Can We Discuss Sex & Gender / Transgender People?

[Trausti]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date. We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them. Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

Yeah, no. A man in a dress is a man in a dress.

New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

Virtually all heterosexuals excluded trans folks from their dating pool: only 1.8% of straight women and 3.3% of straight men chose a trans person of either binary gender. But most non-heterosexuals weren’t down for dating a trans person either, with only 11.5% of gay men and 29% of lesbians being trans-inclusive in their dating preferences.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Hi I am new here but I have been reading for about a month. I hope this is the right forum for this because it has become a political issue. If it's the wrong forum, I apologize.

With that said, I am looking to see if any of you guys can help me understand sex and gender and transgender people because it has been driving me nuts when I think about it. I want to say first off that I have no problem with trans people. If someone wants to dress or act a certain way, that is fine by me. My issue is with the gender/sex subject.

I have been reading the subject and I hear, "Sex and gender are different. They have nothing to do with each other." This confuses me because people say around 99% of people are "cisgender", which means your gender and sex match. But how can gender and sex "match" if they have nothing to do with each other? Saying they match is implying that sex and gender are the same thing and there is a right way and a wrong way, yet people insist on saying they have nothing to do with each other. For example, if someone is a born male and identifies as a man, people say they are cisgender because their sex and gender match. This implies there is a right way to be male and a right way to be female. Otherwise, how can you say they match?

Transgender people are "people whose gender identity differs from their birth sex." But if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other, how can someone state that "my gender differs from my birth sex?" This implies that a person's gender should be the same as their birth sex. But, this is in direct contradiction to the fact that people say, "sex and gender are different and have nothing to do with each other." But for 99% of people, sex and gender are the same. For example, when people find out the sex of their baby, they say, "it's a boy" or "it's a girl." But how can they say this when they only know the baby's sex and not their gender? We are told that only the person themselves can decide what gender they are. So this implies parents should say, "I found out my baby will be born with a penis. But, I have no idea if it will be a boy or girl because they haven't decided their gender yet." Nobody says this. They all say "boy" or "girl" and give the baby "he" and "she" pronouns before they are even born. This implies sex and gender are the same thing. So if 99% of people are comfortable with their gender and sex being the same thing, how can people still claim gender and sex have nothing to do with each other?

So when trans women say, "I was assigned male at birth but I now identify as a woman," this implies that people who are assigned male at birth are supposed to identify as a man. But, how can this be if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other? If someone is assigned male at birth and identifies as a woman, how can this even be considered "transgender" if sex and gender are supposed to have nothing to do with each other? One can just as easily say, "I was born male and I identify as a man and I am transgender becuase sex and gender have nothing to do with each other. Being a man doesn't have anything to do with my penis." The term "transgender" implies that gender and sex should match each other. But if they match this implies gender and sex are the same thing despite the fact people say they are completely different.

Can you guys see the point I am trying to make here? I am trying to explain it as best as I can. Let me summarize: On one hand, people say gender and sex are completely different and have nothing to do with each other. Yet, 99% of people are "cisgender," which means that your gender and sex are the same thing. Can anyone solve this contradiction? I've been trying to for a while and I can't think of a good answer. This is why I'm asking you guys. As I said, I have no problem with trans people. I just feel like there is a big contradiction here with these definitions. I hope you guys can answer these questions for me. I've been driving myself nuts thinking about this.

It has something to do with the fractional anisotropy of my right inferior occipito-frontal fasciculus, which is a gray matter tract that passes backward from my frontal lobe along the lateral border caudate nucleus and radiates in a fan-like manner, on the corona radiata, into the temporal and occipital lobes lateral to the posterior and inferior cornua. Effectively, a certain set of signals, between my frontal and occipital lobe, are drawn into a "tighter beam" than those of a cis-male.

This is most likely true specifically because I am attracted to the male sex. Transgender women that are bisexual or homosexual, with respect to their gender identity, exist, but the causation has been suspected to be different in a large proportion of cases. I do not pretend to understand that other proposed causation. I think that it has something to do with the putamen and some part of the hypothalamus.

Anyhow, while that white matter tract, alone, is only partly cross-gender, it is also true that gay men and androsexual trans-women are frequently found to have ultra-cross-sex development in certain other parts of their brains. Interestingly enough, some of us can actually be more female than female, in certain respects. This might be selection bias, though. I suspect that it takes a stronger neurological bias for an assigned male at birth (AMAB) to admit to being attracted to men than it takes for the average cis-woman to stay content with her socially expected role in society.

Exceptions to all of this most likely do exist, but I doubt that I am one of them.

