Drag Shows

[Emily Lake]

You mean part of their biology? Again, dangling bits, dangling bits, dangling bits. If the neurology says they are in conflict with their genitals, that would imply that part of them is one gender, part of them is the other gender. You keep crying biology, but want to pretend the part of the body that makes us who we are... is excluded from the conversation... or even mocked. Stupid brain! What does it know?!

If neurology tells a person that their left arm shouldn't be there, does that somehow mean that their brain is one-armed and their body is two-armed? If neurology tells a person that they are 6 feet tall, but their body is 5 feet tall, does that somehow men that their body is defiantly heighted than their body?

You keep acting as if brains are somehow *right*. They aren't. Brains lie all the fucking time. Every singly day your brain lies to you about something. Brains are untrustworthy.

And if someone's brain insists that they are Napoleon... the rest of us are within the bounds of rationality and reason to agree that they are NOT Napoleon.

 

[Emily Lake]

Really? Do you think it would be immediately apparent to say, a police officer who stumbled upon the nude, post-surgical corpse of a trans woman that the deceased had been born with, perhaps a penis and testicles?

At first glance, perhaps not. But the examiner performing the autopsy sure as shit would be able to tell.

Honest to god, this is frustrating, Toni. I have on my desk a thing that looks EXACTLY like a jade plant. All of the visible details are incredibly accurate. But it is made of plastic. It is artificial.

You seem to be making some specious argument that if something passes a cursory glance as a thing-which-it-is-not, then no actual difference between the thing-which-it-is-not and the actual thing exists. You're essentially arguing that the plastic apple on your grandma's table can be eaten because it looks a whole lot like an apple.

 

[Emily Lake]

A brain aberration? The body is nothing but a husk without the brain!

And a brain without a body is a lump of goo with some wrinkles on it. What's your point?

Why is it that we don't know the sexual orientation of people at birth? Congrats, you've given birth to a gay boy. Yes, he was born with a penis, but it is a gay penis. Dangling bits and all, yet, the dangling bits get used all the wrong ways by gays. Where is that coming from? You can't change your sex!

Okay, turn that around. Why is it that we DO know the skin color of someone from birth?

Jesus fucking christ this is so frustrating. Sexual orientation is a FUNCTION OF THE BRAIN. Sex is a REALTIY OF THE BODY.

Liking or disliking chocolate is a function of the brain. Being allergic to chocolate whether you like it or not is a function of the body. Choosing a meal is a function of the brain. Digesting that meal and then shitting it out is a function of the body.

Some parts of the brain have no consciousness, no cognitive ability. All they do is send basic signals to perform bodily functions. Some parts of the body don't need anything more than a fucking pituitary gland in order to do what they do - the rest of the brain is unrelated to that part of the body. And some parts of the brain are fucking liars on the reg.

 

[Emily Lake]

Males are not females, females are not males. Males cannot become females. Sperm producers will never produce ova. Testiculators will never be menstruators. This is an evolutionary divide that spans the entirety of the mammalian class, indeed the vast majority of the phylum of chordata. Obscuring the meaning of the term that describes the adult female half of the human species isn't going to make that divide any less real.

The aforementioned sounds exactly as Ben Shipero, Jordan Peterson, Ann Coulter, or other extreme right wing media have been saying some time now. Nor I do not dissagree with you, but I am very surprised with your position. And finding it very interesting that it is being said on (what I consider) a fairly progressive forum.

I am not a conservative. That some right wingers share my view on the reality of sex is irrelevant. I bet a lot of right wingers also share my view that the earth is round, and that we actually did land a man on the moon.

I get really tired of people drawing a false association when it comes to this topic. I'm a moderately liberal person, and a feminist.

 

[Emily Lake]

Nothing other than the dysfunctional use of genitals they were born with.

From the perspective of the continuation of their gene line, yes. It's a dysfunctional use. But it harms nobody, and the only consequence is to their non-existent children.

 

[Toni]

Your neurobiology likely determines your sexual orientation.

Your neurobiology affects your perceptions of who you are. Including your identity as male.

Given your premise, neurobiology also affects the perceptions of an anorexic.

So... what's your point then? Does the anorexic's neurological perception of themselves as fat support them being treated by other people as if they're fat, being supported in their low calorie diet?

Is there a point where you might recognize that a person's neurological perception of themselves as different from observable reality is irrelevant to anyone other than themselves and perhaps their psychiatrist?

