You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Transgender’ tag.

There has been much controversy over lately at Science Based Medicine as they seem to have been institutionally captured by gender ideology and turning away from the foundations SBM was founded on.  When gender woo-magic takes precedent of science based facts the lambasting by those who keep their scientific integrity intact is inevitable, hence this letter by Emeritus Editor Kimball Atwood to Steve Novella about his decent into gender-woo.

 

Thank you for Jessie Singal for posting the letter.

 

 

Hi Steve,

Harriet has told me that you stated that her article “dragged SBM into a raging controversy.” She feels, and I agree, that it was your retracting that article and replacing it by very bad articles written by advocates of “gender affirmation” that dragged SBM into a raging controversy. I’ve attempted to explain why previously, but here I’ll mention a couple of the most obvious reasons.

You claimed that Harriet’s article was below SBM’s minimal standard for “high quality scientific evidence and reasoning to inform medical issues.” Yet you replaced it with articles stating things such as the following:

  • “Biology is a binary and differences of sex development (DSDs) are vanishingly rare”. False. DSDs are as common as 1 in 5,000 births, and increase to 1 in 200 or 1 in 300 if you include hypospadias and cryptorchidism. Biology is very, very well known to be a spectrum.

[Lovell attributes the sentence in quotes to Shrier; I’ve been unable to find it in her book]

Do you, Steve, think that sex is a spectrum? Yes, I know Lovell wrote “biology is a spectrum,” but that is an incoherent claim. Her implication is that sex is a spectrum. If that were true, it would upend all that we know about sex in mammals and many other life forms, including sexual dimorphism, reproduction, and selection. Do you think that Lovell’s statement constitutes “high quality scientific evidence and reasoning”? OMG, apparently you do. What’s happened to you?

Do you think that hypospadias and cryptorchism are DSDs? They are not, and to suggest that they are does not meet SBM’s minimal standard for reasoning about medical issues.

The citation is to a paper that discusses real DSDs, not cryptorchism or hypospadias, and makes no claims about a “spectrum.” It supports the very statement that Lovell claims to be false (even though Shrier seems never to have made that statement). Where was the editor here?

According to Eckert,

  • Throughout her book, Shrier refers to her subjects as “biological girls,” a term that conflates sex with gender and mischaracterizes Shrier’s subjects. The reason is that a person’s sex refers to the identity assigned by doctors, parents, and medical professionals at birth, most often based on external anatomy (genitals).

Do you, Steve, think that Shrier’s subjects were not biological girls? Do you think that this characterization conflates sex with gender? Do you think that sex is an “identity assigned by doctors,” rather than a fact noted by everyone in the delivery room in almost every case? Do you think that “human” is also an identity assigned by doctors? How does such an absurd passage meet SBM’s minimal standard for scientific evidence and reasoning? Do you really think that “this is good scientific practice—not political correctness”? How can you be so naive?

Finally, I’ll remind you of a previous objection that you haven’t answered, which refutes the crux of Lovell’s claim about “gender affirmation” for biological girls “lead(ing) to improved psychological outcomes”:

“Lastly, as clearly noted in the American Academy of Pediatrics statement, complete with many citations of their own, we use affirmation, pubertal suppression, and hormone therapy in youth because it leads to improved psychological outcomes. The literature is abundant and clear on this topic.”

The “abundant” link is not to several studies or a review of several studies, as the adjective implies, but to a single study that is irrelevant to Shrier’s thesis because it looks at a group of pre-pubescent, transgender children (age 3-12) undergoing only social transition, not at adolescent girls. It’s also not a good study because it controls its cohort with a cohort of non-transgender children, rather than with the appropriate control group (transgender children not undergoing social transition).

The “clear” link is to a paper that does not reveal whether its subjects were gender dysphoric (GD) in childhood or not, but whose abstract states:

Implications for impact: This study suggests that gender-affirming hormones are a helpful medical intervention for transgender youth. Gender-affirming hormones were found to be associated with decreases in suicidality and improvements in general well-being.”