 

[Politesse]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date. We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them. Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

Yeah, no. A man in a dress is a man in a dress.

New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

Virtually all heterosexuals excluded trans folks from their dating pool: only 1.8% of straight women and 3.3% of straight men chose a trans person of either binary gender. But most non-heterosexuals weren’t down for dating a trans person either, with only 11.5% of gay men and 29% of lesbians being trans-inclusive in their dating preferences.

Attraction isn't the same thing as dating.

Even the most assholish of straight guys don't actually treat trans women exactly as though they were men. Especially if they don't know that they are trans women.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date. We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them. Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

Yeah, no. A man in a dress is a man in a dress.

New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

Virtually all heterosexuals excluded trans folks from their dating pool: only 1.8% of straight women and 3.3% of straight men chose a trans person of either binary gender. But most non-heterosexuals weren’t down for dating a trans person either, with only 11.5% of gay men and 29% of lesbians being trans-inclusive in their dating preferences.

Attraction isn't the same thing as dating.

Even the most assholish of straight guys don't actually treat trans women exactly as though they were men. Especially if they don't know that they are trans women.

The only time that those types of men treat me like a man are when I tell them I enjoy being treated like a woman.

Allow me to amend that. I do not really enjoy being treated in the way that those types of men treat a woman.

I enjoy being treated in the way that an interesting, worldly, charming, endlessly loquacious, highly educated college professor treats a woman, especially if they are ticklish and enjoy watching intellectually stimulating cartoons on Netflix (you know, the ones that are like acid trips) while sipping on a good Rioja Tempranillo. Bonus points if they bring shrooms, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

 

[Politesse]

Allow me to amend that. I do not really enjoy being treated in the way that those types of men treat a woman.

I enjoy being treated in the way that an interesting, worldly, charming, endlessly loquacious, highly educated college professor treats a woman, especially if they are ticklish and enjoy watching intellectually stimulating cartoons on Netflix (you know, the ones that are like acid trips) while sipping on a good Rioja Tempranillo. Bonus points if they bring shrooms, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Yeah. I kind of like guys, but I've never quite understood what straight women see in them. (given how the stupid "war of the sexes" has painted the distinction and set expectations of interaction...)

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Allow me to amend that. I do not really enjoy being treated in the way that those types of men treat a woman.

I enjoy being treated in the way that an interesting, worldly, charming, endlessly loquacious, highly educated college professor treats a woman, especially if they are ticklish and enjoy watching intellectually stimulating cartoons on Netflix (you know, the ones that are like acid trips) while sipping on a good Rioja Tempranillo. Bonus points if they bring shrooms, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Yeah. I kind of like guys, but I've never quite understood what straight women see in them.

Blame it on Disney. This is strongly related to why women can have such unbelievably poor taste in men.

 

[Trausti]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date. We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them. Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

Yeah, no. A man in a dress is a man in a dress.

New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

Virtually all heterosexuals excluded trans folks from their dating pool: only 1.8% of straight women and 3.3% of straight men chose a trans person of either binary gender. But most non-heterosexuals weren’t down for dating a trans person either, with only 11.5% of gay men and 29% of lesbians being trans-inclusive in their dating preferences.

Attraction isn't the same thing as dating.

Even the most assholish of straight guys don't actually treat trans women exactly as though they were men. Especially if they don't know that they are trans women.

They’re blind?

 

[SigmatheZeta]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date. We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them. Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

Yeah, no. A man in a dress is a man in a dress.

New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

Virtually all heterosexuals excluded trans folks from their dating pool: only 1.8% of straight women and 3.3% of straight men chose a trans person of either binary gender. But most non-heterosexuals weren’t down for dating a trans person either, with only 11.5% of gay men and 29% of lesbians being trans-inclusive in their dating preferences.

Attraction isn't the same thing as dating.

Even the most assholish of straight guys don't actually treat trans women exactly as though they were men. Especially if they don't know that they are trans women.

They’re blind?

Retrospectively, I think that @Politesse was referring to those trans-women that choose to go stealth. You would not believe how effective some cunning make-up tricks are at hiding someone's assigned sex at birth, especially years after having started hormone-replacement therapy.

I am non-stealth, myself, so @Politesse's intended meaning flew a bit over my head, momentarily.

 

[Generation55]

Hi I am new here but I have been reading for about a month. I hope this is the right forum for this because it has become a political issue. If it's the wrong forum, I apologize.

With that said, I am looking to see if any of you guys can help me understand sex and gender and transgender people because it has been driving me nuts when I think about it. I want to say first off that I have no problem with trans people. If someone wants to dress or act a certain way, that is fine by me. My issue is with the gender/sex subject.

