An Ice Girl
Not exactly a discussion topic, I just want to say thank you to the people who edited this article. I made a few tiny corrections relating to some conflation of sex and gender. The links about the brain structure studies at the bottom are also excellent help.
I find the autism bit unnecessary to the article. It has unfortunate implications (at leas with the focus on the trans male autistic person) and seems to support the "male brain" theory of autism which as been debunked. The idea is still popular with lay folk at large, and contributes to a misunderstanding of autism. In general I think the connection between autism and being transgender shouldn't be brought up because many people, in trying to understand or justify it, further stigmatize transgender autistic people. For example, the idea that autistic people think they are transgender because they lack the ability to understand what gender is, and if they had this understanding, they would know that they really are what they were assigned at birth.
Hide / Show Replies
Huh - I didn't see this discussion. My apologies for reverting your edit.
As far as I know "male brain" is definitively not debunked. Nope. I am not seeing Unfortunate Implications at all, either.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The implications is that autistic girls, or autistic transwomen can not exist because it is in conflict with the idea that autism inherently genders a brain. Consider, girls and women are extremely under diagnosed and therefor are less likely to get the support they need. There is also a lot of sexism in autistic spaces because extreme male brain theory coupled with "boys will be boys" and "oh, he's autistic, he doesn't understand boundaries" leads to a lot of inexcusable behavior that tends to mostly hurt autistic girls (who are more likely to be punished or other wise taught not to have boundaries than autistic boys).
Extrem Male Brian Theory being debunked [4]
See also the criticism section on the Other Wiki [5]
[6]
PS: and in general, if you look further, most articles are going to use out dated language and total ignore the existence of non-binary individuals. Which, if a gendered brain was a credible theory, there would be evidence of.
I've seen plenty of science contradicting all these things you are citing. So yeah, until science has settled on stuff (which will probably take years) that won't be enough.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Septimus, no offense intended, but that answer is demanding us to provide evidence you'll accept, which is not productive to an argument. "I've seen stuff that contradicts this" doesn't help. At the very least, we could compare your sources. Let me demonstrate why:
- "I have conclusive evidence that Black persons are human and there is no substantial difference between them and Whites.""I've seen many sources contradicting that, so it seems to be undecided."
Also, if the argument is that this "isn't conclusive" (meaning no scientific consensus), then that's all the more reason to remove the entry as it argues a conclusive point.
Edited by 12.239.13.140
SRS and other procedures as "optional." I know what is meant by this, in that not all transgender people need these procedures, but it may also give the impression that no one really "needs" it, when there is in fact evidence of medical necessity of such procedures in certain cases.
Hide / Show Replies
True. Edited to "only one of the transition options available which a person may or may not need" — does that work better?
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Not That Doctor
Once upon a time there was a very helpful article discouraging people from having SRS, told by firsthand experience, either on this page, or pages related to it. I have come back to cite it elsewhere, but I can't find the relevant link. Does it still exist somewhere? Does anyone have it?
Hide / Show Replies
Maybe this one?
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html
I remember reading the Dani Bunten article that's excerpted, but don't recall seeing the rest of the page before.
Jet-a-Reeno!
Gender Euphoria
Justification for deletion of second paragraph
The second paragraph of the section on Gender Euphoria contained claims of fact and claims of judgment that were not in line with known psychological standards, nor even in agreement with the Light In The Closet article linked to only sentences prior. It is my position that this paragraph contained no useful information and in fact only put forward an anti-trans position based solely on the inserting editor's personal or religious opinions.
Edited by PillowCaseLaw
Recently there was an ATT thread
that raised the question of how to discuss nonbinary identities in the context of a useful note, given that it's included within the "transgender" umbrella yet is a further umbrella in and of itself, encompassing identities like demigender, agender, androgynous, genderfluid, genderqueer (which I've seen interchangeably used as both a synonym for and sublabel of "nonbinary"), etc.
With that in mind, would it be a good idea to give this page a dedicated section about nonbinary identities and definitions of the different sublabels, should nonbinary identity have its own page, or is there another way to go about it?
Be kind.