That is all most SBM readers will read, if they even bother to click on the link. But in the discussion (behind a paywall; I got it on ResearchGate) we see this:

“Hypothesis 3 (i.e., those assigned female at birth will experience greater improvements in general well-being and larger decreases in suicidality) was not supported.” (My italics; parenthetical phrase in the original)

Need I mention (again) that this is the only outcome of the study that is relevant to Shrier’s book? Where was the editor here?

Speaking of editors, it appears that there have been none at SBM other than the original five. Of those, two ruled to retract Harriet’s review, two (Harriet and I) would have kept it, and one is dead. I knew Wally well enough to feel confident that he would have voted to keep the review, and that he would have been shocked, probably to the point of resigning, when you published the embarrassments by Lovell and Eckert and when you banned Andy Lewis from commenting.

No, it was not Harriet who dragged SBM into a raging controversy. It was you and David, because of some very poor choices, made worse by your doubling down after every reasonable objection by Jesse Singal, Andy Lewis, Michael Shermer, Jerry Coyne, Abigail Shrier, me, and several others.

Sincerely Yours,
Kimball

 

Something went wrong between the 2nd and 3rd wave of female political action.  The class based analysis so firmly rooted in the second wave seemed to have been gradually pushed to the margins and replaced with a the conception of intersectionality that in its initial phase could have gone hand in hand with the more traditional feminist analysis.  Intersectionality is the idea that people can experience different layers of discrimination simultaneously based on their race, sex, and class served to furtherfill out traditional radical feminist theory and increase the sensitivity toward women with diverse race and cultural backgrounds.

So far so good?  Right?

Well it would be all good if we just incorporated this utilitarian and useful 3rd wave innovation.  The notions of ‘identity’ and ’empowerment’ were also gifts from the third wave and where some of the analysis began to go off the rails.

From the notion of ’empowerment’ we get most of the dead branch known as Liberal Feminism that is about doing actions in society, that if they feel good and make you feel good, they are in fact empowering acts.  This leads to the idea that activities like pole dancing and stripping can be ‘feminist’ acts because they are empowering the individual woman with agency (?) and power within society.

Many feminists would pause here because like most features of society, patriarchy operates on the macro as well as the micro level.  To return to our previous example, the occupations of both pole dancing and stripping may indeed provide empowerment on the level of the individual, but on a boarder social analysis both serve the male gaze and continue to reinforce the commodification and objectification of the female body.  So perhaps we can see where some friction exists between these two theoretical feminist standpoints.

The notion of identity is also useful in certain contexts because it allows discrimination and oppression that exist within society to be categorized and analyzed with greater precision.  Identity is a tonic against the sometimes homogenizing nature of theoretical work and allows theory and praxis better able to respond to the needs of women from diverse backgrounds.

Identity has now metastasized.  In certain ideological circles it rests above nearly all other theoretical concerns.  More importantly the notion of identity has been severed from the social, material reality we all share.  What we think about ourselves now has a certain reified air that precludes any sort of questioning or critical examination.

For instance, it is now popular to ‘come out’ as non-binary.  Being non-binary is a vague notion that an individuals personal expression isn’t tied to their sex  – so a male person can have a ‘boy-day’ or  ‘girl-day’ depending on their mood.  You gentle reader, would not be alone in concluding that people claiming be non-binary may just be fulfilling the need to feel edgy and special in society.  It’s nice to stand out I suppose, but adopting male or female stereotypes and demanding that others play along with your wacky pronouns and related charade seems like a rather cumbersome and ultimately anti-social way to go about achieving that goal.  Furthermore, since no person embodies all of the stereotypes of their sex but rather a mixture of the two, we are all, in fact, non-binary (just with less narcissism that those boldly ‘coming out’).

