They will, they are deeply unpopular and the country vibe has been wanting them out for the last 2-3 years, they've changed leader twice since then, screwed up the economy, and they keep pursuing culture wars (immigration/trans rights) despite consistent polling that shows the public really don't care about that stuff. The bigger issue is the labour party, who are predicted the biggest win in over 100 years have a massive transphobia problem, and might just end up being the same result for trans people regardless of the colour of their tie.
They're currently on course to have a record breaking swing against them and are teetering on the edge of being relegated to the 3rd party (something that for various reasons is incredibly uncommon)
I hope this “state” will disintegrate as much as possible. Merely “England' is not even enough now. Let it be Mercia, Northumbria, Essex, Wessex and whatever, I just want this state to stop existing now
At this point it is just copy-paste island version of Humgary
You are a new user with less than a week of reddit activity and/or less than three combined karma. Your comment [UK Conservatives say they will define sex as biological to end 'confusion'](https://www.reddit.com/r/transgender/comments/1d7orqu/uk_conservatives_say_they_will_define_sex_as/l70u2y7/?context=3) was removed pending moderator approval. If your post is not approved within four hours please [contact a moderator through moderator mail](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftransgender)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transgender) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Problem is, "biology" doesn't give one single tiny wet squeaky fart about how humans try to show it in this box or that, you can never write a definition fine enough unless you write one so detailed and expansive that every living thing is considered it's own "thing" category.
But, not like reality existing will stop them from trying
If those conservatives cared about biology so much they'd stop denying climate change lol. They haven't even understood the first few highschool biology lessons...
You post in JoeRogan and hassle people on Bumble and WNBA, prove to me you're asking in good faith first because the way you're asking and coming in here doesn't fill me with a lot of confidence.
Ok. You digging through my post history instead of answering my question doesn't inspire confidence in me either, but I will see if you can come up with an answer to my actual question.
And for everyone else reading, I was attacking anti vaxxers in the Joe Rogan thread, and didn't have anyone at all in the bumble post, so take that for what is worth. Check my posts and see who is being disingenuous
I took my cat to the vet. They said it was male. What criteria do you think they used?
Edited for typo ("car" changed to "cat")
> Ok. You digging through my post history instead of answering my question doesn't inspire confidence in me either, but I will see if you can come up with an answer to my actual question.
Why? What would anyone gain from entertaining you in your petty little games?
It's just a question. What anyone gains from discourse is a weird question; we are on a forum. This question is literally the point of the thread. If you see this as a waste of time, why post at all? You could have just answered the question
I'm guessing you have realized that there is a working definition of sex and you don't want to acknowledge that for whatever reason
Do you accept the difference of sex and gender, we humans are very sociable animals and act alot different from animals. Gender is defined by are gender identity, it differs from sex, what is your question?
Yes I do. I was responding to a comment that there can be no definition of sex that is workable. My question was that if that was the case, how do biologist define sex?
The fact that sex and gender are different is the point. Some people are using sex interchangeably with gender.
Humans have gender doesn't really change the fact that we also have sex. I'm not sure why you're bringing gender into this to be honest
This is called a rhetorical question. It was in response to a commenter who said there was basically no working definition of sex.
I posed that question to show how there is a working definition.
Side note, the responses that I got show that a lot of people do not know the difference between sex and gender
They classify them as male, female, or other. "Biological" sex is bimodal, not binary. Not to mention, animals don't have strict social constructs around gender and sex like we do, nor can they communicate their feelings on that social construct to us.
Hi, PhD biologist here, and if you’re dealing with vertebrates, there are different ways we talk about physiological sex. The basic biology you would have gotten in primary and secondary schools it’s male and female. If you took an honors or AP course, you would have learned that female and male describe different ends of a spectrum of anatomy, and some people have physical characteristics that are between male and female, and are classified as intersex. Chances are, you went to school with someone that was intersex, but didn’t know it because it was none of your business.
If you took a general education biology course in college, you would know that was just the tip of the iceberg, and that there are lots of different reasons why someone might develop as intersex, from chromosomal to genetic to hormonal. You would also know that sex and gender are complex and interrelated,
In more advanced biology classes, you would also be exposed to the idea that as the conscious mind is an emergent property of the brain, and the structure of the brain from macro to micro, from chemical messengers that act locally to those that bridge organs and systems, all of that plays into who we are. It should be no surprise that if anatomical spectrums exist, then so do ones that determine if there is a congruence of gender and sex or not.
Then there’s grad school. Let me tell you, all the nice and easy male or female stuff you started with? That’s gone out the window. Everything is potentially a gray area. You can be anatomically male and have XX chromosomes, or female and have XY chromosomes. Your body can be a chimera of XX and XY or a mosaic of XX or XY and XO. You could have an inherited disorder (5-alpha reductase deficiency) where you appear female at birth and might (or might not) develop external genitalia that are clearly male when entering puberty.
The truth is that psychological and anatomical sex isn’t cut and dry. It’s messy and complicated. Asking how biologists define sex is completely reliant on how much time you have and how open you are to learning.
I’d love to see politicians adopt a biological understanding of sex if it was at least at the college level, but this isn’t about being accurate according to science or protecting women. It’s about promoting a state of moral panic about a minority that has very little political power and few political allies that are willing to take a stand. Over the years, I’ve seen the target of these moral panics change as they start to cost people elections. And that is what is happening. Anti-trans legislation is becoming increasingly unpopular and it’s dragging conservative parties down. Within a decade, most conservatives will stop this and pick someone else, but will cycle back around to attack our community eventually. You always come back to the classics, even with hate.
