Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Fried Egg]

So this isn't really about "...an innate sense of gender", but more about what parents and carers may or may not decide on behalf of their charges. At least we know now what the issue-under-discussion is.

Not just parents and carers, but medical professionals too.

By the way, we have talked about a lot of different subjects in this thread, including this but also what happens when trans rights might conflict with women's rights (i.e. single sex spaces) as well as the nature of gender identity itself.

Aren't "medical professionals" carers too?

Yes, I just wanted to be clear what I meant.

The issue of women-only spaces has never really been a problem in the real world, although it has been presented to the world as such by a discredited author and her Sisters of Hatred.

I think the problem is with "rights". There are too many **%&$£! rights, and not enough live and let live. We don't need rights where simple tolerance would do the same job, better.

~sigh~

We've been over this particular topic plenty and as you're not bringing any new facts or arguments to the table, only re-iterating arguments that have already been countered, I shall not bother repeating myself here.

However I will mention the very recent occurrence of the women's pool championship final in the UK (Ultimate Pool Women’s Pro Series) final being contested by two trans women (Harriet Haynes and Lucy Smith), having between them demolished all the biological women on the way, shows that this is still very much a real world problem. If only all those hateful biological women would just shut up and be a little more tolerant, right?

[Sy Borg]

Fact is, that people have gender identities, including you, only you take yours for granted because it's never given you cause for concern.

Then why aren't I aware of my sexuality? That's never given me a "cause for concern", but I'm still well aware of it.

You presumably recognise that people have a range of sexualities from hetero to homo and bi in between. And you recognise that people's sex drive (or libido) can vary from high, through lower to non existent (i.e. asexual)? But you don't allow for these ranges in gender identity? i.e. you're saying gender identity is binary? Oh, the irony...

Scope creep. Did I say gender identity was binary? I do think there are ranges of gender identity, that's a fair point, although you delivered the point horribly. Why are you suddenly start playing dirty with me by misrepresenting my point and then ridiculing me? For now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt - that you had a brain fade and normal service will resume.

As with sexuality, gender identities are predominantly "normal", but exceptions exist and should not be denied.

[Fried Egg]

Scope creep. Did I say gender identity was binary? I do think there are ranges of gender identity, that's a fair point, although you delivered the point horribly. Why are you suddenly start playing dirty with me by misrepresenting my point and then ridiculing me? For now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt - that you had a brain fade and normal service will resume.

You don't seem to have any qualms repeatedly insisting that I don't know my own mind, that I have something that I'm not aware of as if it's an obvious fact that isn't questionable. So it seemed fair and reasonable to infer from this insistence that you saw gender identity as binary, even though you did not explicitly say it. If not, why not allow for the possibility that some people might not have it?

I'm sorry if you feel that I went to far but then I'm sorry that it took me going this far in order for you to acknowledge that I might have a point.

[Sy Borg]

Scope creep. Did I say gender identity was binary? I do think there are ranges of gender identity, that's a fair point, although you delivered the point horribly. Why are you suddenly start playing dirty with me by misrepresenting my point and then ridiculing me? For now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt - that you had a brain fade and normal service will resume.

You don't seem to have any qualms repeatedly insisting that I don't know my own mind, that I have something that I'm not aware of as if it's an obvious fact that isn't questionable. So it seemed fair and reasonable to infer from this insistence that you saw gender identity as binary, even though you did not explicitly say it. If not, why not allow for the possibility that some people might not have it?

I'm sorry if you feel that I went to far but then I'm sorry that it took me going this far in order for you to acknowledge that I might have a point.

You said you don't have a gender identity. That is an admission that you don't notice that part of your mind. Fair enough, you don't need to. I am sure if you raised the point about gender identity not being binary in a civil way, I would have responded just fine.

Fact is, you never said that to me, just that you don't have a gender identity. Yet, I'm pretty sure you are not going to touch up your lippy and pop on a frock to go to the shops. You are a bloke and you know it - your gender identity is so intrinsic that you don't notice it.

Sure, you probably don't see yourself as a macho either - but that doesn't make you non-binary in terms of gender. We all have a blend of Yin and Yang. For instance, I'm a woman and I'm no more likely to wear lippy or a frock than you, and I play drums. It seems to me that gender identity, like sexuality, exists on a steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority of people in the "normal range".