I have been reading the subject and I hear, "Sex and gender are different. They have nothing to do with each other." This confuses me because people say around 99% of people are "cisgender", which means your gender and sex match. But how can gender and sex "match" if they have nothing to do with each other? Saying they match is implying that sex and gender are the same thing and there is a right way and a wrong way, yet people insist on saying they have nothing to do with each other. For example, if someone is a born male and identifies as a man, people say they are cisgender because their sex and gender match. This implies there is a right way to be male and a right way to be female. Otherwise, how can you say they match?

Transgender people are "people whose gender identity differs from their birth sex." But if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other, how can someone state that "my gender differs from my birth sex?" This implies that a person's gender should be the same as their birth sex. But, this is in direct contradiction to the fact that people say, "sex and gender are different and have nothing to do with each other." But for 99% of people, sex and gender are the same. For example, when people find out the sex of their baby, they say, "it's a boy" or "it's a girl." But how can they say this when they only know the baby's sex and not their gender? We are told that only the person themselves can decide what gender they are. So this implies parents should say, "I found out my baby will be born with a penis. But, I have no idea if it will be a boy or girl because they haven't decided their gender yet." Nobody says this. They all say "boy" or "girl" and give the baby "he" and "she" pronouns before they are even born. This implies sex and gender are the same thing. So if 99% of people are comfortable with their gender and sex being the same thing, how can people still claim gender and sex have nothing to do with each other?

So when trans women say, "I was assigned male at birth but I now identify as a woman," this implies that people who are assigned male at birth are supposed to identify as a man. But, how can this be if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other? If someone is assigned male at birth and identifies as a woman, how can this even be considered "transgender" if sex and gender are supposed to have nothing to do with each other? One can just as easily say, "I was born male and I identify as a man and I am transgender becuase sex and gender have nothing to do with each other. Being a man doesn't have anything to do with my penis." The term "transgender" implies that gender and sex should match each other. But if they match this implies gender and sex are the same thing despite the fact people say they are completely different.

Can you guys see the point I am trying to make here? I am trying to explain it as best as I can. Let me summarize: On one hand, people say gender and sex are completely different and have nothing to do with each other. Yet, 99% of people are "cisgender," which means that your gender and sex are the same thing. Can anyone solve this contradiction? I've been trying to for a while and I can't think of a good answer. This is why I'm asking you guys. As I said, I have no problem with trans people. I just feel like there is a big contradiction here with these definitions. I hope you guys can answer these questions for me. I've been driving myself nuts thinking about this.

It has something to do with the fractional anisotropy of my right inferior occipito-frontal fasciculus, which is a gray matter tract that passes backward from my frontal lobe along the lateral border caudate nucleus and radiates in a fan-like manner, on the corona radiata, into the temporal and occipital lobes lateral to the posterior and inferior cornua. Effectively, a certain set of signals, between my frontal and occipital lobe, are drawn into a "tighter beam" than those of a cis-male.

This is most likely true specifically because I am attracted to the male sex. Transgender women that are bisexual or homosexual, with respect to their gender identity, exist, but the causation has been suspected to be different in a large proportion of cases. I do not pretend to understand that other proposed causation. I think that it has something to do with the putamen and some part of the hypothalamus.

Anyhow, while that white matter tract, alone, is only partly cross-gender, it is also true that gay men and androsexual trans-women are frequently found to have ultra-cross-sex development in certain other parts of their brains. Interestingly enough, some of us can actually be more female than female, in certain respects. This might be selection bias, though. I suspect that it takes a stronger neurological bias for an assigned male at birth (AMAB) to admit to being attracted to men than it takes for the average cis-woman to stay content with her socially expected role in society.

Exceptions to all of this most likely do exist, but I doubt that I am one of them.

Thank you for replying. It is interesting you mention this stuff about the brain. I have been doing some reading and it says there are differences in transgender brains and male and female brains. However, transgender brains are still male or female, right? So why call it a transgender brain? I also read some articles about how there are no differences between brains and it's a sexist myth. How do I know which is true? Also, why do transgender people claim they are transitioning from male to female or female to male? I thought it was only about gender and you can't change your sex? This is all so confusing to me.

I also would like a response to post #58. Can you guys really say with a straight face that a man can get pregnant, even if they are a trans man? Doesn't it just feel intuitively wrong to say "a man can get pregnant?" This is what causes a lot of conservatives to claim that liberals can't follow science because they claim "men can get pregnant."

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Hi I am new here but I have been reading for about a month. I hope this is the right forum for this because it has become a political issue. If it's the wrong forum, I apologize.

