I've based this article on a series of Tweets I posted on 23rd of April 2017.
There's an increasing trend of people using the concept of science to attack trans people. These people aren't scientists; they tend to be people who have never studied science.
Two groups in particular seem to be obsessed with this misuse of science - trans excluding feminists, and conservative, or radical, religious bigots.
I believe it started out of genuine ignorance, with many people out there who tend to be bigoted because their experience of life and/ or education was rather limited, and so they fell back on very childish understanding of biology to use as a weapon against trans people - much like arguments that in the past have used to attack gay people. But in recent months it has started to feel like a concerted campaign by a few different groups that are unfortunately prone to a hatred of people different from themselves.
I've been sent scans of basic GCSE level biology text books showing genitals of naked adults, one labelled male and the other labelled female. More recently the same trolls are more likely to shout, "you can't change your chromosomes" or more along the lines of this beauty, "they use science to build their case for climate change yet openly reject it when it comes to the transgender topic. Such hypocrisy", which apparently amounts to XX chromosomes for girls and XY for boys. Never mind the scientific reality and complexity of chromosomes, or the fact that neither gender idenitity nor transgender (or for that matter cisgender) identities depend on chromosomes. And nor do we ever claim it does. We accept that we may well still have XY or XX chromosomes (if indeed that's the case, but until we test them we can't assume), but it does not matter!!! We are still who we are.
 |
| hate speech bus |
One of the arguments against being gay that I remember was that if everyone was gay we'd all die out. But not everyone is gay, and so the argument makes no sense. In fact it tends to be a fairly even and consistent 5 to 10% of society who identify as LGB. And this is backed up by endless studies and surveys.
But how can evolution have produced people who prefer same sex relationships? This assumes that evolution can only affect our ability to procreate - but in fact any development that benefits society, eg, helps us live longer, live healthier, producing more stable societies, & we become more successful as a species, we raise healthier children that are better able to survive and thrive - is one that is amplified by the process of evolution. If man was a solitary animal then the argument that gay people would be selected out by evolution might hold water, but we're not. Our children's survival, and indeed our own survival, is dependent on so many other people that those people's genetics matter to you too.
(Sorry if this is clumsy and sorry if I'm upsetting any geneticists, but I figure if I can explain it to myself then I can probably explain it to others, and I am self taught in the principles of genetics and evolution and probably don;t understand much, but i like to think i have a grasp of some of the core principles.)
See, supporting gay people was considered anti science once. But people were still gay regardless. The haters, instead of wanting to use science to understand why gay people existed despite their own dog eat dog version of evolution, instead just wanted to hound gay people into accepting their own non-existence. They couldn't be natural, they said, so they must be deliberately choosing to be sexual deviants, and so society made it illegal and persecuted anyone who fell in love, or lust, with someone of the same sex.
What the haters don't seem to get, is science is not there to force people to conform, it's there to explain...
So the fact that there have always been trans people and that trans children exist at ages 3 and 4 is not anti science, and nor could it be. It'd be like saying any phenomena observed only since science came into existence, that wasn't fully explainable by science, is anti science. Try telling 4 year old kids who refuse to accept the gender assigned to them that they're being anti science. See where it gets you.
So, haters, i am absolutely certain i am a woman. Even though i was forced to be a boy and man under threats of.violence and ridicule. And yet, the surety, the knowledge, of who i am persists and was so compelling that ignoring it was making me suicidal.
What would be, and is, anti science, is ignoring this phenomena. Pretending it's not real. That would be anti science. Only Nazis use science to erase human behaviours that they seem to be anti science.
Saying it's mental illness is also anti science. Because, you need to prove it's mental illness. Medicine is science based. To declare something to be an illness you need to be qualified, you need evidence, and you need to prove what you say is true to other people who are similarly qualified (so you all actually know what you're talking about) and prove what you say is true. Do studies, write a paper, publish it where it will be robustly critiqued, and that allows you to respond to the criticisms.
That's what you have to do to not be anti science if you're taking an anti-trans stance.
And stop ignoring the evidence that already exists that clearly shows physical evidence that trans is real.
On mental illness, as science is beginning to be applied to trans and the old bigotries in medicine is being stamped out you will note, fewer and fewer "experts" are willing to state that trans is a mental illness. That's because there is no evidence for this. None at all. This was published in the Lancet in 2016:
The conceptualisation of transgender identity as a mental disorder has contributed to precarious legal status, human rights violations, and barriers to appropriate health care among transgender people. The proposed reconceptualisation of categories related to transgender identity in WHO's forthcoming International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 removes categories related to transgender identity from the classification of mental disorders, in part based on the idea that these conditions do not satisfy the definitional requirements of mental disorders.
