Gender Identity

[Matt N]

I believe that as well as the length of time getting shorter, the need for reports from doctors etc is also getting dropped. Honest apologies if I've got that wrong as I was skim-reading the details from somewhere yesterday.

I believe that the thing getting scrapped is the need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis, as well as reports talking about any surgery or medical procedures done in relation to this diagnosis.

The process of proving that you have “lived as the opposite gender” will remain the same as @Benzin described previously, as far as I can tell. This would mean that the system is still protected against abuse while transgender people gain greater rights, which is surely a win-win situation, no?

 

[Dave]

I believe that as well as the length of time getting shorter, the need for reports from doctors etc is also getting dropped. Honest apologies if I've got that wrong as I was skim-reading the details from somewhere yesterday.

I think the prison example is a bit of a right wing/ TERF scare tactic. Any prisoner regardless of gender is risk assessed before being put into the general prison population. If someone pulled that trick they would identified and restricted.

As for the safe woman’s spaces, you don’t need a certificate to enter a woman’s space, there is nothing stopping a male sexual predictor to dress as a woman now and enter these spaces, they don’t need the go through the effort of getting gender recognition.

 

[Benzin]

I'd imagine the reasoning behind dropping the need for the "official" diagnosis from doctors is to allow things for those who are unable to get the right help (be it family or other factors) or to help with those who may struggle to get a diagnosis.

Seeing the situation with how potential autism is treated with 7 month wait periods I doubt many can get through similar waiting periods for this situation. GPs aren't equipped for the most specialist mental bits and pieces.

 

[Matt N]

Going forward, I think that a good way to manage this issue is to ensure that there is a clear distinction made between sex and gender. Despite these two terms often being used interchangeably, they are very different.

Sex is a biological fact. In 99.9% of cases, you are born either male or female (a very small percentage are born intersex, but that’s not really what this debate is about), and that is not something you can change regardless of how you personally feel. You can technically have a sex change operation, but even that does not change your biological sex per se; your biological sex is the one you were born as, and you will always maintain elements of your birth sex due to the two sexes going through puberty differently. To my knowledge, you cannot legally have a sex change operation as a child or be forced to go through the opposite type of puberty to that of your birth sex.

Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct. You can identify as a different gender as you see fit, and there are more than two genders. You can be male, female, non-binary, or something entirely different if you wish, and I fully support that. Ultimately, you’re not harming anyone by using different pronouns to those of your birth sex or living as a different gender to your birth sex, and I fully support those who wish to. I think it’s brilliant that we live in a society where that is possible.

However, I do feel that abandoning birth sex entirely could prove counterintuitive in a small number of areas. In most parts of life, considering chosen gender doesn’t pose an issue whatsoever, but I think some niche areas still need to consider biological sex.

In a medical setting, for instance, I think that biological sex still needs to be taken into account to ensure that people receive the correct treatment for certain things and are given medical advice that’s fully relevant to them.

I also feel that biological sex should be considered in areas involving any kind of physicality or areas relying on physical strength, as biological males and biological females mature and develop very differently and have different muscle compositions and such.

Gender identity is a very, very complicated issue in some aspects, for sure…

 

[Matt N]

Sorry to bump this thread, but within the last week, there has been a rather interesting news story with regard to gender identity. It certainly made mainstream headlines, anyhow.

For those not aware, the Cass Review, an NHS-commissioned review into gender identity services for under-18s, was released last week by paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass. The review was first commissioned in 2020 after a sharp rise in the number of gender-questioning patients referred to NHS gender services.

The report made 32 recommendations in total, and reported various findings and conclusions. These include:

• There was no clear explanation for the rise in the number of young people with gender dysphoria, but there was a broad agreement for attribution to a mix of biological and psychosocial factors, such as social media-related mental health problems, access to information regarding gender dysphoria and struggles with emerging sexual orientation. The report considered a rise in acceptance of transgender identities to be insufficient to explain the increase.
• The review found that gender identity treatment is “an area of remarkably weak evidence”. Cass states that “Results of studies are exaggerated or misrepresented by people on all sides of the debate to support their viewpoint. The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.”.
• The debate around how to care for young people with gender dysphoria is polarised. Some clinicians believe that most people presenting to gender services will go on to have a long-term trans identity and should be supported to access a medical pathway at an early stage. Others believe that this path prematurely medicalises young people with multiple other difficulties that are manifesting through gender dysphoria.
• Cass describes the toxicity of the debate around gender identity as “exceptional”, stating that “there are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour. This must stop.”. Cass also states that the toxicity of the debate has made some clinicians fearful of working with young people with gender dysphoria.
• The review found that many people have already socially transitioned by the time they are seen clinically. This means doing things such as changing their name by deed poll and attending school in their chosen gender.
• The review found that research on the impact of social transition is generally of a poor quality and that findings are contradictory. Some studies suggest that allowing a young person to socially transition may improve mental health and social and educational participation, while others say that allowing young people to socially transition is more likely to lead to an altered life trajectory and medical intervention with lifelong implications that they may otherwise have not taken.
• With this in mind, the review declares that there are “many unknowns” about the impact of social transition, and recommends that parents should be involved in decision making unless there are strong grounds to believe that this would put a child at risk. The review recommends that where children are pre-puberty, families should be seen as early as possible by a clinician with relevant experience. It also suggests avoiding premature decisions and considering partial transition as a means of keeping options open.
• The review suggests that any young person seeking NHS help with gender dysphoria should be screened for neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism and ADHD and given a mental health assessment. This is due to a finding that among people using NHS gender services, there is a higher than average prevalence of conditions such as autism and ADHD, a higher than average prevalence of poor mental health, and also a higher than average prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (e.g. child sexual abuse).
• The review states that evidence surrounding the use of puberty blockers is weak, with no evidence that they “buy time to think” and concern that they may change the trajectory of psychosexual and gender identity development and pose risks to long-term bone health. There is also a lack of evidence to prove that masculinising and feminising hormones improve body satisfaction and psychosocial health and reduce child and adolescent suicide rates, and there are concerns over the impact on fertility, growth and bone health. As such, Cass recommends that there should be significant caution exercised in giving hormones to children below the age of 18, with them only being given where there is a strong clinical case for it. This is despite the NHS currently allowing them to be given to children as young as 16.
• Cass recommends that a “follow-through service” should be put in place for 17 to 25 year olds rather than letting them instantly transition to adult services, with caution being advised in allowing full medical transition in people below the age of 25.

As a result of the Cass review’s findings, NHS adult gender services in England are to undergo a major review, while local NHS leaders have been told to pause first appointment offers at adult gender clinics to young people who are under 18.

What do people think of the Cass Review’s findings and recommendations? I won’t profess to have too much knowledge on the topic of gender identity myself, so I think it would be unfair for all involved for me to express an overly entrenched viewpoint, but I’m willing to be informed, and I’d be intrigued to hear the views of others on this.

One thing I do agree with the review on, however, is that the debate around gender identity has been made far too toxic. The fact that people on both sides of the debate are getting utterly vilified for their views prevents a nuanced, balanced debate on the topic, in my view, and I don’t think that social media has helped with this at all.

I’m aware that this is a sensitive topic, so I sincerely apologise if I have said anything that’s construed as insensitive; that was certainly never my intent.

Sources

• https://www.theguardian.com/society...ey-findings-of-the-nhs-gender-identity-review
• https://uk.news.yahoo.com/what-cass-review-gender-services-why-controversial-121531987.html

 

[Benzin]

From looks of it a lot of stuff that is already easy to figure out has been stated.

If the plan is to push those seeking help into the mental health teams then those need to be improved fast as they're already stretched thin.

Given that the sides of the "debate" are:

1) Accept trans people and support them.
2) Trans people are mentally unwell and are just men looking to abuse women in toilets.

Only one side is truly toxic.

Children need the support to work through their lives, but do not really get it as the school's focus tends to be on making them good at exams rather than prepare for actual life.

 

[DistortAMG]

Do you not think it is kind of ironic though, how society is told we must accept who people are and accept the choices they have made. But, they themselves have not accepted who they were so felt the need to change their gender. I can see why people think there is some double standards going on.

I may have missed something but I've seen that point brought up alot recently.

I have no issues with anyone being who they want to be, everyone deserves to be happy and comfortable.

 

[Matt.GC]

National debt is 97.1% of GDP. Our most basic of public services are failing. Councils are going bankrupt. Home ownership for the young is a distant memory, even renting is becoming a pipe dream. Yet this subject matter, and those of similar matters, takes up so much political oxygen.

I see "look over there" culture war political tactics is thriving. Maybe the debate is now toxic because it's designed to be? Maybe those who have no hope for the future have given up and are turning against eachother instead, using odiously toxic and unregulated social media platforms in which to do this?

Our systems and institutions are so bereft of answers now, that they have resorted to pointing you towards someone else they think you should hate instead whilst they nick your wallet. What horrible times we now live in.

 

[Benzin]

Do you not think it is kind of ironic though, how society is told we must accept who people are and accept the choices they have made. But, they themselves have not accepted who they were so felt the need to change their gender. I can see why people think there is some double standards going on.

I may have missed something but I've seen that point brought up alot recently.

I have no issues with anyone being who they want to be, everyone deserves to be happy and comfortable.

Gender is a social construct.

Genetically you are give a sex upon birth purely based on genitals due to chromosome distribution. However the body might not completely agree with this sentiment as the brain is a strange and complex thing.

I've known someone who transitioned both before and afterwards. Didn't affect me in the slightest as in the general sense they were the same person just in a different 'shell' for want of a better term. If that's what they felt they had to do to be happy then all we could do was give them continued support for it.

There's no double standards. They've been given a label they have no control over from birth and have decided they no longer wish to have/be that particular one. But society demands that men be men and women be women, completely ignoring the vast spectrum of things both can do or be.

The sheer irony of things being that the Queen TERF used her initials for Harry Potter to hide her true self, and her recent series is under a male pseudonym. Much like with these things (the high amount of anti-lgbt people who dabble in the activity) these people do protest too much.

 

[DistortAMG]

I will come back to this properly with a reply, this has taken long enough.

Gender, a social construct? What have you been smoking?

To cut you some slack, the social construct does agree that if you have breasts, a womb and a vagina, then you are probably a women, we can all agree on that. Likewise, for the social construct, if you have a penis, you can more than likely impregnate a woman, so the general agreement is that you are a man. That is what social construct is.

I can stand there with double D breasts, a womb that has created 5 kids and a vagina that has seen more action than the terminator, by definition, and scientifically I am a woman. This is where the social
construct falls straight on its arse.

If the social construct and the perhaps deluded people around me say I am a man, but I am capable of carrying and creating a child, then I am a woman, no matter what rubbish is spouted.

For example, you can socially construct that I am a man all you want, if you can have sex with me and impregnate me, then I am a woman, no matter how many people who are deluded, try and support the fact. No matter how much they socially construct.

As we are talking about irony, the sheer irony is these people, who genuinely think they are intelligent, think that their gender is a choice. That is unbelievably ironic.

Yes, we have all been given something we have no control over from birth, that's life. Deal with it. Because we have no control over it, it does not mean we have to automatically challenge it.

Your logic is so ridiculous there it is almost unbelievable, I did not choose to be a human, I did not choose to be white, infact, I did not even choose to be on earth, but I am where I am. I can challenge anyone of those points, including gender, it doesn't mean I will be that.

Infact, I can get all my friends to socially agree that I am a 12 foot, neanderthal, all my friends can agree with me to, that creates the social construct you protect behind . But that doesn't make me a neanderthal, just because myself and my friends have said I am, facts are facts.

If I have a penis I am a man.
If I have a vagina I am a woman.
If I think anything else I am mentally ill.

Funny how this issues has only just come to light, tens of thousands of years humans have been fine. Give them a sense of responsibility and they try destroy the single natural mechanism that ensures we carry on for centuries. You couldn't make this up. You couldn't.

Give me one example in the animal kingdom of a gender neutral wild or transvestite animal. I will wait......gender works how it was designed to, it's only when you get idiots and I'm sorry idiots is the correct word, that think they are greater than nature and trying to re write the history books to their favor that the stuff hits the fan. This is a new thing, it is, that single fact, should tell you ALOT.

Nothing will change my mind. Humans did not explode onto the 22st centeut because the human race was full of women who thought they were men and men that thought they were women. Ever occurred that might be for reason?

 

[Benzin]

Gender is a construct.

Sex (as in what you are assigned at birth) is what you are thinking of. Doesn't say gender on my passport.

This is not something new, but like with many things over history, those who had things like gender/body dysmorphia or were homosexual were either locked up or put in an asylum. People also seem to think that autism and ADHD are new developments as well but that's also incorrect. The world does surprisingly move forward.

Being non-binary for example doesn't mean you stop procreation. Even some trans relationships I'm sure could continue to do so if they so wished. All depends on the person, which funnily enough also extends to those who keep their "assigned at birth".

Lol at the "look at the animal kingdom" argument. Also used by those who think that homosexuality isn't natural and that's been disproved. I doubt there's much research on body dysmorphia in animals though. Perhaps there is?

I'm just gonna finish with this.

I have no issues with anyone being who they want to be, everyone deserves to be happy and comfortable.

If I think anything else I am mentally ill.

Showed your true colours there.

 

[Rowe]

What do people think of the Cass Review’s findings and recommendations? I won’t profess to have too much knowledge on the topic of gender identity myself, so I think it would be unfair for all involved for me to express an overly entrenched viewpoint, but I’m willing to be informed, and I’d be intrigued to hear the views of others on this.

I'd like to gently push Alexander Avila's "How Conservatives Created (And Cancelled) Gender" video essay into the ring as an important source about the Cass Review and the history of gender ideology.



I'd also like to add in Philosophy Tube's "I Read The Most Misunderstood Philosopher In The World" video essay, since Thorne discusses Judith Butler's works, biology, social constructs etc when it comes to gender.

 

[Ryan]

Give me one example in the animal kingdom a gender neutral wild or transvestite animal. I will wait......gender works how it was designed to, it's only when you get idiots and I'm sorry idiots is the correct word, that think they are greater than nature and trying to re write the history books to their favor that the stuff hits the fan.

Animals...don't have gender identities. That's the whole point. It's a human, social construct.

It's heartbreaking to see people so mouth-frothingly angry at a "problem" they don't seem to understand.

If the source of your entire argument, your belief system, is that biological sex and gender identity are one and the same, and totally interchangable, you aren't going to convince anyone that you know what you're talking about.

This really isn't difficult subject matter.

When people see complete different concepts, with totally different definitions and meanings, and pretend they just see the same thing, I always wonder what's behind that? What are they trying to achieve, that making themselves look unable to comprehend simple concepts is an acceptable sacrifice?

This is a new thing, it is, that single fact, should tell you ALOT.

No, it isn't. We're talking of tens of thousands of years of gender being understood as distinct from sex.

Read.

 

[Benzin]

Also it ignores the number of animals who can change their biological sex.

So it IS natural!

 

[Ryan]

A better question would be "If gender isn't a social construct, why is what defines each gender different in different cultures?"

If gender traits are entirely biological, why are they so varied and different across humankind, and have been for as far back as it's possible to study human activity and society?

But I fear the answer back would be "cavemen had penises and cavewomen had vaginas, that's what I think gender means, you won't change my mind" and we'd get no further

 

[Matt N]

I won’t claim to have the greatest understanding of this topic. While I’m not a very stereotypically masculine male, I am 100% a cisgender male, and I have never denied that for a second. I have no first-hand experience of transgender issues or gender dysphoria, and I’m not even sure that I actually know anyone who openly isn’t cisgender. I won’t pass too much entrenched judgement either way on the topic as a result of this, as I feel it would be unfair. I am very happy to be informed on the topic if anything I’ve said is wrong or unintentionally offensive.

However, what I would say is that just because I don’t have first-hand experience of something, I don’t feel that it’s my place to deny that it exists or that it is natural. My own experience of gender is that it is 100% linked to my biological sex, and I could not comprehend how it wouldn’t be. However, this is my experience of it and mine alone, and I don’t feel it would be fair to force my own experience of gender on other people. Just because I don’t have personal experience of gender being any different to sex, I don’t think it’s my place to tell other people that they must also feel that way and that their lived experiences and truths aren’t valid. I am fully supportive of people living their own truth in a way that makes them happy and however they see fit. As long as it’s not actively hurting anyone, I don’t see the issue with people living their truth in a way that makes them happy. I think that everyone should be supported to live their own genuine truth in a way that makes them happy.

I’m aware that this is a sensitive topic, so I apologise if I’ve said anything to offend. Please know that no offence was intended, and any taken is entirely unintentional and likely comes from my lack of knowledge on the matter.

 

[Tom]

I'd agree that gender identity is a social construct, but this has built over hundreds or maybe even thousands of years. What some of the more intensely liberal people should realise is that attempting to deconstruct such an established social construct over a rapid and relatively very short period is obviously going to be met with social resistance.

Also, like it not, there are people in the world with severe personality disorders and mental illnesses that would use a change of gender identity as a means to unpalatable, sadistic, dangerous, and even illegal things. This has to be acknowledged as part of the speed at which liberals wish society to change.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

I'd agree that sexuality / Judaism / race is a social construct, but this has built over hundreds or maybe even thousands of years. What some of the more intensely liberal people should realise is that attempting to deconstruct such an established social construct over a rapid and relatively very short period is obviously going to be met with social resistance.

Also, like it not, there are people in the world with severe personality disorders and mental illnesses that would use their sexuality / religion / race as a means to unpalatable, sadistic, dangerous, and even illegal things. This has to be acknowledged as part of the speed at which liberals wish society to change.

 

[Ryan]

While I’m not a very stereotypically masculine male

My own experience of gender is that it is 100% linked to my biological sex, and I could not comprehend how it wouldn’t be.

I think these two statements together are the missing link people are consistently missing.

You saying "I'm not a very stereotypically masculine male" is you talking about your gender identity. And it's different to mine, and every other person with our shared biological sex.

If your gender identity is coming entirely, 100% from your biological sex, why is it different to mine? We have the same biological sex, but we have different gender identities. So where is the difference coming from, in your eyes?

You feeling the need to explain how you express gender, as being different to the stereotype, is because "being a man", to you, doesn't mean being entirely masculine. You are a man, you are biologically man, you feel like a man, you don't question that you're a man...but you aren't stereotypically masculine.

Your understanding of your gender is yours, and yours alone, and it isn't stereotypical. You have a gender identity, as we all do, and it isn't as simple as "what's in my pants"

Doesn't that tell you something? Are you wrong, or weird, or strange...or is "penis having = aggressively, stereotypically masculine" just bullshit?

 

[Tom]

I'd agree that sexuality / Judaism / race is a social construct, but this has built over hundreds or maybe even thousands of years. What some of the more intensely liberal people should realise is that attempting to deconstruct such an established social construct over a rapid and relatively very short period is obviously going to be met with social resistance.

Also, like it not, there are people in the world with severe personality disorders and mental illnesses that would use their sexuality / religion / race as a means to unpalatable, sadistic, dangerous, and even illegal things. This has to be acknowledged as part of the speed at which liberals wish society to change.

Not within the scope of this discussion, but I'd possibly agree with one of those three attributes being quite common.