With that said, I am looking to see if any of you guys can help me understand sex and gender and transgender people because it has been driving me nuts when I think about it. I want to say first off that I have no problem with trans people. If someone wants to dress or act a certain way, that is fine by me. My issue is with the gender/sex subject.

I have been reading the subject and I hear, "Sex and gender are different. They have nothing to do with each other." This confuses me because people say around 99% of people are "cisgender", which means your gender and sex match. But how can gender and sex "match" if they have nothing to do with each other? Saying they match is implying that sex and gender are the same thing and there is a right way and a wrong way, yet people insist on saying they have nothing to do with each other. For example, if someone is a born male and identifies as a man, people say they are cisgender because their sex and gender match. This implies there is a right way to be male and a right way to be female. Otherwise, how can you say they match?

Transgender people are "people whose gender identity differs from their birth sex." But if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other, how can someone state that "my gender differs from my birth sex?" This implies that a person's gender should be the same as their birth sex. But, this is in direct contradiction to the fact that people say, "sex and gender are different and have nothing to do with each other." But for 99% of people, sex and gender are the same. For example, when people find out the sex of their baby, they say, "it's a boy" or "it's a girl." But how can they say this when they only know the baby's sex and not their gender? We are told that only the person themselves can decide what gender they are. So this implies parents should say, "I found out my baby will be born with a penis. But, I have no idea if it will be a boy or girl because they haven't decided their gender yet." Nobody says this. They all say "boy" or "girl" and give the baby "he" and "she" pronouns before they are even born. This implies sex and gender are the same thing. So if 99% of people are comfortable with their gender and sex being the same thing, how can people still claim gender and sex have nothing to do with each other?

So when trans women say, "I was assigned male at birth but I now identify as a woman," this implies that people who are assigned male at birth are supposed to identify as a man. But, how can this be if sex and gender have nothing to do with each other? If someone is assigned male at birth and identifies as a woman, how can this even be considered "transgender" if sex and gender are supposed to have nothing to do with each other? One can just as easily say, "I was born male and I identify as a man and I am transgender becuase sex and gender have nothing to do with each other. Being a man doesn't have anything to do with my penis." The term "transgender" implies that gender and sex should match each other. But if they match this implies gender and sex are the same thing despite the fact people say they are completely different.

Can you guys see the point I am trying to make here? I am trying to explain it as best as I can. Let me summarize: On one hand, people say gender and sex are completely different and have nothing to do with each other. Yet, 99% of people are "cisgender," which means that your gender and sex are the same thing. Can anyone solve this contradiction? I've been trying to for a while and I can't think of a good answer. This is why I'm asking you guys. As I said, I have no problem with trans people. I just feel like there is a big contradiction here with these definitions. I hope you guys can answer these questions for me. I've been driving myself nuts thinking about this.

It has something to do with the fractional anisotropy of my right inferior occipito-frontal fasciculus, which is a gray matter tract that passes backward from my frontal lobe along the lateral border caudate nucleus and radiates in a fan-like manner, on the corona radiata, into the temporal and occipital lobes lateral to the posterior and inferior cornua. Effectively, a certain set of signals, between my frontal and occipital lobe, are drawn into a "tighter beam" than those of a cis-male.

This is most likely true specifically because I am attracted to the male sex. Transgender women that are bisexual or homosexual, with respect to their gender identity, exist, but the causation has been suspected to be different in a large proportion of cases. I do not pretend to understand that other proposed causation. I think that it has something to do with the putamen and some part of the hypothalamus.

Anyhow, while that white matter tract, alone, is only partly cross-gender, it is also true that gay men and androsexual trans-women are frequently found to have ultra-cross-sex development in certain other parts of their brains. Interestingly enough, some of us can actually be more female than female, in certain respects. This might be selection bias, though. I suspect that it takes a stronger neurological bias for an assigned male at birth (AMAB) to admit to being attracted to men than it takes for the average cis-woman to stay content with her socially expected role in society.

Exceptions to all of this most likely do exist, but I doubt that I am one of them.

Thank you for replying. It is interesting you mention this stuff about the brain. I have been doing some reading and it says there are differences in transgender brains and male and female brains. However, transgender brains are still male or female, right? So why call it a transgender brain? I also read some articles about how there are no differences between brains and it's a sexist myth. How do I know which is true? Also, why do transgender people claim they are transitioning from male to female or female to male? I thought it was only about gender and you can't change your sex? This is all so confusing to me.