Another particularly problematic aspect that has arisen is the notion of self identification and that one’s personal declaration of gender somehow overrides the societal norms and expectations we all follow.  The most common point of friction is when men, because they have gender feelings, decide that they are women and should therefore have access to female spaces, services, and sports.  The problem is that self id does not change the male socialization, nor the male patterns of behaviour that require all inhabitants of the class of men to be excluded from female only spaces.

Transgender ideology is deeply misogynistic.  Women who disagree with gender ideology and men in their spaces are ostracized, threatened, and called bigots because they have the temerity to raise concern with the erosion of their boundaries and sex based rights within society.  Transgender ideology is also an impediment to the safeguarding of women and children as again, male gender-feelings are given precedence over female safety in society.  The conflict will not resolve until the men involved in the transgender movement respect female boundaries and the female ‘no’.

Being gender diverse is fine, but one must respect the material realities of sex and sex based oppression that exist within our society.

 

This from a major Canadian ‘news’ website.

Forget about ‘just wanting to pee’ wedge issue bullshit – this is what we are in for in Canadian society; this is the upside-down, nothing has any meaning, timeline that trans ideology has in store for us.

Do not believe your eyes, but rather what some individual says about who they are. This is where belief in gender-magic takes us, where male violent crime is somehow called ‘female’ violent crime because the violent male has fucking delusions of gender and we need to respect that. 
No.  The word must get out of what is happening here and the bald-faced misogyny that is transgender ideology must be stopped.

“She is charged with sexual interference with a person under the age of 16 and sexual assault. Eby is set to appear in a Toronto courtroom on July 21.

In a news release issued on Tuesday, police said investigators believe there may be other victims.

Police are asking anyone with information related to the investigation to contact investigators or Crime Stoppers.”

How in any possible sane world is that person a she?  In Canada this male can, and will probably be detained with other female prisoners.  Read that again.   This sex offender will most likely be housed in a target rich environment lush with captive and accessible female victims.  Why (trans rights are male rights)?   Because he *feels* like a woman.  That is all it takes these days to be seen in the eyes of Canadian law as a woman – a simple declaration and *poof* a woman is nothing more than a set of feelings inside of a man’s head.

No ducking thank you.  Women are adult human females and have every right to reject men -especially predatory men- from their spaces and services.  You would think that the our prison service and government would be able to understand how bad an idea it is to house male sexual offenders in a female prison.

What?  Yeah.  This ‘progressive’ trans movement is so evil inclusive that it campaigns and is getting men into female prisons in Canada.  What could go wrong?

Meghan Murphy on the issue and and interview with Heather Mason who is leading the charge against having men in female only prisons.

“The Canadian government has been transferring males who identify as transgender to women’s prisons for a few years now, keeping the public mostly in the dark about this, and the impact on female inmates. The harassment and assaults that have taken place at the hands of these males has also, for the most part, been ignored — both by the government and the media. Only a few brave women have been trying, tirelessly, to force this conversation, and force people to care about these inmates, whose rights are being ignored as a result of Bill C-16, and new gender identity policies. Heather Mason is one of those women. Heather Mason is a 31-year old-mother to two children and a first time federal offender. She was sentenced to three years at Grand Valley Institution in Kitchener and is currently on Statutory Release in Toronto. She is an advocate for women in conflict with the law and a prison abolitionist. Heather recently co-founded a nonprofit organization, whose goal is to break barriers for women in social issues that lead to incarceration.”

So, the time to take action was yesterday, but it is never to late to act and to start to speak up for the rights and boundaries of Canadian Women. Call your MP, share this story widely, read up on what is happening in Canada in the name of misogynistic transgender ideology.

There are lots of problems with how most of society treats transgendered people. Trying to sort out how best to rectify this has lead to many unproductive clashes. A major disagreement centres around whether biologically male transgendered people are actually women. My question to the BioMaleTrans is this: Why do you think you’re a woman?

I commonly see two answers to this question. The first of which is ‘I identify as a woman’. This doesn’t actually provide any information and is, therefore, not actually an answer. It is merely restating the original position that was being questioned in the first place. In this case, “I think I am” is perfectly synonymous to “I identify as”.