I’m actually not a neurobiologist but then, neither are you. I do know enough to know that brain structures are different than neurochemicals. I suspect you know that as well when it doesn’t interfere with your ideology.

I realize you have a family member who is trans and I’m sure you love them and want their happiness. I cannot comment on that young person or how they feel in themselves or your observations.

I’ve raised children who, at various stages of their development were convinced they were from another planet, had friends who lived on a farm with lots of animals, each with their own name and personality, that a tiger lived in the wooded area behind our apartment—multiple children saw this tiger! ; that they were a dog, and a lot of other things. I’ve also known a young child who was adamant that they were a boy.

Everyone except the last child outgrew their perceptions, beliefs, fantasies although mostly they form some very fond memories. The other difference between the childhood fantasies was the absolute intensity that reached to the core of the child’s being. They were not lost in fantasy. They were not embracing any self harm as an anorexic does. They were not actually delusional: their outside did not comport with the reality of how they perceived themselves. In other respects, they were a happy, healthy, keenly intelligent and very creative child.

Suppose you are right: transgender is a delusion. How does that harm you or me? If someone wishes to live as a male who was born female, why should they not? Women have done that for centuries, in fact. Now, they can have surgery and other medical interventions to make their body look the way they feel. Why should they not? Why should a person who is born with the appearance of being male but who feels themselves ti be female not be allowed to have the medical treatment to help them look the way they want to? Why should society not recognize the change? Why shouldn’t the law?

I absolutely share your concerns about violent individuals gaining access to their preferred victim type. This should not be allowed. Regardless of sex or gender identity.

 

[Emily Lake]

No, it wasn't 'known.' It was assumed, based upon whatever testing your mother allowed to be performed. Once you were born, your apparent sex was in agreement with whatever testing was previously performed and there was no need to conduct further examination.

But unless you have had testing to demonstrate that you actually produce motile sperm, you don't KNOW that you do. Unless you have had genetic testing done, you do not KNOW that you have XY chromosomes and not some other configuration.

What you believe to be true about yourself likely comports with observable traits and would likely also agree with any genetic testing you had performed or if you submitted a sample of ejaculate. But you don't KNOW as a fact that this is so. You ASSUME that it is so. Your feelings about your sex and about your sexual orientation are in agreement with your apparent sex. But you do not KNOW as a fact what your karotype is or whether or not you produce sperm or if that sperm is motile.

Have you ever had a blood draw at a doctor's office or a hospital? Guess what they check? They aren't going to do a complete karyotype analysis... but they can very easily and very accurately determine sex from your run-of-the-mill blood test. And they do. Because sex is frequently a factor in medicine. Not "identity", but actual sex.

All of these arguments of "Oh but you don't really really know, you could totally actually be female and not know it" is bullshit. It's also incredibly disrespectful toward people who actually DO have disorders of sexual development. Because those DSD conditions are MEDICAL FUCKING CONDITIONS THAT ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE COMPLICATIONS.

Stop arguing that there might be a teapot orbiting mercury, and that because nobody truly knows for certain wr have to somehow act like a teapot is definitely there. It's bad argument.

 

[Toni]

Is it delusion or dishonesty that motivates you to continue to assert that people are saying thoughts in one’s head determines your sex?

How about confusion and frustration that thoughts in one's head keeps getting brought up as some kind of counter to the observed reality of sex?

How about that?

 

[Emily Lake]

I still haven't heard anyone explain why drag is inherently problematic.

I stand by my position that it is an inherently offensive caricature of women, and it should not be presented to children as if males putting on a cartoonish costume of women for laughs is something good.

 

[Emily Lake]

we aren't the gatekeepers of masculinity.

Totally disagree. Females are the gatekeepers by deciding who to mate with. Females choose masulinity and only those with masculine traits. All other lines die out.

There's an assumption of choice in there that could be questioned. In modern times, yes, there is agency. But throughout history, it has NOT been the females choosing. It has NOT been females deciding who they want to mate with.

 

[Emily Lake]

Incidentally, if the argument is "we should do things as most mammals do", we should not be wearing clothes at all, let alone building strictly but arbitrarily gender-divided clothing sections at the mall and instigating moral panic if a man wears a dress or women pants at the library. No other mammal would give a flying shit what we want to wear. That's religion, not biology, and only we do the religion thing.

Actshooally... You might want to think about this some. You know who drives and monitors GENDER binary divisions? Because it's not women. Women have been accepting of gender non-conforming women time out of mind, and women have always been more tolerant of gender non-conforming men than men are.