I also would like a response to post #58. Can you guys really say with a straight face that a man can get pregnant, even if they are a trans man? Doesn't it just feel intuitively wrong to say "a man can get pregnant?" This is what causes a lot of conservatives to claim that liberals can't follow science because they claim "men can get pregnant."

\What has you confused is ideology. I do not care a rodent's rectum about it. I am telling you that my brain is physically different, and I really preferred being called "she" and "her" when you talk about me in conversation, bitte-danke. Beyond that, I believe that most of the ideology about gender, either way, is stupid. I cannot be bothered to provide you with several years' worth of education about neuroanatomy, and getting my gender right, whenever you talk about me with others, is probably the easiest way that you will ever make friends with somebody.

Furthermore, I disagree with the deconstructionist approach. According to Nick Haslam, it is a counterproductive approach, and when fighting back against essentialism, we are better off focusing on entitative essentialism, which is the kind of stereotyping that denies diversity within a group or intersectionality with other groups. For instance, a transgender man can also be a misogynistic conservative Protestant that likes to watch football. Not all of them are like that, but they can be. Transgender women can be like that, too. Some trans-women are also rednecks that like to go deer-hunting in the autumn. A surprising number of them are fat and lazy computer programmers that have not actually looked believably feminine since middle-school. Only a few of them actually look like the glamorous models off of RuPaul, and a truly amazing number of them just look like normal, everyday people. The point is that we come in all possible flavors. You might even like some of us.

See Essentialist beliefs about social categories, by Nick Haslam.

I have given you the neurobiological explanation for why I am the way that I am. If you need sources, then I am happy to provide them for you, but you could always look them up on your own if you prefer. Also, I have given you simple instructions for how to make a good start on turning me into a friend if that were ever your inclination: just call me by the gender that I prefer to be called.

I am not complicated. Life is complicated, but I am not. When you get right down to it, I am the easiest person ever.

 

[Metaphor]

(And I think it's even more the case with sexual alignment. I'm in the camp that doesn't think there really is such a thing as homosexuality--or heterosexuality. There is no internal concept of being attracted to the same gender or the opposite gender. Rather, it makes much more sense if there is an attracted-to-males system and an attracted-to-females system. A model with one control being heterosexual/homosexual and one being intensity does a much poorer job of explaining bisexuality and asexuality than two independent systems, one for attracted to men and one for attracted to women, each with an intensity control.)

Non.

Nobody is attracted to the same "gender". People are attracted to zero, one, or both sexes.

Well, that's a load of nonsense. That's not information you're even privy to when you're just out on the street looking for someone to date.

That people believe this kind of nonsense scares me. How often do you believe you are mistaken about the sex of people you are looking at?

We're highly dependent on how someone presents themselves - a component of their gender - in feeling attraction to them.

I have never, ever asked somebody's gender when I look at them or when I sleep with them. I'm attracted to male bodies, not 'the male gender'.

Gay men, for example, have personalities that cover the entire spectrum of what people would call 'butch' to 'femme'. I don't rule out 'femme' men; I rule out women.

Any trans woman can tell you that being hit on by straight men is a regular occurrence in their lives whether or not it is wanted.

This would be an extraordinary phenomenon if it were true - 100% of trans women get regular male attention! Of course, I don't believe that's true, especially since transwomen who are attracted to women routinely complain about the 'transphobia' of cis lesbians who do not want to date them.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

@Metaphor

My life is very simple. People like me, or they dislike me. If they like me, then most of them would call me whatever I asked them to call me. If they disliked me, then I would be shocked if they did not do the opposite just because it annoyed me.

You can't please all the people all the time.

 

[Metaphor]

@Metaphor

My life is very simple. People like me, or they dislike me. If they like me, then most of them would call me whatever I asked them to call me. If they disliked me, then I would be shocked if they did not do the opposite just because it annoyed me.

You can't please all the people all the time.

Like most people, I do lots of things for friends that I wouldn't do for strangers. I have vegan and vegetarian friends, and on the rare occassions I can be arsed to host lunch or dinner, I cater to their dietary preference.

Trans ideologists, like many on this thread, flat out state 'it's not difficult', but of course they are begging the question. It is 'not difficult' for them because they believe pronouns refer to gender identity and not sex. Trans people get 'misgendered' because trans people often do not pass and it is obvious to people. People instinctively use the appropriate sexed pronoun. It would be one thing for the trans ideologists on this thread to acknowledge the cognitive difficulty in looking at the body of a naked male transwoman with an erection and mentally reconciling that person as 'she'. In fact, I cannot mentally reconcile it, and 'she/her' pronouns for such a person, coming from me, would be uttering a falsehood. But it's quite another that they think the only possible reason that anybody would 'misgender' is malicious, evil, transphobic spite.