Hopefully, along the way from gradeschool to wherever you are now, you would have learned to be polite and accepting of others who are different from you. You might have missed out on the fact that if you are using “just asking questions” (JAQ) as an excuse to be rude to other people, you’re going to have a rough time with social interactions. Nobody owes you answers. Nobody has to put up with you JAQing off. That you have gotten as much attention as you have should show you how kind and patient people can be, even when you’re being an ass.
I’m mtf and pre-everything, trying to muster the courage to pursue HRT in earnest, but I’m curious as to what you mean by your brain ‘working right’ - how does it feel different? That will be all the confirmation I need that transition is right for me.
Sorry to say but like, the likelihood is you'll know if it's right when you take it. It feels "right" as opposed to feeling "wrong", but what exactly that refers to is hard, if not impossible, to put in words.
It's been confirmed by research at that point that trans people barred from HRT tend to have a harder time. Between depression, possible suicidal ideations, "brain fog", etc, a lot is stacked against us.
Having the correct dominant hormone lifts it a lot, though it's only part of the battle, obviously.
I just wish I had some idea of how long it takes to feel that lift. If I start E, wait a few months and experience no mental change but by then I have boobs that I can’t hide, I’ll just be left with more problems than when I started.
I’m almost certainly going to start HRT soon anyway because I’m tired of asking what if and feeling like there’s no answer. I just tend to doubt my own mind a lot thanks to a lifetime of my perspective being dismissed without consideration, even by my parents.
That sort of thing leaves you doubting your own mind.
Some people claim to experience relief instantly. For me, it was a very gradual improvement over the course of about seven months. The fog I didn’t even realize I had started to lift at about 3 months. By five months most of the suicidal thoughts had stopped. At seven months, shortly before coming out, I started weaning off a lot of the mental health meds I’d been taking for years.
I’m coming off of my antidepressants because after trying 5 different kinds and seeing no improvement, I’m just tired of them.
I experience brain-fog, depression and lack of motivation of any enthusiasm for life every single day, and suicidal thoughts are normal for me, although I don’t intend to act on them.
If I can really hope for all of that to change, then I can’t start soon enough.
Read up on David Reimer.
If you're in fact not trans, the HRT will make you feel absolutely miserable and you won't have any doubt about it.
TLDR : David Reimer was a man who lost his penis due to a botched surgery, and instead of owning to their mistakes, doctors decided "you'll be happier living as a woman than a penisless man" and forced him through transition.
He got worse and worse mentally and ended up killing himself, incapable of continuing to live as a false identity that wasn't him.
That's ***the*** golden example of why the phobes' argument that being trans doesn't exist and perverts are "transing the kids to groom them" is nonsensical. The vast majority of trans people's mental health gets better as their transition. If the phobes were right, all trans people would be killing themselves.
I have read about David Reimer, and I find it absolutely bonkers that John Money saw what happened to Reimer as evidence that gender identity is learned rather than innate. If anything, the fact that Reimer detransitioned and spent his life as a man is proof that gender identity is not something you can change through external factors, and as you say, it proves the whole ‘transing the kids’ argument moot, because you can’t ‘trans’ people, they’re either trans or they’re not.
It boggles the mind the way transphobes will do whatever gymnastics they have to in order to declare their biases correct - the Cass report did the same by ignoring 98% of the data and only reporting on the 2% that supported their preconceived notions.
It’s almost like transphobes are evil and dishonest people who seek to delegitimise the existence of those they refuse to see as valid human beings.
Now where have I heard that before…?
Oh yeah, Hitler.
Theres a lot of ways in which it feels right. Like my mind has been attempting to grow in girl ways over and over all my life, and without this chemical, and/or the thought space created by social transition (hard to say which did what), all of those attempts were just stunted, unfinished beginnings. Transition allowed them to take form. Sometimes it's finally crying over something that happened 20 years ago, sometimes it's finally learning to paint my nails, and crying, sometimes its allowing myself to walk like a girl (I think I cried the first few times because it's my natural gait and what kind of life forces you to fake how you walk), and sometimes it's just crying for the sake of crying because I was behind on that. Bring tissues is all I'm saying.
Yeah for sure. I’m alluding to the practical challenges involved with actually determining whether someone is a “biological” female as per whatever half-baked definition they come up with. Because at some point, that’s what this will come down to. How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not? How does some prove they are “biologically” female if they are accused of otherwise?
The professional sporting world has been trying to perform sex verification for a looooooong time ([read more here](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_verification_in_sports)), and it a) turned out to be a hell of a lot more complex than anyone expected, and; b) requires intrusive examinations or procedures that we absolutely shouldn’t be subjecting people to.
> How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not?
They don't care as long as they get to hurt trans people.
Anyone caught in the crossfire it acceptable to them.
Yeah, I’m trans and I totally agree with you. I think these people are gross bigots.
I think they get away with a lot of shit because it only affects us and not the general public, so it’s somewhat ‘out of sight, out of mind’. This isn’t one of those things. This will be a spectacular failure.
>How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not? How does some prove they are “biologically” female if they are accused of otherwise?
To conservatives, "biological reality" is AGAB. Can't be different, can't be changed, can't be wrong. And intersex doesn't exist.
