Experts confirm gender identity is biological

[IceAgeComing]

Said "facts", well, aren't if you look at the body of evidence available - such as I laid out above.

Unless we're apparently meant to consider the opinion of.. some guy as being equal to that of medical professionals who've studied this area for decades..

[Idaho Conservative]

I absolutely agree with medical professional s on this issue. There was your "evidence" here is more of mine:
Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.

Dr. McHugh, the author of six books and at least 125 peer-reviewed medical articles, made his remarks in a recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal, where he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically.

He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”

While the Obama administration, Hollywood, and major media such as Time magazine promote transgenderism as normal, said Dr. McHugh, these “policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention.”


Promoted by Schwab Advisor Services


Ad Feedback


Time magazine, June 9, 2014,

cover story,  The Transgender Tipping Point:

America's Next Civil Rights Frontier. (Photo: AP)

“This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken – it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.”

The transgendered person’s disorder, said Dr. McHugh, is in the person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh.

This assumption, that one’s gender is only in the mind regardless of anatomical reality, has led some transgendered people to push for social acceptance and affirmation of their own subjective “personal truth,” said Dr. McHugh. As a result, some states – California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts – have passed laws barring psychiatrists, “even with parental permission, from striving to restore natural gender feelings to a transgender minor,” he said.

The pro-transgender advocates do not want to know, said McHugh, that studies show between 70% and 80% of children who express transgender feelings “spontaneously lose those feelings” over time. Also, for those who had sexual reassignment surgery, most said they were “satisfied” with the operation “but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery.”



Ad Feedback


Pro-transgender activists. The

Obama administration announced

in May that Medicare will

now cover transgender surgical

procedures. (AP)

“And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a ‘satisfied’ but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs,” said Dr. McHugh.

The former Johns Hopkins chief of psychiatry also warned against enabling or encouraging certain subgroups of the transgendered, such as young people “susceptible to suggestion from ‘everything is normal’ sex education,” and the schools’ “diversity counselors” who, like “cult leaders,” may “encourage these young people to distance themselves from their families and offer advice on rebutting arguments against having transgender surgery.”

Dr. McHugh also reported that there are “misguided doctors” who, working with very young children who seem to imitate the opposite sex, will administer “puberty-delaying hormones to render later sex-change surgeries less onerous – even though the drugs stunt the children’s growth and risk causing sterility.”

Such action comes “close to child abuse,” said Dr. McHugh, given that close to 80% of those kids will “abandon their confusion and grow naturally into adult life if untreated
“’Sex change’ is biologically impossible,” said McHugh. “People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.”

[IceAgeComing]

Figured you'd post that.  Paul McHugh was in charge of John Hopkins from 1975 to 2001 and was instrumental in the closing of the gender clinic there in 1979.

This was the study used to justify that closure.  There are a few things that we have to consider - firstly its a single study from 1979 and considering that the body of more recent work shows that transition related care is effective, that raises questions about this study.  When you look at it there are clear methodological flaws to it.

Basically the authors construct a single "adjustment score" on an individual based on certain measures, with points being added or deducted based on interactions with law enforcement, employment status, interactions with psychiatric services and intimate relationships.  However many of the criteria that they use are hardly objective criteria but more subjective value judgements: one example is that when considering marriage and cohabitation one point was deducted for "nongender-appropriate cohabitation" and two for "nongender-appropriate marriage", which effectively means that they considered trans people in long term same sex relationships up to four points "less adjusted" than others - which basically means that rather than measuring ones health, its a measure of heterosexuality.

They also deducted points for any contact with psychiatric services - one point for general contact, two for outpatient treatment, three for hospitalisation.  Firstly, contact with psychiatric services is not inherently a bad thing - indeed modern standards of care stress the importance of follow-up care even for people who have competed transitioning - but also this is an incredibly simplified measure that ignores severity of symptoms or their diagnosis or the duration of any treatment.  For example on this measure, a hypothetical schizophrenic who saw their doctor once would be rated as more "adjusted" than a person with depression who had regular therapy sessions.