I also think there are political implications with using pronouns that conflict with the sex of a person. If it were all that trans people were asking is that people be polite and try and use their preferred pronouns, and nobody were demanding the addition of potentially hundreds of sets of neopronouns, and laws had not changed so that the State can now punish people for 'misgendering', that could be a compromise.

But of course trans ideologists, just like George Orwell, know that language is the key to shaping--or erasing--thoughts. It is not the case--it has never been the case--that men and women were separated in sports based on their gender identity, but on their sexed bodies. Nevertheless, trans ideologists have said it is appropriate that we separate sports based on gender identity and not sex, and the most radical do not want to brook any compromise on this. As in, no demands for testosterone suppression or any other measure. Any male-bodied person who wants to compete in women's sports needs only to make the claim they are a woman. I find that completely unacceptable and, to be honest, a kind of delusional collective madness.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

@Metaphor

My life is very simple. People like me, or they dislike me. If they like me, then most of them would call me whatever I asked them to call me. If they disliked me, then I would be shocked if they did not do the opposite just because it annoyed me.

You can't please all the people all the time.

Like most people, I do lots of things for friends that I wouldn't do for strangers. I have vegan and vegetarian friends, and on the rare occassions I can be arsed to host lunch or dinner, I cater to their dietary preference.

Trans ideologists, like many on this thread, flat out state 'it's not difficult', but of course they are begging the question. It is 'not difficult' for them because they believe pronouns refer to gender identity and not sex. Trans people get 'misgendered' because trans people often do not pass and it is obvious to people. People instinctively use the appropriate sexed pronoun. It would be one thing for the trans ideologists on this thread to acknowledge the cognitive difficulty in looking at the body of a naked male transwoman with an erection and mentally reconciling that person as 'she'. In fact, I cannot mentally reconcile it, and 'she/her' pronouns for such a person, coming from me, would be uttering a falsehood. But it's quite another that they think the only possible reason that anybody would 'misgender' is malicious, evil, transphobic spite.

I also think there are political implications with using pronouns that conflict with the sex of a person. If it were all that trans people were asking is that people be polite and try and use their preferred pronouns, and nobody were demanding the addition of potentially hundreds of sets of neopronouns, and laws had not changed so that the State can now punish people for 'misgendering', that could be a compromise.

But of course trans ideologists, just like George Orwell, know that language is the key to shaping--or erasing--thoughts. It is not the case--it has never been the case--that men and women were separated in sports based on their gender identity, but on their sexed bodies. Nevertheless, trans ideologists have said it is appropriate that we separate sports based on gender identity and not sex, and the most radical do not want to brook any compromise on this. As in, no demands for testosterone suppression or any other measure. Any male-bodied person who wants to compete in women's sports needs only to make the claim they are a woman. I find that completely unacceptable and, to be honest, a kind of delusional collective madness.

*laughs out loud* I've been called more entertaining things than mad. The only reason I even know about neopronouns is the old sci-fi novels I used to read. When I was a kid, I identified with intersex characters from those dusty, old books. It was a cute idea, and some of my old friends let me get away with it because we were young and still just went along with stuff. I will not lie: not all of my childhood was happy. However, those were some of the best times in my entire life. It was so much fun. It was the "sie/hir" set. .

I would never ask you to call me those because it was an intimate part of my experience. You weren't a part of it.

Most of the time, though, I am one of those people that keep their noses buried in Elsevier articles, so I have a little bit different of a perspective on these sorts of things from what you are probably used to. I can yak all day about that stuff. Transgender people are genuinely born with their brains connected a little bit differently. I can support this point-of-view with tungsten-hard scientific research if you want to go there.

 

[Metaphor]

@Metaphor

My life is very simple. People like me, or they dislike me. If they like me, then most of them would call me whatever I asked them to call me. If they disliked me, then I would be shocked if they did not do the opposite just because it annoyed me.

You can't please all the people all the time.

Like most people, I do lots of things for friends that I wouldn't do for strangers. I have vegan and vegetarian friends, and on the rare occassions I can be arsed to host lunch or dinner, I cater to their dietary preference.

Trans ideologists, like many on this thread, flat out state 'it's not difficult', but of course they are begging the question. It is 'not difficult' for them because they believe pronouns refer to gender identity and not sex. Trans people get 'misgendered' because trans people often do not pass and it is obvious to people. People instinctively use the appropriate sexed pronoun. It would be one thing for the trans ideologists on this thread to acknowledge the cognitive difficulty in looking at the body of a naked male transwoman with an erection and mentally reconciling that person as 'she'. In fact, I cannot mentally reconcile it, and 'she/her' pronouns for such a person, coming from me, would be uttering a falsehood. But it's quite another that they think the only possible reason that anybody would 'misgender' is malicious, evil, transphobic spite.