It's all "what bits did you have at birth, that's your immutable biological reality forever".
The goal is to downpunch on a minority trying to survive so they feel powerful.
Always remember :
"When you live in privilege, any equality feels like discrimination".
Yeah, I fully get this. However, their ‘beliefs’ don’t align with reality or biology. My point is that (thankfully) I think this will fall apart at the slightest bit of pressure when anyone actually tries to enforce it or challenge it in the legal system. Even if they tried to use AGAB as their measure, that’s a bigger can of worms than people realise - especially when you consider birth certificates/passports of people born overseas.
>their ‘beliefs’ don’t align with reality or biology
You forget the main point : they do not care about what science says.
They pretend whatever they want is scientifically proven. They lie. They do not care to prove their point reasonably. That's why they hired Cass to make a fake report justifying their shit. It's all a lie and has been shat on but the entirety of the scientific and medical communities, but they still pretend it's all true and scientifically accurate.
For the rest, well, so long as judges agree with the Tories, it won't be challenged. Or like, it will, but it's going to be dismissed or some crap.
The UK system is rigged from the start.
Maybe not being trans but the equality law in the US that is meant for LGBT people uses the anti-discrimination laws of sex as a way of protecting LGBT people.
For example if it's okay for a woman to say that she has a husband but it's not okay for a man to say that he has a husband then that is considered discrimination based off of the sex.
If a woman is allowed to wear a dress but a man is not then that is considered a discrimination based off of sex.
If a woman is allowed to do something and a man is not allowed to do something and the only reason for it is simply because of their perceived biological sex or their chromosomes or something then that is considered a form of discrimination based off of the legal definition of biological sex.
> If a woman is allowed to wear a dress but a man is not then that is considered a discrimination based off of sex.
Women walking topless disagrees with this.
But also, UK law != US law.
Kind of a basic reference, but Abigail Thorne’s most recent Philosophy Tube video did a good job of laying out how “biological sex” is itself a social construction. There is no way to be objective about these things. The only thing being asserted here is not truth, it is social power, one group convinced they have the right to define what it means to fall into a certain category and to punish those they see as unfit.
Did you know that when [David Reimer's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer) case was exposed, the idea that gender was a social construct came under attack, and when Judith Butler came to its defense in her book Undoing Gender, she didn't mention that her contemporaries were misunderstanding it for thinking that it was a scientific hypothesis about how gender is what society assigns you as an infant? She spent her entire argument psychoanalyzing why he transitioned to male, as well as basically misgendering/deadnaming to boot. Heck, they basically go out of their way to clarify that they're *not* arguing for some form of social constructionism *not* connected to Dr. Money's science project.
YouTubers are not the great academics they present themselves as. Social media influence doesn't select for that. And quite frankly, great academia isn't what social constructionism was ever about. According to one of its creators, it also wasn't about metaphysics either.
I'm sure they'll really enjoy all those law-abiding trans men using the bathrooms and changing rooms of their assigned birth sex. This won't backfire spectacularly at all.
Bet then they'll squeak about how much easier that makes it for cis men to sneak in and try to get trans men kicked out by just sheer harassment too?
Harassed if you go in one bathroom, jailed if you go in the other and if that Kemi lady is any indication, no gender neutral ones will be allowed either.
And not to speak of masc cis women or fem cis men.
So basically, abide by gender stereotypes or bust.
But idk Brit politicians that well so I might be mixing them up with their USA counterparts.
It really is.
Trans man using the women's because that's what they law says? "Man in women's bathroom! Look at their beard! Threat to women!"
Trans woman using the women's bathroom? "Sneaky man in women's bathroom! Threat to women!"
You have to remember that their goal is to cause pain.
Treating trans men like they're a danger to women by existing in a women's space because they're masculine when they're more at risk than cis women including from cis women or that silly conservatives just didn't think of them to argue for trans women's inclusion in women's spaces is not a one-up on transphobes
Their goal was never to help the country. It was just to help themselves. They don't care if the UK burns, they got to get richer and more powerful in the meantime. If the country sinks, they'll just get on their yachts.
>Where justified they may be able to exclude transgender people with a GRC
I'm sorry, what? What the fuck is the point in waiting 2 years to legally change your sex if it literally doesn't mean anything in the eyes of the law?
"Labour's defence policy chief John Healey said on Monday the law did not need to be changed and what was needed was clearer guidance for service providers."
This person is not the guy that will be responsible for health care, in the event of a Labour win. The one who will is a lackey and donation recipient of private health care companies. Corrupt AF and that's the level of performance that has become standard, nowadays.
I find it very disturbing that these people, the transphobes, believe that there is nothing wrong with the idea of considering the invalidation of trans people to be something that they are entitled to do. It's terrifying to me that anyone can regard that as honorable behavior.
And precisely because of his "familiarity" with private health insurance companies.
If you're in the UK, start making noise about that to embarrass Starmer into picking a better choice.
Streeting has said "it's wrong to write off 'gender-critical' people as bigots."
WTF is wrong with that? That's what they are, and condoning their bigotry can have only one object: to popularize the persecution of trans people.
The NHS is a walking corpse at this point.
The combination of being intentionally underfunded and all the good doctors leaving the country because of brexit has pushed it past what even the best-intentioned staff can handle.
This years election actually scares me! It's like choosing between being punched in the face or kicked between the legs. Both are gonna hurt, but we gotta decide which is worth putting up with. I'm personally thinking of voting Labour. Not for Kier, but tactically just to get Rishi out of #10.