The criteria on contact with law enforcement was also equally vague - one point for arrest, two for being arrested and jailed.  These criteria do not consider whether the charge was substantiated, what the charge was, or how long a suspect was jailed.  There is also the fact that many communities in the 1980s retained laws against "crossdressing" which would criminalise trans people just for presenting as their gender in public, and that trans people have historically faced discrimination from police, even to the present day.  This is hardly a measure of "adjustment"; but of ones ability to avoid being noticed by law enforcement.

There's also significant methodological problems in terms of compiling this score; in that all of the "adjustments" could only ever score -7; yet some subjects scored as low as -18 which suggests either the addition of unknown, undisclosed measures or the counting of certain measures twice which makes any conclusions significantly less useful.  Also consider some of the ridiculous conclusions that this thing comes up with - for example, being married to a person of the same sex is considered as much of a maladjustment as being sent to jail.  Indeed; all of the above was noted in this study - a reply to the Meyer and Reter article published a year afterwards.  Holding up a single study that's the best part of 40 years old, with serious methodological flaws and which is 100% contary to modern medical evidence on the issue - I cited a few studies in my earlier post that you seem to have dismissed out of hand without reading them and stating your disagreements with them - and saying that that is the REAL TRUTH and that modern investigations are all wrong is the height of intellectual dishonesty.  Indeed, if you want a few more to look at; I can do that for you.

Also, lets consider the words of Dr McHugh.  This is a piece called "Psychiatric Misadventures", written by Dr McHugh.  It contains the following quote:

"…Johns Hopkins was one of the places in the United States where this practice [gender reassignment surgery] was given its start. It was part of my intention, when I arrived in Baltimore in 1975, to help end it."

Note several things.  Firstly, he arrived at John Hopkins in 1975; four years before the publication of the study that he cites to this day as being the proof that transition does not work; and two years before the piece was initially presented.  He went there with the clear written intent to close the gender clinic, regardless of whatever evidence existed as to the efficacy of transition to treat gender dysphoria.  Personally; I do not think that someone who goes somewhere with a clear aim to do something before even the most tenuous evidence for it emerges as being someone who's an entirely trustworthy source on the subject.

There is also the fact that medical science moves incredibly quickly; and doctors always need to be aware of new developments in their field.  You get a doctor in any field in 1975 and drop them in today and they'd be lost: not just because of the emergence of new technologies but because of the new procedures and discoveries that we have made.  Dr McHugh clearly has ulterior motives in his anti-trans crusade - especially since he refuses to comment on the new evidence that has emerged, and still clings to the 1979 study that he claims to have used to justify the gender clinics closure.  However; John Hopkins reopened their Gender Clinic in 2016, and explained that they did this because of the overwhelming about of medical evidence in favour of that decision.  Doctors are an incredibly conservative group of people when it comes to things like this and will only ever do something when they believe 100% that it is in the best interest of their patient: the fact that there is this overwhelming consensus in favour of gender reassignment and transitioning and that the vast majority of medical institutions either have a gender clinic or will refer people to gender clinics suggests that they are very, very sure about the medical evidence on it.

[Famous Mortimer]

What exactly is gender identity? It's the preference to present as masculine or feminine, isn't it? What's masculine and feminine are totally socially constructed. Is this study saying that transgender people who have beards but wear dresses have a biological need to wear a dress? That makes no sense.

[JA]

What exactly is gender identity? It's the preference to present as masculine or feminine, isn't it? What's masculine and feminine are totally socially constructed. Is this study saying that transgender people who have beards but wear dresses have a biological need to wear a dress? That makes no sense.

You were correct until that bolded point. Of course, it makes no sense because that's not what it's saying. The study is saying that it's a biological reality that we behave and express ourselves in more masculine or feminine ways, but the way masculinity and feminity are expressed is dependent upon one's culture. In American culture, a person who's more feminine would feel more comfortable expressing themselves in a way that conforms to the socially constructed feminine gender norms, which may result in a transgender person with a beard wearing a dress.

[Idaho Conservative]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

[JA]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

You're the only one here obsessed and crazy enough to publicly argue with modern science on this issue, not the only one who's transphobic.

[Famous Mortimer]

It just doesn't make sense how a culturally constructed aesthetic can be genetically inborn.

[JA]

It just doesn't make sense how a culturally constructed aesthetic can be genetically inborn.