There also used to be psychological theories trying to explain why trans existed, but they've been thoroughly discredited over years. Only bigotry keeps them alive now. Being trans does not look like an illness (as above, "does not fit the definitional requirements of mental disorders"). As a woman I'm perfectly healthy, only as a man was i mentally ill. I developed depression and anxiety that prevented me from living any kind of life. Being a woman now allows me to live. So why do haters persist in attacking trans people for doing the one thing that allows us to live?
You talk about science. well science is about evidence. And all the evidence says transitioning is extraordinarily successful. See below:
Surgical regret is actually very uncommon. Virtually every modern study puts it below 4 percent, and most estimate it to be between 1 and 2 percent (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfafflin 2003, Kuiper & Cohen-Kettenis 1998, Pfafflin & Junge 1998, Smith 2005, Dhejne 2014). In some other recent longitudinal studies, none of the subjects expressed regret over medically transitioning (Krege et al. 2001, De Cuypere et al. 2006).
These findings make sense given the consistent findings that access to medical care improves quality of life along many axes, including sexual functioning, self-esteem, body image, socioeconomic adjustment, family life, relationships, psychological status and general life satisfaction. This is supported by the numerous studies (Murad 2010, De Cuypere 2006, Kuiper 1988, Gorton 2011, Clements-Nolle 2006) that also consistently show that access to GCS reduces suicidality by a factor of three to six (between 67 percent and 84 percent)
Two studies on trans regret here:
Pfafflin F., Junge A. (1992) Sex Reassignment: 30 Years of International Follow-up Studies after SRS: A Comprehensive Review, 1961-1991 [publication online]. Translated from German into American English by Roberta B. Jacobson and Alf B. Meier. IJT Electronic Books.
This study looked at 70 previous studies and reviews on outcomes following sex reassignment surgery. These included 2000 individuals from 1961 to 1991. This doesn’t take into account individuals who transition without surgery. About 70% of MTF individuals were satisfied and 90% of FTM individuals.
Krege S., Bex A., Lummen G., et al. (2001). Male-to-female transsexualism: a technique, results and long-term follow-up in 66 patients. BJU International. 88:396-402.
This study shows little or no regrets possibly due to surgical advances
All the evidence says trans is real, and the illnesses associated with trans are treatable, and even if trans itself was a mental illness (& it isn't) do you realise the current medical route for transitioning came about as response to the belief that "transsexuallism" was a mental illness? Mental illnesses need to be treated where possible, and science needs to be applied to understand the nature of mental illness. What makes you think that transitioning isn't the completely appropriate thing to do to help trans people live?
What would you do to help/ treat/ cure (pick your own word) trans people? Some form of conversion therapy. Well, these methods have been proven time and time again not to work.
Example 1, example 2, example 3.
From Julia Serano:
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH, who are health care providers, not trans activists) in their latest Standards of Care (version 7) clearly state:
Treatment aimed at trying to change a person’s gender identity and expression to become more congruent with sex assigned at birth has been attempted in the past without success (Gelder & Marks, 1969; Greenson, 1964), particularly in the long term (Cohen-Kettenis & Kuiper, 1984; Pauly, 1965). Such treatment is no longer considered ethical.
So the largest and most long-standing trans health organization, and the transgender community at large, both think that gender conversion therapies are unethical. Those are the facts. But you wouldn’t know this if you read Dreger’s article, as these highly relevant points are never mentioned at all. And miraculously, her article titled “The Big Problem With Outlawing Gender Conversion Therapies” never once discusses actual gender conversion therapies! So readers never learn about the real-life horror stories detailed in those three previous links.
But that's why we have science, and qualified people in medicine, so that we don't keep trying to make things work that clearly don't work. Without science we'd all still be trying to cure disease with magic, or strange and ineffective remedies.
All those people who use science to attack trans people, you need to understand that evidence is the bedrock of science. That communication with people who disagree with you is an essential part of science. That providing evidence to others that stands up, and that is up to date and supported. Shouting chromosomes at trans people is anti science.
Because you've proved yourself unable to listen and unable to understand basic biology and completely fail to understand what it is that trans people.have to say, and what we go through and what we endure to become our true selves. You have failed at science. Sorry!
A Firsthand Account of the Torture of 'Conversion' Therapy