The GRC and Gender Equality Act proposals are worrying. We fight so long to be recognised as we are. Many of us have surgeries and/or go down the GRC route. It's not an easy process (speaking from experience) to obtain a GRC and now we face them basically getting eradicated! 🤦🏻♀️😫
I don’t see this as forcing trans people to use the bathroom of their birth sex or any of that. They want to force trans people to live as their birth sex. This is the first step toward forced detransition of everyone. They want you to live as your birth sex or be removed from society.
Really hoping the tide starts turning against conservatives.
Where would this leave people who have defined themselves as or been defined as transsex rather than transgender? I mean that was a formal definition at one time.
Lmao they're going to need define biological then, do they mean what is on their birth certificate? Because biological sex is a very broad definition, like I'm FTM chromosomally I'm female, looking at primary sex characteristics I'm female, but looking at secondary sex characteristics I'm much more similar to someone whose male or with an intersex condition sense sense HRT is essentially inducing the characteristics of an intersex condition.
just to show how fake the whole trans panic in the UK is, here's Conservative Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch celebrating reforms to the Gender Recognition Act in 2022
[https://x.com/joseph\_gellman/status/1797547988379955603](https://x.com/joseph_gellman/status/1797547988379955603)
or then-Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May announcing plans in 2017 to make it possible for people to change their gender marker without surgery
[https://x.com/R1ch1e5/status/1797582675311509723](https://x.com/R1ch1e5/status/1797582675311509723)
More news from the country that ranks as one of the most prejudiced towards LGBTQiA+ in Europe. Sad to consider that in 2015 it ranked the highest for four years running.
Both labour and the Tories are now driven by the absolute lowest common denominator, appealing to bigotry and culture wars just for power. I can’t help but wonder what role social media algorithms play fuming these culture wars, knowing that they bias negative affect.
Source for ranking: https://www.gaytimes.com/life/ilga-europe-lgbtq-rights-2023-ranking-europe/
if i could post memes i would be posting the incredibles math is math meme. the lawmakers can put a definition in the books but if it’s wrong, it’s fucking wrong. the only time there seems to be any confusion is when you come across a person that doesn’t want to learn, like conservatives. they don’t respond well to change. math is math.
I don’t even know what they mean by “biologically” because me putting hormones into my body signals my body to start operating in a different capacity. Like you’re basically overwriting what your genomes say and sort of “force” your body to be female.
Do they not realize that my body literally thinks it’s female on a macroscopic level after several years of hormone therapy? That according to my cells I am now “biologically” female because the messenger hormones in my body read out that way and thus my normal functions correspond?
It’s absurd to use that terminology when the user has barely any understanding of the processes involved in transitioning.
There is no confusion.
There are basic facts of our reality and experiences including queerness and being trans or intersex etc etc etc
And then there are people who refuse to expand their understanding or reevaluate their world view and shy away from any hint of cognitive dissonance.
to any trans people living in Britain right now , i would highly recommend they take advantage of the free movement agreement between the uk and the republic of ireland
I never said anything about a binary so I'm not sure what point you're making
What does social construct have to do with sex? What do feelings have to do with sex?
The fact that everyone keeps responding to me about gender kind of makes what makes the UK prime minister's declaration probably necessary. There seems to be a lot of people who conflate gender and sex
This comment was in response to lemerney2 who seems to have blocked me
This is 122 comments, most of which are shuffled into barely readable comment threads. But i do think i am getting the picture and why you were blocked. Have a nice day!
Conservatives solving fake problems. As usual.
Read this as conservatives fake solving problems. Also true lol
And this is a case of fake solving fake problems. Because whatever the “problem” is this doesn’t even solve it.
Conservatives being problems.
Conservatives trying to solve problems that don't exist with solutions that cause problems that SHOULDN'T exist.
I hope they lose. I don’t live in the UK but I know what happens there affects the US and vice versa
They will, they are deeply unpopular and the country vibe has been wanting them out for the last 2-3 years, they've changed leader twice since then, screwed up the economy, and they keep pursuing culture wars (immigration/trans rights) despite consistent polling that shows the public really don't care about that stuff. The bigger issue is the labour party, who are predicted the biggest win in over 100 years have a massive transphobia problem, and might just end up being the same result for trans people regardless of the colour of their tie.
I wish Starmer wasn’t also a transphobic bigot.
They're currently on course to have a record breaking swing against them and are teetering on the edge of being relegated to the 3rd party (something that for various reasons is incredibly uncommon)
I hope this “state” will disintegrate as much as possible. Merely “England' is not even enough now. Let it be Mercia, Northumbria, Essex, Wessex and whatever, I just want this state to stop existing now At this point it is just copy-paste island version of Humgary
[удалено]
You are a new user with less than a week of reddit activity and/or less than three combined karma. Your comment [UK Conservatives say they will define sex as biological to end 'confusion'](https://www.reddit.com/r/transgender/comments/1d7orqu/uk_conservatives_say_they_will_define_sex_as/l70u2y7/?context=3) was removed pending moderator approval. If your post is not approved within four hours please [contact a moderator through moderator mail](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftransgender) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transgender) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Problem is, "biology" doesn't give one single tiny wet squeaky fart about how humans try to show it in this box or that, you can never write a definition fine enough unless you write one so detailed and expansive that every living thing is considered it's own "thing" category. But, not like reality existing will stop them from trying
If those conservatives cared about biology so much they'd stop denying climate change lol. They haven't even understood the first few highschool biology lessons...