I also think there are political implications with using pronouns that conflict with the sex of a person. If it were all that trans people were asking is that people be polite and try and use their preferred pronouns, and nobody were demanding the addition of potentially hundreds of sets of neopronouns, and laws had not changed so that the State can now punish people for 'misgendering', that could be a compromise.

But of course trans ideologists, just like George Orwell, know that language is the key to shaping--or erasing--thoughts. It is not the case--it has never been the case--that men and women were separated in sports based on their gender identity, but on their sexed bodies. Nevertheless, trans ideologists have said it is appropriate that we separate sports based on gender identity and not sex, and the most radical do not want to brook any compromise on this. As in, no demands for testosterone suppression or any other measure. Any male-bodied person who wants to compete in women's sports needs only to make the claim they are a woman. I find that completely unacceptable and, to be honest, a kind of delusional collective madness.

*laughs out loud* I've been called more entertaining things than mad. The only reason I even know about neopronouns is the old sci-fi novels I used to read. When I was a kid, I identified with intersex characters from those dusty, old books. It was a cute idea, and some of my old friends let me get away with it because we were young and still just went along with stuff. I will not lie: not all of my childhood was happy. However, those were some of the best times in my entire life. It was so much fun. It was the "sie/hir" set. .

I would never ask you to call me those because it was an intimate part of my experience. You weren't a part of it.

Most of the time, though, I am one of those people that keep their noses buried in Elsevier articles, so I have a little bit different of a perspective on these sorts of things from what you are probably used to. I can yak all day about that stuff. Transgender people are genuinely born with their brains connected a little bit differently. I can support this point-of-view with tungsten-hard scientific research if you want to go there.

I didn't call you mad; I called trans ideologists mad (trans ideologists are not trans people who are ideologists, people who have a particular gender ideology are trans ideologists). Most trans ideologists are not trans.

I have never said that the brains of trans people are not different to the brains of non-trans people. Nothing important in my arguments hinges on it, though. Sex is not a brain state.

Trans ideologists have clouded the waters--on purpose--about the difference between sex and gender. Indeed, trans ideology has been so successful on this front that facts of biology--like that mammals cannot change sex--are now routinely trashed as wrong and bigoted. And I suppose if you actually believed that humans can change sex--which they cannot--you might also believe that it is fair for transwomen to play against women.

So in a way I think I can understand some positions of trans ideologists, as those positions can logically flow from premises they believe. But they believe faulty premises, and they gaslight people who believe true ones.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

@Metaphor It is substantially less complicated if transgender girls are put started on HRT at the beginning of puberty, rather than after its completion. I sensed that I was transgender at the very start of my puberty, and that was during the mid-1990's, when that kind of thinking might have actually gotten me expelled for being a disgusting pervert and therefore somehow a threat to other kids. I still knew. A transgender girl that starts transitioning at the same age as the normal age, for girls to go through puberty, cannot be easily distinguished from cis-girls. Their performance ought to be commensurate with that of their female peers.

 

[Metaphor]

@Metaphor It is substantially less complicated if transgender girls are put started on HRT at the beginning of puberty, rather than after its completion. I sensed that I was transgender at the very start of my puberty, and that was during the mid-1990's, when that kind of thinking might have actually gotten me expelled for being a disgusting pervert and therefore somehow a threat to other kids. I still knew. A transgender girl that starts transitioning at the same age as the normal age, for girls to go through puberty, cannot be easily distinguished from cis-girls. Their performance ought to be commensurate with that of their female peers.

There may be more 'wiggle room' for male-bodied people who never went through a male puberty to compete as women on the women's side. But that isn't what trans ideologists demand. They want any male who utters the words 'I am a woman' or 'I am a girl' to be able to play in women's sports - whether he has had a male puberty or not, and whether he takes any testosterone blockers or not.

But even that wiggle room is begging the question. Why is puberty supposed to be the dividing line? There are physiological differences between the sexes in pre-pubescent children, too. There are sex differences in athletic records achieved by sex from children as young as 5 year old (http://age-records.125mb.com/).

 

[Generation55]

\What has you confused is ideology. I do not care a rodent's rectum about it. I am telling you that my brain is physically different, and I really preferred being called "she" and "her" when you talk about me in conversation, bitte-danke. Beyond that, I believe that most of the ideology about gender, either way, is stupid. I cannot be bothered to provide you with several years' worth of education about neuroanatomy, and getting my gender right, whenever you talk about me with others, is probably the easiest way that you will ever make friends with somebody.