The second common answer is pretty much the same: ‘I feel like I’m a woman’. Still no new information, still synonymous with the original. Still not an answer.

So let’s get specific. Let’s do away with the vague, the obscure, and the etherial. Let’s dispose of brevity and confusion. Let’s look at some possible detailed answers as to why you think you are / feel you are / identify as a woman.

Do you like to wear skirts, dresses, and/or lingerie?
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who don’t like to wear any of those thing, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who do like to wear some or all of those things, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you like having long hair and/or wearing make up.
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who don’t like either of those things, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who do like both of those things, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you speak with what today’s society might consider a “feminine” lilt?
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who don’t speak with such a lilt, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who do speak so, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you like the colour pink, romantic comedies, stuffed toys, spa days, looking at attractive men and/or any other thing that fits some version of the “feminine” stereotype?
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who don’t like any of these things, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who do like many of these things, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you more easily connect with women than you do with men?
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who get along better with men, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who get along better with women, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you express emotions in what much of our culture would call a “feminine” manner?
Well, that may be common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are women who express their emotions in non “feminine” ways, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who express themselves in all kinds of “feminine” ways, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Do you constantly get bullied, ostracized, and/or mistreated by entitled fuckwit men?
Well, that may be extremely common in women, but it is in no way tied to them being women.
There are a few women who aren’t consistently mistreated, but that does not mean they are somehow not women.
There are non-women who do suffer unimaginably because of these bastards, but that does not magically turn them into women.

Any reason, or combination of reasons, a BioMaleTrans could possibly give for ‘being a woman’ would necessarily be tied to a gender stereotype. That is, any claim of actually being a woman is inextricably rooted in harmful bullshit gender roles. There is only one valid claim to womanhood, and it is one that a BioMaleTrans is inherently excluded from: biology.

“Feminism recognizes that institutionalized male dominance is rooted in men’s control of women’s reproductive power (a source of other political struggles in Texas and beyond) and sexuality. In patriarchy, an enduring feature of the lives of girls and women is sexual violence — men’s unwanted intrusions into their lives. Women’s experiences vary, but none escapes this ever-present threat.

I’ve heard many stories from women about men following them into public restrooms or threatening them, a strategy some men use to harass and sexually assault women. Even more common is girls’ struggle with being sexually objectified throughout the culture, which creates a range of difficult emotions about their bodies, especially about being seen by boys and men.

I don’t endorse Patrick’s reactionary right-wing politics, but I do take seriously the experiences of girls and women who have to find ways to live as safely and sanely as possible in patriarchy. Where possible, the best solution is single-person spaces for maximal privacy for everyone. But in public facilities used by large numbers of people at a time, multi-stall bathrooms and collective showering and changing rooms should be segregated by biological sex, and we should guarantee the safety of those spaces.

Let me be clear: I am not arguing that male-to-transgender people are waiting to harass and attack women. Instead, this position recognizes that (1) some men will exploit any opportunity to move into female space, and (2) girls and women have a right to be free from the male gaze in such private spaces.

A feminist critique of the ideology of the transgender movement is not an attack on people who identify as transgender but simply asks questions that shouldn’t be glossed over and asserts the rights of women in a patriarchal society. The internal subjective experience of transgender people should not trump the objective threats that girls and women experience routinely.

Robert Jensen on A Feminist Current.

   Boom.  That last sentence, emphasis mine.

school   “I don’t want to see penis when I go to the washroom; he just stands there with the stall open and it makes me uncomfortable.“.

That was the quotable bit from a conversation I had with a female student I happened to be teaching at an elementary school this week.  We were walking in from recess and Jaina brought this to my attention.  I couldn’t detect any hate or malice in her statement, as she had just been playing convivially with Dakota (Male to Trans) minutes before.  I told her that she had every right to feel uncomfortable as the situation she described was not appropriate in terms of what was happening in the bathroom…   Jaina was surprised that a teacher agreed with her and her feelings of discomfort.  I was going to suggest that she remind Dakota to shut the door but the conversation ended as we entered the school.