It's the interaction of culture with biology. Biology can't help but express itself through the culture in which it exists; every person's identity is intricately intertwined with their culture since none of us exist in a vacuum. Think of it this way. You, Famous Mortimer, are born a male, yet biologically you're more inclined towards feminine behavior, mannerisms, and modes of expression. You were also born in America. In America, what is associated with femininity? Pink, dolls, dresses, skirts, and so on. So, if you're a feminine male and the culture you're raised in says wearing dresses, playing with dolls, the color pink, and so on are expressions of feminity, how will you then attempt to express your feminity?

[IceAgeComing]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

man I didn't realise that I was trans, I'm sure that a few people will be happy that i've joined the team

Also you are literally the only person who claimed that the modern science on this is somehow wrong and that Dr McHugh is somehow the only correct person on this.  I mean, please feel free to counter the points that I have made: I think it is rather revealing that you've elected not to.

[Idaho Conservative]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

man I didn't realise that I was trans, I'm sure that a few people will be happy that i've joined the team

Also you are literally the only person who claimed that the modern science on this is somehow wrong and that Dr McHugh is somehow the only correct person on this.  I mean, please feel free to counter the points that I have made: I think it is rather revealing that you've elected not to.

I have countered your points over and over again, you just deny the facts.  The scientists are forced to cooperate with the transgender agenda or they are bigots, don't you get  that?  I have evaluated both sides and have found that my side makes more sense.  You have come up with the opposite conclusion.  I think I am right, you think you are.  I would say that my opinion is valid and your is crazy and affirming mental illness.  You would say my opinion is bigoted against people that have no control over what they feel.  Go ahead, I really don't care if you chop your penis off.

[Idaho Conservative]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

You're the only one here obsessed and crazy enough to publicly argue with modern science on this issue, not the only one who's transphobic.
[/quote
"transphobic" what a stupid word.  I am not scared of anything, I just consider delusion to be mental illness.  Well you are a  "mental illness denier."  If the press was conservative and treated liberals like the liberals treat conservatives today, the media would constantly whine about how liberals are deniers and affirmers of mental illness.

[Idaho Conservative]

Since you're so obsessed with "winning debates," here are ten responses.

1. I resort to insults because you're as dumb as a bag of rocks.

2. You f[inks]ing asked me "What specific facts that I stated do you deny?" to which I bolded what I disagreed with you on.

3. You cited some 9th grade biology bullsh[inks] about gene abnormalities which is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

4. Your usage of male pronouns in reference to Caitlyn Jenner is a transphobic canard.

5. Having a penis/vagina =/= gender. That's sex. Read a book or something.

6. Why the f[inks] does it matter to you what Jenner chooses to identify as?

7. Why the f[inks] do you think that YOU get to decide what Jenner and other trans people are allowed to identify as?

8. The whole "Why can't I identify as a tree????1?1" thing is not only beyond stupid, it completely belittles the struggles that trans people have to deal with, both internally and societally.
     a. If you can't the difference between a tree and a woman, you really are as dumb as I say you are.
     b. There are things which make Caitlyn Jenner a woman other than her word: her transitioning, her psychological identification as a woman,
     c. Once again, I'd like to repeat that you are incredibly stupid.

9. The article in the OP literally explain how what one feels inside one's head IS biology.

10. These are medical experts at the Endocrine Society who are stating this, officially, as a legitimate organization. I think it's safe to say that they better understand the issue and can actually provide facts as opposed to some random person posting their opinion on the internet.