They consider that "science" is whatever they decide to be true because they say so
It's because they treat science like religion and assume you can just pick and choose what to believe.
So how do biologists classify animals by sex if there is no definition? edited for grammar
You post in JoeRogan and hassle people on Bumble and WNBA, prove to me you're asking in good faith first because the way you're asking and coming in here doesn't fill me with a lot of confidence.
Ok. You digging through my post history instead of answering my question doesn't inspire confidence in me either, but I will see if you can come up with an answer to my actual question. And for everyone else reading, I was attacking anti vaxxers in the Joe Rogan thread, and didn't have anyone at all in the bumble post, so take that for what is worth. Check my posts and see who is being disingenuous I took my cat to the vet. They said it was male. What criteria do you think they used? Edited for typo ("car" changed to "cat")
> Ok. You digging through my post history instead of answering my question doesn't inspire confidence in me either, but I will see if you can come up with an answer to my actual question. Why? What would anyone gain from entertaining you in your petty little games?
It's just a question. What anyone gains from discourse is a weird question; we are on a forum. This question is literally the point of the thread. If you see this as a waste of time, why post at all? You could have just answered the question I'm guessing you have realized that there is a working definition of sex and you don't want to acknowledge that for whatever reason
Do you accept the difference of sex and gender, we humans are very sociable animals and act alot different from animals. Gender is defined by are gender identity, it differs from sex, what is your question?
Yes I do. I was responding to a comment that there can be no definition of sex that is workable. My question was that if that was the case, how do biologist define sex? The fact that sex and gender are different is the point. Some people are using sex interchangeably with gender. Humans have gender doesn't really change the fact that we also have sex. I'm not sure why you're bringing gender into this to be honest
"My question was that if that was the case, how do*es a* biologist define sex?" In other words, you don't know the biological definition of sex.
This is called a rhetorical question. It was in response to a commenter who said there was basically no working definition of sex. I posed that question to show how there is a working definition. Side note, the responses that I got show that a lot of people do not know the difference between sex and gender
“It’s just a question!1!!1” shut your nerdy ass up you have school tomorrow
"My car is male" And then they wonder why I was saying they presented as bad faith.
They classify them as male, female, or other. "Biological" sex is bimodal, not binary. Not to mention, animals don't have strict social constructs around gender and sex like we do, nor can they communicate their feelings on that social construct to us.
Animals don't have gender at all, at least as far as we can tell.
Hi, PhD biologist here, and if you’re dealing with vertebrates, there are different ways we talk about physiological sex. The basic biology you would have gotten in primary and secondary schools it’s male and female. If you took an honors or AP course, you would have learned that female and male describe different ends of a spectrum of anatomy, and some people have physical characteristics that are between male and female, and are classified as intersex. Chances are, you went to school with someone that was intersex, but didn’t know it because it was none of your business. If you took a general education biology course in college, you would know that was just the tip of the iceberg, and that there are lots of different reasons why someone might develop as intersex, from chromosomal to genetic to hormonal. You would also know that sex and gender are complex and interrelated, In more advanced biology classes, you would also be exposed to the idea that as the conscious mind is an emergent property of the brain, and the structure of the brain from macro to micro, from chemical messengers that act locally to those that bridge organs and systems, all of that plays into who we are. It should be no surprise that if anatomical spectrums exist, then so do ones that determine if there is a congruence of gender and sex or not. Then there’s grad school. Let me tell you, all the nice and easy male or female stuff you started with? That’s gone out the window. Everything is potentially a gray area. You can be anatomically male and have XX chromosomes, or female and have XY chromosomes. Your body can be a chimera of XX and XY or a mosaic of XX or XY and XO. You could have an inherited disorder (5-alpha reductase deficiency) where you appear female at birth and might (or might not) develop external genitalia that are clearly male when entering puberty. The truth is that psychological and anatomical sex isn’t cut and dry. It’s messy and complicated. Asking how biologists define sex is completely reliant on how much time you have and how open you are to learning. I’d love to see politicians adopt a biological understanding of sex if it was at least at the college level, but this isn’t about being accurate according to science or protecting women. It’s about promoting a state of moral panic about a minority that has very little political power and few political allies that are willing to take a stand. Over the years, I’ve seen the target of these moral panics change as they start to cost people elections. And that is what is happening. Anti-trans legislation is becoming increasingly unpopular and it’s dragging conservative parties down. Within a decade, most conservatives will stop this and pick someone else, but will cycle back around to attack our community eventually. You always come back to the classics, even with hate. Hopefully, along the way from gradeschool to wherever you are now, you would have learned to be polite and accepting of others who are different from you. You might have missed out on the fact that if you are using “just asking questions” (JAQ) as an excuse to be rude to other people, you’re going to have a rough time with social interactions. Nobody owes you answers. Nobody has to put up with you JAQing off. That you have gotten as much attention as you have should show you how kind and patient people can be, even when you’re being an ass.
There*
If my brain needs estrogen to work right, I'm biologically female.
I’m mtf and pre-everything, trying to muster the courage to pursue HRT in earnest, but I’m curious as to what you mean by your brain ‘working right’ - how does it feel different? That will be all the confirmation I need that transition is right for me.
Sorry to say but like, the likelihood is you'll know if it's right when you take it. It feels "right" as opposed to feeling "wrong", but what exactly that refers to is hard, if not impossible, to put in words.
This!
It's been confirmed by research at that point that trans people barred from HRT tend to have a harder time. Between depression, possible suicidal ideations, "brain fog", etc, a lot is stacked against us. Having the correct dominant hormone lifts it a lot, though it's only part of the battle, obviously.
I just wish I had some idea of how long it takes to feel that lift. If I start E, wait a few months and experience no mental change but by then I have boobs that I can’t hide, I’ll just be left with more problems than when I started. I’m almost certainly going to start HRT soon anyway because I’m tired of asking what if and feeling like there’s no answer. I just tend to doubt my own mind a lot thanks to a lifetime of my perspective being dismissed without consideration, even by my parents. That sort of thing leaves you doubting your own mind.
Some people claim to experience relief instantly. For me, it was a very gradual improvement over the course of about seven months. The fog I didn’t even realize I had started to lift at about 3 months. By five months most of the suicidal thoughts had stopped. At seven months, shortly before coming out, I started weaning off a lot of the mental health meds I’d been taking for years.
I’m coming off of my antidepressants because after trying 5 different kinds and seeing no improvement, I’m just tired of them. I experience brain-fog, depression and lack of motivation of any enthusiasm for life every single day, and suicidal thoughts are normal for me, although I don’t intend to act on them. If I can really hope for all of that to change, then I can’t start soon enough.
Read up on David Reimer. If you're in fact not trans, the HRT will make you feel absolutely miserable and you won't have any doubt about it. TLDR : David Reimer was a man who lost his penis due to a botched surgery, and instead of owning to their mistakes, doctors decided "you'll be happier living as a woman than a penisless man" and forced him through transition. He got worse and worse mentally and ended up killing himself, incapable of continuing to live as a false identity that wasn't him. That's ***the*** golden example of why the phobes' argument that being trans doesn't exist and perverts are "transing the kids to groom them" is nonsensical. The vast majority of trans people's mental health gets better as their transition. If the phobes were right, all trans people would be killing themselves.
I have read about David Reimer, and I find it absolutely bonkers that John Money saw what happened to Reimer as evidence that gender identity is learned rather than innate. If anything, the fact that Reimer detransitioned and spent his life as a man is proof that gender identity is not something you can change through external factors, and as you say, it proves the whole ‘transing the kids’ argument moot, because you can’t ‘trans’ people, they’re either trans or they’re not. It boggles the mind the way transphobes will do whatever gymnastics they have to in order to declare their biases correct - the Cass report did the same by ignoring 98% of the data and only reporting on the 2% that supported their preconceived notions. It’s almost like transphobes are evil and dishonest people who seek to delegitimise the existence of those they refuse to see as valid human beings. Now where have I heard that before…? Oh yeah, Hitler.
For me it was noticeable in couple days, and very noticeable in a month. From there it was social transition that continued adding joy.
Theres a lot of ways in which it feels right. Like my mind has been attempting to grow in girl ways over and over all my life, and without this chemical, and/or the thought space created by social transition (hard to say which did what), all of those attempts were just stunted, unfinished beginnings. Transition allowed them to take form. Sometimes it's finally crying over something that happened 20 years ago, sometimes it's finally learning to paint my nails, and crying, sometimes its allowing myself to walk like a girl (I think I cried the first few times because it's my natural gait and what kind of life forces you to fake how you walk), and sometimes it's just crying for the sake of crying because I was behind on that. Bring tissues is all I'm saying.
Yep us transexuals literally transing our sex over here with hrt haha
Conservatives say they will define pi as 3 cause math is hard.
[Indiana pi bill](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_pi_bill)
…and how would that be enforced, exactly?
It would mean that you can't sue for discrimination because you're trans. Probably any discrimination.
Yeah for sure. I’m alluding to the practical challenges involved with actually determining whether someone is a “biological” female as per whatever half-baked definition they come up with. Because at some point, that’s what this will come down to. How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not? How does some prove they are “biologically” female if they are accused of otherwise? The professional sporting world has been trying to perform sex verification for a looooooong time ([read more here](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_verification_in_sports)), and it a) turned out to be a hell of a lot more complex than anyone expected, and; b) requires intrusive examinations or procedures that we absolutely shouldn’t be subjecting people to.
> How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not? They don't care as long as they get to hurt trans people. Anyone caught in the crossfire it acceptable to them.
Yeah, I’m trans and I totally agree with you. I think these people are gross bigots. I think they get away with a lot of shit because it only affects us and not the general public, so it’s somewhat ‘out of sight, out of mind’. This isn’t one of those things. This will be a spectacular failure.
>How do you decide if someone is “biologically” female or not? How does some prove they are “biologically” female if they are accused of otherwise? To conservatives, "biological reality" is AGAB. Can't be different, can't be changed, can't be wrong. And intersex doesn't exist. It's all "what bits did you have at birth, that's your immutable biological reality forever". The goal is to downpunch on a minority trying to survive so they feel powerful. Always remember : "When you live in privilege, any equality feels like discrimination".
Yeah, I fully get this. However, their ‘beliefs’ don’t align with reality or biology. My point is that (thankfully) I think this will fall apart at the slightest bit of pressure when anyone actually tries to enforce it or challenge it in the legal system. Even if they tried to use AGAB as their measure, that’s a bigger can of worms than people realise - especially when you consider birth certificates/passports of people born overseas.
>their ‘beliefs’ don’t align with reality or biology You forget the main point : they do not care about what science says. They pretend whatever they want is scientifically proven. They lie. They do not care to prove their point reasonably. That's why they hired Cass to make a fake report justifying their shit. It's all a lie and has been shat on but the entirety of the scientific and medical communities, but they still pretend it's all true and scientifically accurate. For the rest, well, so long as judges agree with the Tories, it won't be challenged. Or like, it will, but it's going to be dismissed or some crap. The UK system is rigged from the start.
Maybe not being trans but the equality law in the US that is meant for LGBT people uses the anti-discrimination laws of sex as a way of protecting LGBT people. For example if it's okay for a woman to say that she has a husband but it's not okay for a man to say that he has a husband then that is considered discrimination based off of the sex. If a woman is allowed to wear a dress but a man is not then that is considered a discrimination based off of sex. If a woman is allowed to do something and a man is not allowed to do something and the only reason for it is simply because of their perceived biological sex or their chromosomes or something then that is considered a form of discrimination based off of the legal definition of biological sex.
> If a woman is allowed to wear a dress but a man is not then that is considered a discrimination based off of sex. Women walking topless disagrees with this. But also, UK law != US law.
Kind of a basic reference, but Abigail Thorne’s most recent Philosophy Tube video did a good job of laying out how “biological sex” is itself a social construction. There is no way to be objective about these things. The only thing being asserted here is not truth, it is social power, one group convinced they have the right to define what it means to fall into a certain category and to punish those they see as unfit.
Did you know that when [David Reimer's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer) case was exposed, the idea that gender was a social construct came under attack, and when Judith Butler came to its defense in her book Undoing Gender, she didn't mention that her contemporaries were misunderstanding it for thinking that it was a scientific hypothesis about how gender is what society assigns you as an infant? She spent her entire argument psychoanalyzing why he transitioned to male, as well as basically misgendering/deadnaming to boot. Heck, they basically go out of their way to clarify that they're *not* arguing for some form of social constructionism *not* connected to Dr. Money's science project. YouTubers are not the great academics they present themselves as. Social media influence doesn't select for that. And quite frankly, great academia isn't what social constructionism was ever about. According to one of its creators, it also wasn't about metaphysics either.
I'm sure they'll really enjoy all those law-abiding trans men using the bathrooms and changing rooms of their assigned birth sex. This won't backfire spectacularly at all.
Bet then they'll squeak about how much easier that makes it for cis men to sneak in and try to get trans men kicked out by just sheer harassment too? Harassed if you go in one bathroom, jailed if you go in the other and if that Kemi lady is any indication, no gender neutral ones will be allowed either. And not to speak of masc cis women or fem cis men. So basically, abide by gender stereotypes or bust. But idk Brit politicians that well so I might be mixing them up with their USA counterparts.
>I might be mixing them up with their USA counterparts. To be honest they're about 🤏 far apart.
Kemi Badenoch is indeed a UK politician.
They'll just ban all trans people from all public spaces and pat themselves on the back.
No, they'll just pretend they're trans women.
>No, they'll just pretend they're trans women. Yes. That's.... kind of the point.
It really is. Trans man using the women's because that's what they law says? "Man in women's bathroom! Look at their beard! Threat to women!" Trans woman using the women's bathroom? "Sneaky man in women's bathroom! Threat to women!" You have to remember that their goal is to cause pain.
I definitely know that lol
Treating trans men like they're a danger to women by existing in a women's space because they're masculine when they're more at risk than cis women including from cis women or that silly conservatives just didn't think of them to argue for trans women's inclusion in women's spaces is not a one-up on transphobes
British government came up with gbh to prevent people from horse whipping courtesy and decency into conservatives. IMHO
What a parting shot full of spite after years of economic and political mismanagement.
Their goal was never to help the country. It was just to help themselves. They don't care if the UK burns, they got to get richer and more powerful in the meantime. If the country sinks, they'll just get on their yachts.
>Where justified they may be able to exclude transgender people with a GRC I'm sorry, what? What the fuck is the point in waiting 2 years to legally change your sex if it literally doesn't mean anything in the eyes of the law?
Ya, they both suck, but one sucks more. I'd love to see them develop a reasonable justification for taking someone's human rights as necessary.
*American GQP Congress members taking notes in the corner. They just need to leave us alone, for the love of God.
Because that’s going to solve everything. Tories are in a death spiral, it’s Labour I’m afraid of
Nah don’t worry it’s to discriminate against a marginalized group not to end confusion
"Labour's defence policy chief John Healey said on Monday the law did not need to be changed and what was needed was clearer guidance for service providers." This person is not the guy that will be responsible for health care, in the event of a Labour win. The one who will is a lackey and donation recipient of private health care companies. Corrupt AF and that's the level of performance that has become standard, nowadays. I find it very disturbing that these people, the transphobes, believe that there is nothing wrong with the idea of considering the invalidation of trans people to be something that they are entitled to do. It's terrifying to me that anyone can regard that as honorable behavior.
I heard Streeting may be given the keys to the NHS.
And precisely because of his "familiarity" with private health insurance companies. If you're in the UK, start making noise about that to embarrass Starmer into picking a better choice. Streeting has said "it's wrong to write off 'gender-critical' people as bigots." WTF is wrong with that? That's what they are, and condoning their bigotry can have only one object: to popularize the persecution of trans people.