[Fried Egg]

You said you don't have a gender identity. That is an admission that you don't notice that part of your mind.

And I was questioning whether it even existed. Since many others seem to insist that they have it, I have to conclude that it does exist for some people at least.

Fact is, you never said that to me, just that you don't have a gender identity. Yet, I'm pretty sure you are not going to touch up your lippy and pop on a frock to go to the shops. You are a bloke and you know it - your gender identity is so intrinsic that you don't notice it.

But I would argue that the reason I don't go to the shops wearing lippy and a frock is more a case of wanting to fit in and not draw attention to myself. Not out of any feeling that my outward appearance would be conflicting with my inner sense of gender. Rightly or wrongly, I know what's expected of me and it would make life harder for me defying social expectations.

Also, how people dress themselves in public might also be informed by wanting to appeal to the sex you're attracted to. I would think that it would, as a man dressing in an overtly feminine way, only make me less attractive to women.

Sure, you probably don't see yourself as a macho either - but that doesn't make you non-binary in terms of gender. We all have a blend of Yin and Yang. For instance, I'm a woman and I'm no more likely to wear lippy or a frock than you, and I play drums.

I've never seen any reason why one's behaviour (and how it appears to align with what we think of as typical gendered behaviour) as having much to do with one's gender identity. Nor do I think choosing to dress in gender neutral ways (such as jeans and a tea-shirt) has much to do with it either. Though it does seem that trans people want to behave and look in the most gender typical ways as possible.

It seems to me that gender identity, like sexuality, exists on a steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority of people in the "normal range".

But there is also the axis of libido. Having a very low libido is not merely occupying the half way house position (i.e. being bi-sexual), but being barely sexually attracted to anyone.

Is this analogous to gender identity? I know that I am a male but have no strong internal sense that I am male. Just like any other fact about myself that I have learned to believe.

[Pattern-chaser]

I think the problem is with "rights". There are too many **%&$£! rights, and not enough live and let live. We don't need rights where simple tolerance would do the same job, better.

However I will mention the very recent occurrence of the women's pool championship final in the UK (Ultimate Pool Women’s Pro Series) final being contested by two trans women (Harriet Haynes and Lucy Smith), having between them demolished all the biological women on the way, shows that this is still very much a real world problem. If only all those hateful biological women would just shut up and be a little more tolerant, right?

Like I said, tolerance. If there is a particular problem, as there seems to be here, it can surely be solved by discussion between decent folk?

[Fried Egg]

I think the problem is with "rights". There are too many **%&$£! rights, and not enough live and let live. We don't need rights where simple tolerance would do the same job, better.

However I will mention the very recent occurrence of the women's pool championship final in the UK (Ultimate Pool Women’s Pro Series) final being contested by two trans women (Harriet Haynes and Lucy Smith), having between them demolished all the biological women on the way, shows that this is still very much a real world problem. If only all those hateful biological women would just shut up and be a little more tolerant, right?

Like I said, tolerance. If there is a particular problem, as there seems to be here, it can surely be solved by discussion between decent folk?

In an ideal world, yes. Unfortunately, the trans women who are excluded by from women's only sporting events often take the sporting bodies to court (such as is happening right now with Harriet Haynes who is suing the English Blackball Pool Federation) on the basis of alleged discrimination in an attempt to force a change in the rules.

I think they're past talking...

[Sy Borg]

You said you don't have a gender identity. That is an admission that you don't notice that part of your mind.

And I was questioning whether it even existed. Since many others seem to insist that they have it, I have to conclude that it does exist for some people at least.

You are the only person I know or have even heard of who denies having a gender identity.

Poor old John from John/Joan infamy certainly had a gender identity. The only one to deny this was a corrupt doctor who supervised the fiasco.

Sure, you probably don't see yourself as a macho either - but that doesn't make you non-binary in terms of gender. We all have a blend of Yin and Yang. For instance, I'm a woman and I'm no more likely to wear lippy or a frock than you, and I play drums.