I hope that by listening to Jaina and supporting her statement she will talk with her teacher and her Dakota to sort that issue out.

The conversation caught me by surprise (as with most occurrences while teaching behaviour classes) and in the moment I had to negotiate between the child’s feelings and the official school board policy on gender and washrooms.

Review of the policy in question came down to these points –

Indicators of this best practice in action (pg.9)

• Students are able to access washrooms that are congruent with their gender identity.

• A student who objects to sharing a washroom or change-room with a student who is trans or gender-diverse is offered an alternative facility (this scenario also applies when a parent or other caregiver objects to shared washroom or change-room facilities on behalf of their child).

I certainly hope that Jaina’s concerns are heard and action is taken as traditionally the concerns of girls, and females in general, are all to often thrown under the bus.

 

feminismI would suggest that you go read the full article by Rebecca Reilly-Cooper on politics.co.uk right now, as it describes the situation facing many feminists today.  Increasingly there is no debate, there is only complete acceptance of a set of views or you’re marginalized.  This is not a rational give or take situation, but rather an inquisitional drive for purity.

But I skip ahead – The article is about Germaine Greer deciding not to speak at Cardiff University because of concerns over her personal safety and the resulting fallout surrounding the event.

“In a Newsnight interview with Kirsty Wark, Greer remained characteristically uncompromising. Among the many things she said during that interview, the focus has been on two statements which directly echo Melhuish’s complaints: “I don’t think that post-operative transgender men, ie MtoF transgender people, are women” and “it is simply not true that intersexual people suffer in a way that other people don’t suffer” (given the context, it’s reasonable to assume she was referring to transgender as opposed to intersex people here).

You might not like these opinions very much. You might find them rude, obnoxious, blunt and hurtful. You might think it is disrespectful and unkind for Greer to openly proclaim that she does not share trans people’s perceptions of themselves and their identity. You might think she is mistaken, that trans women are in fact women, and do experience forms of discrimination and marginalisation that other groups do not share. But whatever your view about the truth of these opinions, it requires quite an argumentative leap to define them as hate speech, or to claim convincingly that merely holding and expressing such views is equivalent to inciting violence, hatred and discrimination against trans people. Crucially, Greer was explicit that she was making no statement at all on what treatment trans people ought to have. “I’m not saying that people should not be allowed to go through that procedure. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t make them a woman. It happens to be an opinion. It’s not a prohibition.” She also said that when speaking to trans women, she would “use female speech forms, as a courtesy”.

So Greer said nothing about what rights trans people ought to have or how they ought to be treated, and certainly nothing that could plausibly be interpreted as an incitement to violence. Believing that trans women are men is neither an incitement to violence, nor is it dehumanising, unless you also happen to think that men deserve violence and are not human. So the two main offences she is accused of are ones she openly admits to: not believing that transgender women are women, and not believing that transphobia – prejudice and bigotry towards transgender people – exists.

Both of these offences are solely concerned with the propositional content of Greer’s beliefs. That is, the objection is that she believes things that her opponents believe to be false, and that these beliefs are, for reasons that are never properly articulated, “dangerous”. So what Greer stands accused of is, essentially, thoughtcrime. She is guilty of holding the wrong thoughts, of believing the wrong things, of entertaining ideas and defining concepts in ways that diverge from some doctrine to which all decent people are supposed to subscribe. One must believe that trans women are women, and one must believe that trans people are subject to forms of prejudice and discrimination that others are not, and if you do not hold those beliefs, then you are by definition dangerous, a potential threat to others, and must be silenced. The possibility of reasonable disagreement on these issues is ruled out, ex hypothesi.

