refer to males and females when it comes to medical terminology or situations regarding private spaces etc? So a person can be a male but they socially identify as a "woman". Then obviously they can't compete in female sports because they are male. People with genetic disorders etc would fall under the umbrella of intersex and as such cases are so rare we can just deal with that as it arises?

Is it possible to have a biological sex that changes depending on the configuration of the night sky? So one could be male at midnight but female at noon and let's say non-binary when there is a full moon? Or would that be a gender rather than a biological sex? What would you call that?

Not really. Most people simply don't understand or are curious.

When hard questions are asked and then avoided or answered in an even more confusing fashion then this just breeds suspicion.

As far as acceptance goes? I always think about the poor lads out there who genuinely identify as attack helicopters but they face a lifetime of abuse and hatred from their own community because the far right got in there and claimed "attack helicopter" as their one trans joke. Where is the acceptance for them?

Most people are too preoccupied with themselves to give any consideration to trans issues. It's a concept most people don't understand, and if there are any questions asked, there are a vocal minority who will shout that it's transphobic to ask any questions, that asking questions is automatically a sign of hate, when it's actually an attempt to determine if anybody else's rights or freedoms are being infringed by trans rights. The same sex marriage referendum passed overwhelmingly because there were questions asked, and it could be seen by the majority that there was absolutely no infringement on anybody else's rights. It is only by asking questions that the general public can see how much/little is being asked. In both cases, there are some who have deep-seated feelings motivated by religious or other reasons, that it is "wrong", but most people are motivated by potential impacts on society.

The autism spectrum does not include neurotypical individuals or those who are neuro-diverse in other ways. For gender, it would be more appropriate to only consider those who are not at ease with their assigned gender as part of a spectrum. Also, before a person is accepted as being on the autism spectrum, there are a number of tests performed by qualified medical professionals to rule out other conditions that could be mistaken for ASD. Trans advocates want self identification to be sufficient for a person to socially transition from one gender to the other. This means that a person has had no medical evaluation to ensure that there are no underlying mental health issues, and to ensure they are making the correct decision for themselves, and that there isn't some treatment that is more appropriate for them. Also, by allowing people to self identify and then giving them access to what should be single-sex safe spaces it can reduce the access that is available to those who are not transgender. An example of this from the UK is here (Woman suing rape charity over transgender row - BBC News) where a woman who was raped did not feel comfortable at a sexual assault victims support group because there was a transwoman present who "presented as typically male, wearing male clothing".

This is before we get to questions about if changing language meanings is important, or if it is something that should be given any consideration, or if an argument in favour of transgender rights is actually reinforcing gender stereotypes, and if society in general would be a better place if we instead break down gender stereotypes. The question on legal recognition of gender becomes one on if gender should have any impact on how an individual is treated by the state, or if there is only a legitimate discrimination on the basis of biology.