I've never seen any reason why one's behaviour (and how it appears to align with what we think of as typical gendered behaviour) as having much to do with one's gender identity. Nor do I think choosing to dress in gender neutral ways (such as jeans and a tea-shirt) has much to do with it either. Though it does seem that trans people want to behave and look in the most gender typical ways as possible.

Behaviour and presentation is deeply linked to gender identity. Transpeople change gender because they want to behave and present in a way that is only accepted in the opposite sex - hence the decision. It's all about social interactions. Robinson Crusoe would have no interest in changing sex, even if that way inclined.

It seems to me that gender identity, like sexuality, exists on a steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority of people in the "normal range".

But there is also the axis of libido. Having a very low libido is not merely occupying the half way house position (i.e. being bi-sexual), but being barely sexually attracted to anyone.

Is this analogous to gender identity? I know that I am a male but have no strong internal sense that I am male. Just like any other fact about myself that I have learned to believe.

Sure. That would be another steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority having a strong gender identity.

[Fried Egg]

You are the only person I know or have even heard of who denies having a gender identity.
...
That would be another steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority having a strong gender identity.

I wonder...It would be interesting to see if there have been any studies on the subject. It doesn't surprise me you haven't heard of it because it's hardly the kind of thing that comes up in regular conversation, is it? I mean, it's not like I don't know I'm male and many people might confuse the simple knowledge of their sex with a gender identity, which I consider to be some kind of deep, inner conviction that I am male (that doesn't come from anything I have learned).

Robinson Crusoe would have no interest in changing sex, even if that way inclined.

That's interesting you say that as it seems to me to conflict with what pattern-chaser was saying in that re-assignment surgery is done purely for their own benefit and has nothing to do with how other people see them. I agree with you in that it must be about how others see them (since the surgery available to us is intrinsically cosmetic).

[Sy Borg]

You are the only person I know or have even heard of who denies having a gender identity.
...
That would be another steep Bell Curve, with the vast majority having a strong gender identity.

I wonder...It would be interesting to see if there have been any studies on the subject. It doesn't surprise me you haven't heard of it because it's hardly the kind of thing that comes up in regular conversation, is it? I mean, it's not like I don't know I'm male and many people might confuse the simple knowledge of their sex with a gender identity, which I consider to be some kind of deep, inner conviction that I am male (that doesn't come from anything I have learned).

John/Joan kills all counter-arguments. One can question transkids endlessly but are you going to say John was delusional for being uncomfortable as a girl? If we accept that the boy was for real and not play-acting something he'd heard about, it becomes clear that this situation is sometimes occurring with unusually feminine boys and masculine girls.

Robinson Crusoe would have no interest in changing sex, even if that way inclined.

That's interesting you say that as it seems to me to conflict with what pattern-chaser was saying in that re-assignment surgery is done purely for their own benefit and has nothing to do with how other people see them. I agree with you in that it must be about how others see them (since the surgery available to us is intrinsically cosmetic).

Often it's life saving "cosmetic" surgery. Do minds matter, or only bodies? Does the fact that minds are ostensibly more malleable than bodies mean that mentally unconventional people are not just a bit different or eccentric, but are mentally ill or perverted and in need of cure?

[Fried Egg]

I wonder...It would be interesting to see if there have been any studies on the subject. It doesn't surprise me you haven't heard of it because it's hardly the kind of thing that comes up in regular conversation, is it? I mean, it's not like I don't know I'm male and many people might confuse the simple knowledge of their sex with a gender identity, which I consider to be some kind of deep, inner conviction that I am male (that doesn't come from anything I have learned).

John/Joan kills all counter-arguments. One can question transkids endlessly but are you going to say John was delusional for being uncomfortable as a girl? If we accept that the boy was for real and not play-acting something he'd heard about, it becomes clear that this situation is sometimes occurring with unusually feminine boys and masculine girls.

I don't think this case conclusively proves the question of gender identity as decisively as you suggest. Let's be clear on the facts; John was not actually magically transformed into a girl. It must have been absolutely clear (even to him) that his genitals were highly abnormal, and he had to undergo regular courses of hormone treatments and other physical surgery and maintenance throughout his life. By no means was he able to lead a normal life as a girl. It was not merely his masculine tendencies making him uncomfortable and distressed.

Robinson Crusoe would have no interest in changing sex, even if that way inclined.

That's interesting you say that as it seems to me to conflict with what pattern-chaser was saying in that re-assignment surgery is done purely for their own benefit and has nothing to do with how other people see them. I agree with you in that it must be about how others see them (since the surgery available to us is intrinsically cosmetic).

Often it's life saving "cosmetic" surgery.

Is it though? I think the argument that you have to allow people access to sex re-assignment surgery in order to stop them killing themselves is at the very least over blown.

But if you really believe that, why would you not support it for children too? Don't we want to save children's lives too?

Or what about people with BIID? Should we be amputating limbs or severing spinal cords if it might stop those people killing themselves?

I do accept that cosmetic surgery can sometimes massively enhance people's quality of life. I've already mentioned plastic reconstructive surgery for people who've had disfiguring accidents. And I would support such surgery for children too. But the downsides of the various sex re-assignment procedures are too problematic, are too damaging to be granted to children. Especially as they might just be experiencing the angst of associated with puberty may grow out of it. (The same could not be said if you were facially disfigured from a burn for instance).

Do minds matter, or only bodies? Does the fact that minds are ostensibly more malleable than bodies mean that mentally unconventional people are not just a bit different or eccentric, but are mentally ill or perverted and in need of cure?

There's nothing wrong with people being unconventional, different or eccentric. But if they are suffering a lot of distress and unhappy persistently, then clearly they are ill in some kind of way and it is reasonable to try and cure them (if possible).

It is interesting you mentioned 'perverted' there. Why mention that? Has anyone ever said trans people are perverted (in this thread)? Not that I am aware of.

Even the men who become trans for reasons of autogynephilia I would not call perverted. Although I think many of them would be reluctant to admit it because of the negative stigma attached to it. But I would not call them perverted.

[Fried Egg]

Like I said, tolerance. If there is a particular problem, as there seems to be here, it can surely be solved by discussion between decent folk?

Well, there has just been announced in the UK the supreme courts ruling on how the 2010 Equality Act should be interpreted with regards women. They have decided unanimously that it refers to biological sex. The Scottish parliament had argued that trans women who have a gender recognition certificate should be entitled to be treated as a women with all the sex based rights that that implies.

So, that's the final word on the subject. If the politicians (or the activists) don't like it, they will have to change the law.

Will that be the end of the matter (as far as protected spaces for women is concerned)? I doubt it but I am pleased the the court has decided in favour of (what I would call) common sense.

[Sy Borg]

I wonder...It would be interesting to see if there have been any studies on the subject. It doesn't surprise me you haven't heard of it because it's hardly the kind of thing that comes up in regular conversation, is it? I mean, it's not like I don't know I'm male and many people might confuse the simple knowledge of their sex with a gender identity, which I consider to be some kind of deep, inner conviction that I am male (that doesn't come from anything I have learned).

John/Joan kills all counter-arguments. One can question transkids endlessly but are you going to say John was delusional for being uncomfortable as a girl? If we accept that the boy was for real and not play-acting something he'd heard about, it becomes clear that this situation is sometimes occurring with unusually feminine boys and masculine girls.

I don't think this case conclusively proves the question of gender identity as decisively as you suggest. Let's be clear on the facts; John was not actually magically transformed into a girl. It must have been absolutely clear (even to him) that his genitals were highly abnormal, and he had to undergo regular courses of hormone treatments and other physical surgery and maintenance throughout his life. By no means was he able to lead a normal life as a girl. It was not merely his masculine tendencies making him uncomfortable and distressed.

Sorry, but you are wrong here. John/Joan 100% conclusively proves that gender identity is real when you add the fact that thousands, maybe even millions, of others have a mismatched gender identity and biological sex.

Without John/Joan one can just assume that all transpeople are insane but no one can say that John was wrong. Also, assuming that all transpeople are simply delusional and that nothing real is involved, as you do, fails to explain why their "insanity" is limited to this one area of life because many transpeople are highly functional in all other areas of life.

Robinson Crusoe would have no interest in changing sex, even if that way inclined.

That's interesting you say that as it seems to me to conflict with what pattern-chaser was saying in that re-assignment surgery is done purely for their own benefit and has nothing to do with how other people see them. I agree with you in that it must be about how others see them (since the surgery available to us is intrinsically cosmetic).

Often it's life saving "cosmetic" surgery.

Is it though? I think the argument that you have to allow people access to sex re-assignment surgery in order to stop them killing themselves is at the very least over blown.

But if you really believe that, why would you not support it for children too? Don't we want to save children's lives too?

Or what about people with BIID? Should we be amputating limbs or severing spinal cords if it might stop those people killing themselves?

Physicians and psychiatrists spent years trying to change transpeople, using psychotherapy, counselling, conversion therapy including talk therapy, behavioural modification, and even institutionalisation. They tried hypnosis, hormones, electroshock therapy, lobotomies and aversion therapy.

That's why doctors moved to surgical solutions.

There is something real going on. Some call it gender identity. Others call it delusion, although most of these have zero knowledge on the subject.

The quote “Where the mind cannot be made to fit the body, the body should be made to fit, approximately, at any rate to the mind” is attributed to Laurence Michael Dillon, a British physician and transgender pioneer. Dillon included this statement in his 1946 book Self: A Study in Ethics and Endocrinology, one of the first psychomedical works to discuss trans identity and advocate for medical treatment to align the body with gender identity, distinguishing it from homosexuality. His work laid early groundwork for understanding gender incongruence and the role of medical intervention in transgender care.

Re: your comment that, if this is such important surgery, why no do it on the young?

A: Because plenty of surgeries are deferred for the young because they are still developing, such as hip and knee replacements, spinal fusion, rotator cuff repair, cardiac bypass surgery, liver transplants and cochlear implant surgery.

[Fried Egg]

I don't think this case conclusively proves the question of gender identity as decisively as you suggest. Let's be clear on the facts; John was not actually magically transformed into a girl. It must have been absolutely clear (even to him) that his genitals were highly abnormal, and he had to undergo regular courses of hormone treatments and other physical surgery and maintenance throughout his life. By no means was he able to lead a normal life as a girl. It was not merely his masculine tendencies making him uncomfortable and distressed.

Sorry, but you are wrong here. John/Joan 100% conclusively proves that gender identity is real when you add the fact that thousands, maybe even millions, of others have a mismatched gender identity and biological sex.

You just completely disregard my point that there were a whole host of other factors in John's life that would have caused him a lot of distress. When you don't control for all the variables, you don't end up with a conclusion that is 100% proven. Indeed, a single instance would not prove anything either.

Without John/Joan one can just assume that all transpeople are insane but no one can say that John was wrong. Also, assuming that all transpeople are simply delusional and that nothing real is involved, as you do, fails to explain why their "insanity" is limited to this one area of life because many transpeople are highly functional in all other areas of life.

It's already been pointed out that there high rates of comorbidities with other conditions so I don't know how you can say that they "are highly functional in all other areas of life" (although I accept it may be true in some cases).

No doubt there are a huge array of different and complex reasons for people seeking to transition. Some of which don't have anything to do with gender identity (such as autogynephilia).

But one thing's for sure, there's a whole lot my research that needs to be done, not only to better understand the condition of gender dysphoria but also on the array of re-assignment treatments available as to their effectiveness.

[Pattern-chaser]

Like I said, tolerance. If there is a particular problem, as there seems to be here, it can surely be solved by discussion between decent folk?

In an ideal world, yes. Unfortunately, the trans women who are excluded by from women's only sporting events often take the sporting bodies to court (such as is happening right now with Harriet Haynes who is suing the English Blackball Pool Federation) on the basis of alleged discrimination in an attempt to force a change in the rules.

I think they're past talking...

If so, that's a shame. The recent UK verdict is a petty and vindictive case, IMO. It's too late now, but I still think it could've been solved outside our Supreme Court, which is there to judge the most terrible of cases. It should never have become involved. Now, there will be an increase in the beatings and killings of trans people. It won't make the news, because the numbers involved will be small, as trans people are such a small minority. And they will be taunted and abused wherever they go, with women being called "men", and men "women", loudly and publicly.

Humans reject, abuse, and attack those who are different from themselves. I don't think we needed any extra encouragement in this.