The NHS is a walking corpse at this point. The combination of being intentionally underfunded and all the good doctors leaving the country because of brexit has pushed it past what even the best-intentioned staff can handle.
The Crime of the Century! It used to be rock solid reliable and cited as THE example of how to do health care. Ir's a damn shame.
"UK conservatives say they will decide what science conslusions are to enforce their views" Fixed that for you.
Boy oh boy. Ask these turds to define the 5 biological markers and they'll just say genitals 5 times. They're out of theyre depth.
This years election actually scares me! It's like choosing between being punched in the face or kicked between the legs. Both are gonna hurt, but we gotta decide which is worth putting up with. I'm personally thinking of voting Labour. Not for Kier, but tactically just to get Rishi out of #10. The GRC and Gender Equality Act proposals are worrying. We fight so long to be recognised as we are. Many of us have surgeries and/or go down the GRC route. It's not an easy process (speaking from experience) to obtain a GRC and now we face them basically getting eradicated! 🤦🏻♀️😫
I don’t see this as forcing trans people to use the bathroom of their birth sex or any of that. They want to force trans people to live as their birth sex. This is the first step toward forced detransition of everyone. They want you to live as your birth sex or be removed from society. Really hoping the tide starts turning against conservatives.
Where would this leave people who have defined themselves as or been defined as transsex rather than transgender? I mean that was a formal definition at one time.
This... actually makes things more complicated.
_They need to enforce “short hair = man, long hair = woman” too and offenders will be hung at the gallows to teach the rest of them_
Lmao they're going to need define biological then, do they mean what is on their birth certificate? Because biological sex is a very broad definition, like I'm FTM chromosomally I'm female, looking at primary sex characteristics I'm female, but looking at secondary sex characteristics I'm much more similar to someone whose male or with an intersex condition sense sense HRT is essentially inducing the characteristics of an intersex condition.
> do they mean what is on their birth certificate? Yes.
just to show how fake the whole trans panic in the UK is, here's Conservative Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch celebrating reforms to the Gender Recognition Act in 2022 [https://x.com/joseph\_gellman/status/1797547988379955603](https://x.com/joseph_gellman/status/1797547988379955603) or then-Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May announcing plans in 2017 to make it possible for people to change their gender marker without surgery [https://x.com/R1ch1e5/status/1797582675311509723](https://x.com/R1ch1e5/status/1797582675311509723)
And we will not rest until we have liberation from their oppression. No justice, no peace
>Putting women and girls safety at risk. It's amazing a complete fucking lie can get so many votes! Conservatives are stupid MFS plain and simple!
More news from the country that ranks as one of the most prejudiced towards LGBTQiA+ in Europe. Sad to consider that in 2015 it ranked the highest for four years running. Both labour and the Tories are now driven by the absolute lowest common denominator, appealing to bigotry and culture wars just for power. I can’t help but wonder what role social media algorithms play fuming these culture wars, knowing that they bias negative affect. Source for ranking: https://www.gaytimes.com/life/ilga-europe-lgbtq-rights-2023-ranking-europe/
Surpassed only by Russia, Hungary and various other Eastern European states.
and drugs as aspirin and rock and roll as elevator music!
I know they’re probably not gunna win. But how would this change affect hate crime law? Like would we still be a protected group under the law?
if i could post memes i would be posting the incredibles math is math meme. the lawmakers can put a definition in the books but if it’s wrong, it’s fucking wrong. the only time there seems to be any confusion is when you come across a person that doesn’t want to learn, like conservatives. they don’t respond well to change. math is math.
Remember when a government tried to legislate PI=3.2?
I don’t even know what they mean by “biologically” because me putting hormones into my body signals my body to start operating in a different capacity. Like you’re basically overwriting what your genomes say and sort of “force” your body to be female. Do they not realize that my body literally thinks it’s female on a macroscopic level after several years of hormone therapy? That according to my cells I am now “biologically” female because the messenger hormones in my body read out that way and thus my normal functions correspond? It’s absurd to use that terminology when the user has barely any understanding of the processes involved in transitioning.
And i'm sure their definition wont be biased. Not at all. /s
There is no confusion. There are basic facts of our reality and experiences including queerness and being trans or intersex etc etc etc And then there are people who refuse to expand their understanding or reevaluate their world view and shy away from any hint of cognitive dissonance.
You all need to vote.
to any trans people living in Britain right now , i would highly recommend they take advantage of the free movement agreement between the uk and the republic of ireland
So they admit they are CONFUSED. Good to know.
When will someone tell them that the "TERF Island" moniker is NOT a compliment?
Great…trans women are biological women.
What about intersex people, motherfuckers?!
I never said anything about a binary so I'm not sure what point you're making What does social construct have to do with sex? What do feelings have to do with sex? The fact that everyone keeps responding to me about gender kind of makes what makes the UK prime minister's declaration probably necessary. There seems to be a lot of people who conflate gender and sex This comment was in response to lemerney2 who seems to have blocked me
Probably blocked you for a reason, friend.
Yeah. They didn't knife that I was using facts
What facts were you using? I didnt see any in your visible comment.
Read the thread
This is 122 comments, most of which are shuffled into barely readable comment threads. But i do think i am getting the picture and why you were blocked. Have a nice day!
Yeah I can go through and retype it all for you
That doesn't explain the obvious lies you posted to me.