The response to Greer and her alleged transphobia is just one example of a creeping trend among social justice activists of an identitarian persuasion: a tendency towards ideological totalism, the attempt to determine not only what policies and actions are acceptable, but what thoughts and beliefs are, too. Contemporary identity-based social justice activism is increasingly displaying the kinds of totalising and authoritarian tactics that we usually associate with cults or quasi-religious movements which aim to control the thoughts and inner lives of their members. The doctrine of “gender identity” – the idea that people possess an essential inner gender that is independent both of their sexed body and of the social reality of being treated as a person with such a body – has rapidly been elevated to the status of quasi-religious belief, such that those who do not subscribe to it are seen as not only mistaken and misguided, but dangerous and threatening, and must therefore be silenced.”

Gender identity is all about the feels, however… strong personal feelings do not trump reality or the facts of the matter.   Women, the feminist movement, and society in general will be in a great deal of trouble if they ever do.

This Blog best viewed with Ad-Block and Firefox!

What is ad block? It is an application that, at your discretion blocks out advertising so you can browse the internet for content as opposed to ads. If you do not have it, get it here so you can enjoy my blog without the insidious advertising.

Like Privacy?

Change your Browser to Duck Duck Go.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,241 other followers

Progressive Bloggers

Categories

January 2022
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Archives

Blogs I Follow

The DWR Community

Women Are Human

Independent source for the top stories in worldwide gender identity news

Widdershins Worlds

WRITING LESBIAN FICTION, SCIENCE FICTION, AND FANTASY, SINCE THE 20TH CENTURY

aunt polly's rants

A fine WordPress.com site

silverapplequeen

herstory. poetry. recipes. rants.

Paul S. Graham

Communications, politics, peace and justice

Debbie Hayton

Transgender Teacher and Journalist

Whirlwind of Scrap Paper - A Blog

Wittering about books and current affairs. Posting Wednesday and Friday.

shakemyheadhollow

Conceptual spaces: politics, philosophy, art, literature, religion, cultural history

Our Better Natures

Loving, Growing, Being

Lyra

A topnotch WordPress.com site

I Won't Take It

Life After an Emotionally Abusive Relationship

VictimFocus Blog

Exploring best practice and research in sexual violence. A loud voice in the fight against victim blaming. Written and Managed by Psychologist and Best Selling Author Dr Jessica Taylor

Unpolished XX

No product, no face paint. I am enough.

Volunteer petunia

Observations and analysis on survival, love and struggle

femlab

the feminist exhibition space at the university of alberta

Raising Orlando

About gender, identity, parenting and containing multitudes

REAL for women

Reflecting Equality in Australian Legislation for women

The Feminist Kitanu

Spreading the dangerous disease of radical feminism

Double Plus Good

The Evolution Will Not BeTelevised

la scapigliata

writer, doctor, wearer of many hats

Teach The Change

Teaching Artist/ Progressive Educator

Female Personhood

Identifying as female since the dawn of time.

Radfem Resources | Radical Feminist Literature

A virtual library for those interested in radical feminist literature and resources.

Not The News in Briefs

A blog by Helen Saxby

SOLIDARITY WITH HELEN STEEL

A blog in support of Helen Steel

thenationalsentinel.wordpress.com/

Where media credibility has been reborn.

BigBooButch

Memoirs of a Butch Lesbian

RadFemSpiraling

Radical Feminism Discourse

a sledge and crowbar

deconstructing identity and culture

The Radical Pen

Fighting For Female Liberation from Patriarchy

Emma

Politics, things that make you think, and recreational breaks

Easilyriled's Blog

cranky. joyful. radical. funny. feminist.

Nordic Model Now!

Movement for the Abolition of Prostitution

The WordPress C(h)ronicle

These are the best links shared by people working with WordPress

HANDS ACROSS THE AISLE

Gender is the Problem, Not the Solution

fmnst

Peak Trans and other feminist topics

There Are So Many Things Wrong With This

if you don't like the news, make some of your own

Gentle Curiosity

Musing over important things. More questions than answers.

%d bloggers like this: