XFilesGeek's Guide to Transphobia!

Post Reply New Topic

Greetings, LGBT Aspie Brain Trust!

I'm bored and since X-Mas break is on the horizon, I've decided to start a thread dedicated to my responses to common transphobic buffoonery I encounter both on the internet and in real life. As most of us know there are, unfortunately, nests of transphobia/homophobia alive and well here on WP, but what better way to vent my frustrations with stupidity than creating a repository of smartness? I'll add new posts to the thread as time and "brain energy" become available.

Feel free to join in if you have any good anti-transphobe thoughts to add to the pile. And, if I accidentally say something intelligent, you are more than welcome to appropriate it for your own use.

The first "argument" I'm going to tackle is..........

Transphobe: "The Y-chromosome is the most important indicator when determining sex. A person with a Y-chromosome is "male" and surgery can't change it! Sex is objective."

Honestly, this argument is a lot of fun to take down because it involves a heady mix of science, culture, and history. It's also an indicator that a person is trying to sound "scientific" without much understanding of "science."

To begin, as most of us know, a person can be born with a Y-chromosome and still develop female secondary sex characteristics. Whether a person will eventually develop boobs or facial hair has more to do with the fetus being exposed to certain hormones, namely, androgen, in the womb at a certain stage of development.

Transphobe: "But a person with a Y-chromosome is still technically male!"

The designation of "maleness" is not a "scientific" one. All science does is describe the physical world. The only thing "science" has to say about "sex" is that the Y-chromosome exists and that, when combined with development in the womb, will usually produce a particular set of secondary sex characteristics.

The concepts of "man" and "woman" predate the discovery of chromosomes. People have been designating "he" and "she" based on genitals for thousands of years and, depending on the society, other factors were often taken into account. The terms "man" and "woman" carry significant baggage and implications that derive from CULTURE, not "science." Science does not dictate how we live within society; culture does.

Therefore, "maleness" exists within the realm of CULTURE, not physical reality. Y-chromosomes can be objectively proven to exist, but what it have to say about a person's identity and how they should be perceived in society is based on CULTURE, not SCIENCE.

To reiterate:

"Man" and "woman" = culture.

Y-chromosome = science.

Can a person get sex reassignment surgery and be considered a man or woman afterward? That's a CULTURAL question.

Transphobes: "But people need to base their sex on physical markers, or anyone can define themselves as anything!"

That may be true, but what physical markers should we use? The pseudo-intellectuals agitate for us to rely on the Y-chromosome to designate "maleness" or "femaleness." Others will point to genitals. Some people think it should be a combination of genitals and chromosomes and whether they are in the "correct" configuration.

A study that scanned the brains of transgendered people who had not yet undergone hormone replacement therapy suggested that transgendered people do, in fact, posses brains that are structured differently than the gender-normative. If we can look to chromosomes and genitals as the source of sex/gender, than why can't we look to brains? Are brains any less of a significant physical attribute than chromosomes or genitals?

In reality, any attempt to label any physical attribute as "more important" than any other is arbitrary and based on subjective preference, not objective reasoning. We might as well include hair color or eye spacing as indicators of sex/gender.


Well, that's all for now, folks. This post is long enough and I need to break. I'll make more posts as inspiration hits. In the meantime, happy transphobe hunting!

Tootles.

Guess I'm a transphobe then.

I hope your being sarcastic. Being a transphobe is not something to be proud of and smile about. By being a transphobe, you are a part of the very environment that causes pain, suffering, discrimination, and death to people with transgenderism.

I have learned that transphobes are usually ignorant people that, once educated, turn out be decent. Personally, I have far too much confidence in myself to tolerate the stupidity of transphobes. That's why I prefer to go "stealth-mode" instead of deal with the constant stupid arguments.

The OP had some very nice counter-arguments.

Oh don't be silly, just because I don't automatically lap up the nonsense on sex & gender spouted by trans folk, doesn't mean I'm raining death down upon them.

Congratulations.

Preach it i'm tired of transphobes. they dont even realize how much they impact peoples lives. they make people scared to be themselves or even worse: make them feel to worthless to even go on living. i know way to many people who tried to kill themselves, i don't want anyone else to.

btw, carl sagan!! !! !! !

And I don't automatically lap up the nonsense on sex and gender spouted by the mainstream, so I guess we both have not "lapping" things in common.





Thanks.

Part of the reason I started this thread was to encourage new or "budding" TGs not to get down on themselves. I figure all of the negativity typically thrown at TGs deserved a response, even if it means exposing myself to "bashing."

But most "anti-transgendered" arguments generally boil down to either, "You're gross!" or "Sex is determined by chromosomes alone because I say so!! !"



Precisely.

I'll post more of my responses to "Transphobia Greatest Hits" tomorrow. Work calls.

you're not in the least ashamed. not a good thing.

"Governments that consist of very few women have hurried to recognize as women men who believe that they are women and have had themselves castrated to prove it, because they see women not as another sex but as a non-sex. No so-called sex-change has ever begged for a uterus-and-ovaries transplant; if uterus-and-ovaries transplants were made mandatory for wannabe women they would disappear overnight. The insistence that manmade women be accepted as women is the institutional expression of the mistaken conviction that women are defective males."

that little gem is from germaine greer. a name many would associate with feminism but one i think should not be as a feminist should not be cissexist or sexist. and this is so very clearly both. how does she know transwomen wouldn't want reproductive organs? has she asked any? seeing as she doesnt even awknowledge they exist i would think not and seeing as how many other transphobes do not(theyre just delusional men to them) then i think the same argument applies. by making the uterus and ovaries the defining feature of being female you reduce women to their biology and more than that you reduce them to their reproductive ability, something that has been used to bind women to the home for ages so we could reproduce little workers for the state and has been something feminists have tried to disassociate being female from then greer and her ilk are just ignorant morons. that disqualifies any "feminist" argument against transpeople. and the italicised part is just sheer idiocy- all the misogynists are trying to make it look like they think women are inferior by getting sex changes. riiiight. i wonder how she explains transmen?

I do sympathize with transsexuals, but, like 95% of the human race I cannot accept you, rationally or emotionally, as anything other than transsexuals, not the gender you "feel" you are. I think it's rather brutal the way the medical community treat gender dysphoria. It is, in my mind, a mental illness and should be treated as such with psychological techniques, but we don't even try anymore for fear of upsetting post-ops. So they sell you a nice wedge of false hope and mutilate you. Good job guys.

As my signature suggests, it is often better to face reality head on.

Historically, all attempts at treating GID with therapy have failed. There have been 70 years of attempts to do so. The decision to treat with transition was made due to psych professionals not being able to figure out what else to do to keep their patients from killing themselves. It has nothing to do with "upsetting post-ops." The suicide rate is reputed to be about 50% (though I have not seen really solid studies on that number).


I'm going to guess that you are envisioning a stereotypical man-in-a-dress with 5 o'clock shadow trying act feminine. Like Mr. Garrison on South Park. There are plenty, especially those who transition young (or even have an intersex condition so that they already looked like their target gender) who are indistinguishable from "normal people." You're already accepting them, you just don't know it.

Some others who can't pass find that they still prefer to be transitioned despite all the ill treatment, ignorance, and crap they receive. IIRC, the rate of de-transitioning is less than 10%.

Also, the fact is that most transsexuals do not transition. They find other ways to cope. Those for whom that isn't enough are the minority who end up on the transition track. And in order to end up on that track a person has to undergo at least a year of therapy. They also have to spend a year (or two) of being able to "pass" as their target gender. That means being able to work, having a social life, and not having serious psychological or adjustment problems. If they can't function in their target gender, they do not get medical approval to go forward. The medical protocol (called "WPATH") is designed to make transition the last resort.


It doesn't sound like you actually know what the medical community does.

As far as "facing reality," that's the same kind of thinking that lead to homosexuality being in the DSM. It's obviously "reality" that people can only really be heterosexual. Doesn't someone's being gay just *seem* psychological? It does, but only if you assume that other people are exactly like yourself on the inside. It's a kind of cognitive arrogance that leads to flawed reasoning and illogical conclusions.

True, the surgery has come a long way in recent years, but I wasn't talking about that kind of day-to-day acceptance, that's easy. I meant the only kind of acceptance they really care about, that romantic acceptance, that will to be desired and loved as men or women, not as a "person-of-anomalous-sex".

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f_1OiuL658[/youtube]

That's more or less the reaction you might expect from a straight male. What do you do as Ida in that situation? Lie til the end? Pretend the infertility is due to other problems? This is what I mean by false hope. True acceptance is impossible without lobotomising the population


I am glad to learn it, at least they have a chance for happiness/true acceptance as a odd member of a particular gender rather than next to none taking the surgery route.



I've heard that a lot more than 10% deeply regret the decision. Shame I can't find it though, was a long time since I read it.



No it's different, gays & lesbians are accepted as gays & lesbians, there's no conflict, while transsexuals cannot be accepted the way they want to be.

I think there is a problem with trying to simulate that in your imagination. When you do that, you already know. OTOH, IRL you get a feeling about a person's gender and whether or not you like then from how they come across. If that happens first, and *then* the person finds out it may not work out so stereotypically.

Note: most transsexuals tell before the first kiss, let alone sex -- there is way too much awareness/fear of getting murdered. It seems (from reading forums, anyway) that most try to be considerate in allowing that a person might have a problem with with romance with them.

Those who don't tell are probably the ones who are indistinguishable. As far as not telling the truth about their past, that was the official recommendation in the "old days." (Back then they wouldn't let someone transition unless they could sexually arouse a straight male therapist.)

With greater acceptance people are feeling safer now to be honest, so that acceptance really does make it better for everyone.

IMO, the straight male fear of the "lying transsexual" tricking them is more true in the imagination than it is in reality.

I've also read of various MTF people's dating experiences, and a surprising number of guys who say they're straight are ok with it (even with pre/non-op people). Maybe it's that simple or maybe they're bisexual, I don't know. Most of that reading was on a board for people who are mostly in their 20's, though, so they're probably very passable and pretty good looking.

There is someone named Lynn Conway, who transitioned in the 60's. She was a brilliant engineer who had to give up credit for some work which later became famous. So, she came out because people were starting to take credit for her work. Anyway, she's married to a guy, and has been for a long time. Now that he knows, he's apparently ok with it.

There's also someone named Nikki Araguz. She has an intersex condition, and her body naturally feminized at puberty. But she was left with (small, non-functional) male genitalia (she was too poor to do anything about it). She ended up marrying a firefighter (they're pretty macho, aren't they?) and he's ok with it. (Her case is not a good example, though, because she's in the middle of a legal battle and the opposing attorney is putting lies out to the media.)

And there are those who transition while they are married or otherwise in a long-term relationships. Most relationships don't survive transition, but some do. Jennifer Finney Boylan and Zoe Brain are examples which can be googled.

Also, not all MTF transsexuals are attracted to men.

Maybe. Or maybe they'll just scrape along, miserable, doped up on anti-depressants and tranquilizers, and will spend their lives shut up in their houses.

Oh, also, as far as surgery being the main thing about transition, to some it is and to some it isn't. For some it's actually a bureaucratic matter -- in some states you can't change your driver's license gender indication without it. And having an ID whose gender is different than how you look can get you killed by police. In the last few weeks someone was tazered in the crotch for nothing more than that.

I think overall that it isn't a simple situation that is generalizable. Some straight guys are ok with transwomen (and I'm not talking about 'chasers') and others assault or kill them. And yet others will rob and kill transwomen deliberately, because they know they can use the "tranny panic" defense ("he tricked me into sex" -- even if they never had sex) to get away with it.

Don't you dare claim to be able to sympathize with transgendered/transsexual folk. To make a statement that you are sympathetic and then that you cannot accept them as the gender they feel is not sympathy. Why? Because, by not accepting them based on what they feel, you are ignoring or disagreeing with their feelings which is the opposite of sympathy (sympathy being agreement or harmony in what another person is feeling).

Be honest and say what you truly feel. You are either incapable or refuse to understand transgender people. You don't agree with them changing and you are not willing to accommodate them when they change.

How very sympathetic of you, indeed. (sarcasm)

I will correct you and call you out. Because the transgender people reading this deserve that. Not only do transgendered folk have to fight the feeling of being born in the wrong body. They also have to fight unsympathetic people like you when they transition. So they can finally obtain peace of body and mind. They don't need people making it harder for them.



Um, "we don't even try anymore"? Are you a medical doctor? If you were in the medical community, you would know that the first treatments are psychological.

You don't seem to know how the process works in this so let me tell you:

It is necessary, before any surgery, to determine whether it is psychological or something else. My surgeon and insurance requires letters from a psychologist telling them that psychological techniques did not or would not, in their professional opinion, work. To get any transgender/transsexual surgery, you also have to be mentally sound (not mentally ill).

On top of that, you have to live as your desired gender for three years straight, changed your name to the appropriate gender, have two therapists letters, see a gender therapist, and been diagnosed with gender identity disorder minimum!

The medical community, before doing any type of surgery, has to make sure this is not a phase or mental illness. If this team of specialists gets this wrong, does surgery, and has the patient sue them after regretting it; they can loose their professional credentials.

If people have already made it to the surgery stage, they are far more likely than not to actually need the surgery to live a full and fulfilling life.



Whose "they"? Do you mean all the therapists, psychiatrists, surgeons that a transgender person must consult for years before going through any type of surgery? Before getting my top surgery scheduled, I have to consult for three years straight. It wasn't the usual 5-7 years, because I had a history of saying I was a boy for fourteen years straight.

To you, as someone who is most likely already comfortable with their body, these surgeries would be mutilation. For a transgendered person, whose brains were hardwired for the opposite genitals than that they were born with, it wouldn't be. Oh, wait, but you wouldn't understand why transgender people would feel this way because you are unsympathetic. That or you just didn't know.



You need to face the reality that you don't care or really don't know about transgender people and their plights.

RikersBeard, I am biting my sharp tongue, in respect for the forum rules, but just barely. I might be wrong and you are a decent person. That's up to you to demonstrate.

If you just didn't know or other people feed you bad information, I don't blame you for your responses. There is so much misinformation around. But, as a transman who went through the process and doesn't regret it at all, I hope this educates you.

If you still are like this even after what I gave you, then you are a transphobe. And no reason nor education will quell your fear.

Alrighty.....

Who's ready for some more fun? I am!

Transphobe: "Transsexual isn't natural and doesn't happen in nature!!"

The term "natural" is a big, sexy word isn't it?

I've noticed this argument finds favor in atheistic/agnostic circles. This is because when people say "nature," what they really mean is "God." Yes, even non-believers fall into this trap because life's a lot easier when you fancy that a large, eternal entity, whether it be nature or a god, shares your opinions.

The truth: "nature" is not a conscious being. It has no thoughts, feelings, or opinions. Therefore, "nature" has no "design." It has absolutely no "plan." If you think nature looks orderly, it's because you're a human and humans are inherently inclined to seek patterns, even in things that don't actually have any. This is why people can see a "face" on the moon.

If it's your assertion that nature is a conscious creature that can make decisions, the burden of proof falls on you.

Besides, "nature" is not a particularly good template for which humans to base culture on. I realize that many individuals like to cite "human nature" when pushing their socio-political agendas, but it really boils down to them cherry-picking which aspects of "nature" they find most appealing. For example, in our closest relative, the chimpanzee, there is ample evidence for greed and dominance, but there is also ample evidence for empathy and sharing. Where you fall on the political spectrum will dictate which behaviors you choose to pay attention to and subsequently ascribe to "human nature."

In any case, "gender-bending" occurs in a myriad of places in "nature," even among primates. And even if it didn't, who in their proper mind would suggest that humans should base their actions on the characteristics of non-human animals?

The, "It's not natural!" whine has pestered many different groups throughout history, from TGs, to homosexuals, to women, to African Americans, ect. It's time to put this particular baby to bed.

And more for Tuesday.....

Transphobe: "I'm against sex-reassignment because it's dangerous!"

Oh, bless your dear heart......you're being concerned for my welfare warms me to the marrow. It's too bad you're full of sh!t.

If we do a little fancy math and compare the statistics of people who perish on account of getting sex-reassignment surgery with the numbers of how many people die, get maimed, and/or kill and maim others in automobile accidents, I'm sure we'll see that the numbers of TGs who bite the dust under the scalpel is relatively small by comparison.

Are you also "against" people driving cars? Are you "against" people flying in planes? Are you "against" people participating in full-contact sports wherein they might suffer broken bones, concussions, or even death? I thought not.

Seeing as how SRS (sex-reassignment surgery) is a conscious decision made by an individual who has undergone many months of psychiatric care, and it puts no one else at risk besides the person having the surgery, the potential "danger" is not a reason to "oppose" it, unless you're willing to "oppose" other much more dangerous activities out of your apparent boundless love and caring for other people.

Coffee's running out. Last post for today.

Transphobe: "Gender Identity Disorder is a psychological problem, not a medical problem! It needs to be cured by therapy."

This is a classic example of people picking and choosing the "facts" that they wish to believe.

From a recent study:

Source: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... -scan.html

It would seem to suggest that "therapy" has about as much chance at "curing" transgenderism as it does "curing" autism. Neurology and brain-wiring are linked to behavior. You cannot simply change brain-structure through sheer force of will.

As for people who would suggest TGs should undergo radical brain surgery, or take mind-altering drugs in an attempt to "fix" their brains, I would humbly suggest that altering a person's brain is much more complicated and risky than altering their physical appearance to match their brain. Plus, there's no valid reason NOT to alter their physical bodies in the first place.

And if we can tell TGs they should simply "fix" their brains to match what society finds "acceptable," why should we not demand the same for autistics (or any other group of people who's benign behavior society finds "undesirable")?

Lastly, and this goes back to my previous argument, there's no particular reason not to include "brains" as reliable physical markers for gender. A brains is no less of an arbitrary physical indicator of "gender" than either chromosomes or genitalia. I can't overstate how amusing I find it that humans are so willing to disregard "brains" simply because we can not "see" them in everyday life.

"Curing" TG brains isn't much different from "curing" autistic brains.

Tootles.