Furthermore, I disagree with the deconstructionist approach. According to Nick Haslam, it is a counterproductive approach, and when fighting back against essentialism, we are better off focusing on entitative essentialism, which is the kind of stereotyping that denies diversity within a group or intersectionality with other groups. For instance, a transgender man can also be a misogynistic conservative Protestant that likes to watch football. Not all of them are like that, but they can be. Transgender women can be like that, too. Some trans-women are also rednecks that like to go deer-hunting in the autumn. A surprising number of them are fat and lazy computer programmers that have not actually looked believably feminine since middle-school. Only a few of them actually look like the glamorous models off of RuPaul, and a truly amazing number of them just look like normal, everyday people. The point is that we come in all possible flavors. You might even like some of us.

See Essentialist beliefs about social categories, by Nick Haslam.

I have given you the neurobiological explanation for why I am the way that I am. If you need sources, then I am happy to provide them for you, but you could always look them up on your own if you prefer. Also, I have given you simple instructions for how to make a good start on turning me into a friend if that were ever your inclination: just call me by the gender that I prefer to be called.

I am not complicated. Life is complicated, but I am not. When you get right down to it, I am the easiest person ever.

I can see what you are saying. I also never said I don't like trans people. I do. My issue is with the definitions of these words "man" and "woman." I can see pictures of trans women and trans men online. They don't bother me. What does bother me is me wondering, "What do they mean by "man" and woman?"

Also things like, "you don't have to wear dresses and make up to be a woman" but a lot of trans women DO wear dresses and makeup which seems to be conforming to the stereotype feminists are trying to erase in the first place. Same how trans men like to dress in stereotypical male clothes while claiming that gender norms shouldn't exist. It just seems weird to hear someone say, "You don't think I'm a man? Look at my beard! Look at my motorcycle jacket! Look at my boots!" But, feminists would say "those things don't make someone a man." You see what I'm saying? Not trying to be hateful or hurtful here. It's just confusing to me.

And what do you do about medicine? A trans woman gets into a car accident or something and the paramedics come, I think it would be helpful for the paramedics to know that her body is male, right? This is just so confusing to me. There's a difference in medicine for women's bodies and men's bodies. It's not as simple as, "just treat me like a good person!" I can do that, but what about every other scenario that doesn't involve simple conversation?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But this doesn't explain why there are trans women who don't mind having a penis and trans men who don't mind having a vagina. There are trans people like you say who hate their bodies and wish the body was different, but there are some who are fine with their genitals. Why is this so?

Some people care, some people don't. Since you are new here you probably don't realize I'm actually male (both biologically and mentally)--I have the male spelling of the name which was always quite rare and is basically extinct this century. I also have a voice that somehow sounds female on the phone. I'm routinely misgendered but I don't care and usually only correct people when there's some reason it matters.

You also (but not just you) also ignored my point about David Reimer. He had a botched circumcision that severely injured his penis. The psychologist John Money said, "Since sex and gender different, just raise him as a girl. It won't matter." It didn't work and he committed suicide later in life. This shows that sex and gender are the same thing. If they were different, he would've had no problem being a girl.

Huh? I think you have it backwards. If they had been the same thing he wouldn't have had a problem.

 

[Generation55]

But this doesn't explain why there are trans women who don't mind having a penis and trans men who don't mind having a vagina. There are trans people like you say who hate their bodies and wish the body was different, but there are some who are fine with their genitals. Why is this so?

Some people care, some people don't. Since you are new here you probably don't realize I'm actually male (both biologically and mentally)--I have the male spelling of the name which was always quite rare and is basically extinct this century. I also have a voice that somehow sounds female on the phone. I'm routinely misgendered but I don't care and usually only correct people when there's some reason it matters.

You also (but not just you) also ignored my point about David Reimer. He had a botched circumcision that severely injured his penis. The psychologist John Money said, "Since sex and gender different, just raise him as a girl. It won't matter." It didn't work and he committed suicide later in life. This shows that sex and gender are the same thing. If they were different, he would've had no problem being a girl.

Huh? I think you have it backwards. If they had been the same thing he wouldn't have had a problem.

John Money is the one who came up with the idea that sex and gender are different. He was going by his assumption so that's why he said that raising David as a girl would've been no big deal. It turned out he was wrong. David was born male and he always saw himself as a man. He couldn't handle not having a penis. His sex "matched" his gender. He was considered a cisman.