It is men who have defined and enforced gender roles, and who have bound women to subservient roles throughout history, and it is men who continue to police the boundaries of masculinity - ejecting with force those men who do not meet their arbitrary standards.

The men enforce the gender roles socially. But the women enforce gender roles reproductively by who they select.

Only within very recent history, and even so there remain large parts of the globe where this is not true.

Up until very recent history, and in westernized countries... men enforced the gender roles social AND men selected who got reproduced with. Literally. Through rape, through deciding who their daughters married, and through the keeping of women as property owned by men. Even within modern westernized societies, there are a number of religious sects who still REQUIRE the father's blessing for marriage, and if such blessing is withheld by the father, the two don't get married.

 

[Toni]

No, it wasn't 'known.' It was assumed, based upon whatever testing your mother allowed to be performed. Once you were born, your apparent sex was in agreement with whatever testing was previously performed and there was no need to conduct further examination.

But unless you have had testing to demonstrate that you actually produce motile sperm, you don't KNOW that you do. Unless you have had genetic testing done, you do not KNOW that you have XY chromosomes and not some other configuration.

What you believe to be true about yourself likely comports with observable traits and would likely also agree with any genetic testing you had performed or if you submitted a sample of ejaculate. But you don't KNOW as a fact that this is so. You ASSUME that it is so. Your feelings about your sex and about your sexual orientation are in agreement with your apparent sex. But you do not KNOW as a fact what your karotype is or whether or not you produce sperm or if that sperm is motile.

Have you ever had a blood draw at a doctor's office or a hospital? Guess what they check? They aren't going to do a complete karyotype analysis... but they can very easily and very accurately determine sex from your run-of-the-mill blood test. And they do. Because sex is frequently a factor in medicine. Not "identity", but actual sex.

All of these arguments of "Oh but you don't really really know, you could totally actually be female and not know it" is bullshit. It's also incredibly disrespectful toward people who actually DO have disorders of sexual development. Because those DSD conditions are MEDICAL FUCKING CONDITIONS THAT ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE COMPLICATIONS.

Stop arguing that there might be a teapot orbiting mercury, and that because nobody truly knows for certain wr have to somehow act like a teapot is definitely there. It's bad argument.

Yeah, I’ve had my blood drawn a number of times. But only when there was a gynecological issue did they check hormone levels, etc. there has never been a genetic analysis performed. Or any need to do so.

 

[Emily Lake]

I understand that you ASSUME you are of the sex organized around producing small mobile gametes. You have no proof. You just have your feelings.

Oh bullshit. Met has a male-typical penis, tesitcles, vas deferens... and I'm betting he knows damned good and well that he's got a prostate. And I bet that Met knows for sure that he does NOT have a vagina, nor a uterus.

Met knows quite well that he has the anatomy of a male - that would the reproductive anatomy that is arranged around production of sperm, even if no sperm are actually produced.

YOU don't know for sure that Met is male. But unless you are low-key asking for a dick-pic, I'd take his word for it.

 

[Emily Lake]

Of course, those are not the questions I asked. I asked if it would be immediately apparent to a police officer who stumbled upon the nude, post surgical corpse of a trans person, perhaps born with a penis and testicles. A coroner or medical examiner could determine a great deal more than a cursory examination by a police officer. But I wasn't asking about a medical examiner. I was asking about a police officer.

Uh huh. So if a visiting kid sees an apple on grandma's table, then obviously it's a real apple, because that kid couldn't tell it was plastic.

 

[Emily Lake]

Yet you reject using your body the way it was designed for use.

Our bodies were not designed.

 

[laughing dog]

I don't identify as 5'2". I AM 5'2".

If one allows that someone who is 5'2" to identify as something other than 5'2", then there is no reason to disallow that someone who is 5'2" to also identify as 5'2".

 

[Emily Lake]

What difference does it make what genitals someone has?

Under typical conditions you'll never know. Even under conditions where one might know/suspect (say, the local backcountry hot spring--unofficially clothing optional and few people wear more than skimpy bathing suits) why should I care?

Under most conditions it does not matter at all. Nobody anywhere is having a problem with those "typical conditions". It's conditions like being in a prison cell with another person, sharing a hostel room with someone who you don't get to choose. Sharing a cabin on a train or a boat where you are assigned a roommate and don't get to choose your own. Having a person handle your breasts for a mammogram. Having a person insert their fingers into your vagina or your rectum for a medical exam. Having a person unclothe and bathe you - including your genitals - while you are sick or incapacitated. Having a person naked with you in a shower or changing room.