1. I am not dumb.  My SAT score puts me in the 90th percentile.  My IQ is over 140.
2. I didn't notice the bolding.
3. It was relevant because "Communist Cracker" said there was more variation than XX and XY so I clarified those variations and how they still work out into the 2 sexes.
4. Ha! Ha!  You are triggered because I "misgendered" someone.  Most sincere apologies for that micro-aggression.  Please go to a safe space.
5. Sex and gender are synonyms.  Read a thesaurus or something.
6. It doesn't affect me, but I  can still disagree about it.
7. I don't get to decide what they identify as.  I don't have mind control powers.  But I can call them what I want and see them for their real gender....that they got at birth.
8. So basically what makes Caitlin Jenner a woman is that he says so , wears a dress, and is in "transition" aka hormones and surgery.
what makes him a man is: XY chromosomes, penis, testicles, prostate, seminal vesicles, Adam's apple, lacks any female organs, has a deep,many voice, is like 6'3'', won an Olympic medal as a MAN..........
My arguments are based on science while all you can do is say I'm dumb until you are blue in the face.  Generally, someone whose best argument is to call someone dumb is actually the dumb one, just sayin.
9/10. I agree, any feeling you have inside your head is technically biological, but with that logic, if you feel inside your head you are POTUS, are you actually in the real world?  Nope.  Just the same as with the trannies.  I don't doubt Jenner feels inside his head he is a woman, I just don't think that actually makes him one when all of the physical evidence points otherwise.  Why is it that all other mental feelings that are not reality are considered delusions, except gender identity?  It is because of politics.  The transgenders are the next big victim group for the left and any scientist that challenges their identities would be labeled a bigot, so they come up will a silly excuse which basically, "they think they are the other gender so they are."   That argument doesn't hold up any where else.  I am 17 and think I am 60, so am I?  no. Can I get drinks at a bar?  no. I think I am a tree so am I? no. My ancestry is white but I identify as black.  Can I begin a transition to black and listen to rap music and wear black shoepolish? no.  Now I am a black person? no. do I get affirmative action? no.  I am a man but I think I am a girl.  Can I just wear a dress and makeup and become a girl? no...... I mean absolutely yes! can I use the girls restroom? come right in! can I go into a girl's locker room and watch them change?  why yes!
See the problem.  Every other time a person identifies in their brain they are something they are not, it is either a joke, crazy, or the person is delusional.  Except with gender, because of 2 works: political correctness.  I honestly don't care if you think I am a bigot or if I offended you.  If you think of this objectively and in a logical and fact based manner, you will understand transgenderism is absolute lunacy and a denial or reality.  If someone has a delusion, you don't try to make that delusion reality, you try to fix their delusion.  Yes trans people need medical treatment, to fix their identity and make it in sync with reality.  Cutting your dick off won't solve problems.

DIAF you closeted POS.

which one of us are you referring to?  I hope it isn't me, because that is no way to address a fellow republican.

[adrac]

DIAF you closeted POS.

which one of us are you referring to?  I hope it isn't me, because that is no way to address a fellow republican.

Pretty sure whether or not that comment is appropriate has nothing to do with your political affiliation.

[emailking]

Transgenders have a right to ask people to use any pronoun they prefer.  That doesn't mean that everyone will use that pronoun.

Would you?

[IceAgeComing]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

man I didn't realise that I was trans, I'm sure that a few people will be happy that i've joined the team

Also you are literally the only person who claimed that the modern science on this is somehow wrong and that Dr McHugh is somehow the only correct person on this.  I mean, please feel free to counter the points that I have made: I think it is rather revealing that you've elected not to.

I have countered your points over and over again, you just deny the facts.  The scientists are forced to cooperate with the transgender agenda or they are bigots, don't you get  that?  I have evaluated both sides and have found that my side makes more sense.  You have come up with the opposite conclusion.  I think I am right, you think you are.  I would say that my opinion is valid and your is crazy and affirming mental illness.  You would say my opinion is bigoted against people that have no control over what they feel.  Go ahead, I really don't care if you chop your penis off.

Have you, though?  Your contestation was that trans people are "mentally ill", that they needed effectively conversion therapy rather than transitioning.  I provided a range of primary sources (and actually linking to the bloody things, since I have way too much time on my hands) from reputable medical journals to present my argument, that the body of the medical evidence clearly demonstrates that the best way of dealing with gender dysphoria is for the person to transition, and that the medical outcomes of that are incredibly positive.  You then brought up Dr McHugh and his statements to the Washington Post as being the Medical Professional that you listen to: and I shared some facts about him: the fact that he went to John Hopkins with the intent from the beginning to close the gender clinic and that the evidence that he used to backup that claim is critically flawed and was seen as such even at the time.  You then proceeded to moan about the trans takeover of Atlas (I mean firstly lots of the Atlas trans-posters have been here a hell of a lot longer than you and are widely considered to be great posters; while you are just... a guy) and then heavily imply that I'm trans - which might be an attempt at an insult but I'm secure in my manliness so I don't care, and if something changes or I come to a realisation in the future about things then hey, I only hope that I'm open minded enough to accept myself very quickly).