Under those conditions, it matters a wee bit more what genitals someone else has.

 

[Emily Lake]

Maybe... Don't sex children at birth in that way?

Tell me you have never had to care for an infant without telling me you have never had to care for an infant...

Sexing each other is stupid, on the face of it.

Tell me you don't understand the degree to which males and females are fundamentally different from a developmental and medical standpoint without telling me you don't understand the degree to which males and females are fundamentally different from a developmental and medical standpoint

Most children aren't aware that their genitals are in any way different from anyone else's until they are a few years old, and by that time, they will have gendered themselves.

At most, they as individuals need to be educated on how to keep their bodies clean, and warned to not let grownups take advantage of them.

Tell me you don't understand that how to keep a female body clean isn't exactly the same as how to keep a male body clean without telling me... well... you should get the picture already.

Most of the more specific stuff can wait until just before puberty.

If a doctor needs to examine their genitals, then the doctor will quote immediately know what kind of genitals they have.

Then, when puberty is close, discuss gonads, hormones, and reproduction.IFF (if and only if) they express that the effects of the hormones their body will produce are not the ones they wish to be effected by in puberty, then make plans and discussions with them about rectifying that, what consequences this will have on reproductive goals, and whatever else so they can make an informed decisions about their body.

Yeah, I strongly object to that last bit. Applying wrong sex hormones has negative affects on the health of the individual, and children are not capable of understanding the risk, nor are they any good at all at deciding what they really want when they grow up. Furthermore, applying wrong sex hormones does NOT produce a different puberty, all it does is fuck up the body's ability to effectively complete maturation. Giving a female child testosterone will NOT give her a "male puberty". At no point will her testes descend, nor will her penis elongate, nor will she experience nocturnal ejaculations. Giving a male child estrogen will NOT give him a "female puberty", he will not experience menarche, nor will his hips widen. The only thing those wrong sex hormones do is to suppress the natural progress of the body from child to adult.

And a fucking 12 year old is NOT cognitively capable of making an "informed" decision about whether or not they want to be STERILE as an adult!

 

[Oleg]

Giving a male child estrogen will NOT give him a "female puberty", he will not experience menarche, nor will his hips widen.

You are so wrong.

 

[Emily Lake]

When our first child was born, I was certain that there were no gender differences in how children played, if they were given free choice, no gendered differences in whether or not any given child would prefer to play with say, trucks or dolls. I played with both as a child, for example. Turns out: yes, some kids indeed do choose stereotypical toys and play. Turns out a penis is also a gun and little boys are fascinated with penises: theirs and other people's. Turns out that even if they are raised with no television, no weapons, or books or media about weapons, some children will gravitate to...using their fingers, carrot sticks, celery sticks, and yes, their penis as a 'gun.' I was shocked when our child at barely a year old picked up something and pointed it, saying POW. I still have no idea where he got that idea.

No matter how little you may have emphasized sex and sex-based behavioral expectations to your kids... you didn't raise them on an island in isolation. Other people outside of your home still exert influence, even if it's inadvertent and unconscious.

And even if you don't do... there's an extremely deep-seated tendency in western societies to treat girls and boys differently. They get praised for different things, they get chastised for different things. Even if you yourself didn't, I would be you had friends and relatives who made a point of telling your little girls how pretty they look in their pretty dresses, or how pretty and nice their shoes are, or their hair, etc. Or telling your boys what strong independent boys they are, how smart they are for stating their own opinions and for asking (and expecting) to have their desires satisfied. I bet your girls were praised for such good behavior when they were polite and quiet and kept out of the way, while your boys were rewarded for getting involved and taking part and speaking up.

Even if you, personally, never allowed your kids to watch TV or to listen to the radio, or to read any books... the rest of the world still exists, and it's not possible to completely shelter children from the social trappings of sex-roles.

And... Even with all of that acknowledged... there is a well documented tendency for girls and boys to gravitate toward toys that more closely align with the evolutionary pressures on our sexes. Girls tend to gravitate toward care-giving and organizing games, boys gravitate toward physically expressive and competitive games that frequently involve building and hunting skills. We are, after all, animals. And we're a fairly sexually dimorphic animal at that. Given that female humans have a nine-month gestation period followed by a year or two of breastfeeding, followed by another decade until their offspring reaches sexual maturity and is pretty much able to survive on their own... It should hardly be surprising that we have evolutionarily based behavioral tendencies that divide along the lines of sex. That's not a rule book, but it is a pretty strong guideline.