What facts have I denied?  I've dismissed Dr McHugh as being a credible source but that was very much based on the facts.  Only, naturally, you go down the route that all people who come to the realisation that this factual base for their beliefs goes down: that the evidence is wrong because of some conspiracy theory.  Firstly; the idea that trans people and their supporters have enough pull to end the careers of researchers that present findings that they don't like is silly really, and only comes from a strong misunderstanding of the academic process.  I mean this "agenda" certainly wasn't present in 1980 when Fleming, Steinman and Bocknek presenting their paper demonstrating the methodological problems in the study that McHugh always holds up.  I mean there are still researchers around who try to present (incredibly flawed) research that attempts to debunk Climate Change; and there's certainly more chance of an institutional backlash against those people than the (incredibly small) number of researchers.  And hell; if this agenda exists; you should find it easy to go through the above studies and find methodological flaws and biases that disprove their claims right?  After all; managing to reveal to the world this mega conspiracy that Doctors have used to, in your eyes, hurt people would be a big news story, wouldn't it?  Unless you wish to claim that the doctors and researchers involved just totally made up their findings and never actually researched anything, which is an incredibly bold accusation to make, and certainly one that requires proof. 

You know what though; its OK to be scared of the unknown.  Its OK to not quite understand things that are new, and sometimes a person's reaction can be to refuse to accept it; to accept what you have always known.  I remember when my Mum first explained the concept of trans people to be like fifteen years ago when I was nine (pretty sure it had to do with someone on Big Brother or some similar awful TV show that my Mum watched) I had a load of questions and the whole idea just seemed a little silly to my nine year old brain (although my attitude always was something along the lines of 'people should do what they want and no one should be nasty towards them about it' which is a radical concept, apparently) - after all, its something totally new.  That explains why some people probably have a backlash against it because they see it as being something new and scary even though its been something that's existed throughout history in some sort or another: its just that we've discovered ways to better diagnose and deal with it.  What isn't as OK is to construct a false scientific facade and use that to justify your feelings; especially when its against the body of scientific evidence - and claiming that literally all modern science is somehow wrong because of the TRANSGENDER AGENDA or some crap is as intellectually dishonest as you can get.

And you know what: you go back to your favourite Shapiro quote: that's a load of nonsense.  Feelings matter and they guide the way that everyone looks at the world.  You made a judgement about how I perceive your opinion (which is slightly wrong) based on your feelings and internal biases, and being aware of those biases is very useful for a few reasons: mostly because your actions change and become more positive when you realise that you might be doing something that isn't very nice entirely based on bias and can make sure that you try not to do it, because rather than being subconscious its a more conscious thing.  And also most of politics is based on feelings; how a person feels about the society that they live in and what sort of place that they'd like to live in in the future.  Pure technocratic politics never works because it always produces incredibly unsatisfactory governments to the majority of people for that reason - also because there are no single policies that work for everyone.  You ought to accept that feelings are what are guiding you here rather than facts - indeed that is the case for everyone here: the reason why I'm so in favour of trans rights isn't from some technocratic position about THE FACTS or whatever: its because I'm a strong believer in human rights and equality, and that putting obstacles in a persons way to prevent them from doing something that truly makes them much much happier while harming no one is a bad thing to do.  The fact that there's a factual base for that only strengthens those feelings and the importance of them to me...

[MasterJedi]

Have transgenders taken over Atlas forums?  I am literally the only person here on the opposing side.  There are other conservatives on atlas, I guess they are not interested.

Because someone being transgender and having the same rights as you has no affect on your life. Trust me, you've gone to the bathroom with transgender people before in the same room, if you look at people's junk you're doing it wrong.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

DIAF you closeted POS.

If this person is closeted then they deserve a certain amount of sympathy.

[Santander]

DIAF you closeted POS.

If this person is closeted then they deserve a certain amount of sympathy.

And respect for staying in the closet.

[Idaho Conservative]

You got me.  I  am actually trans.  I am out of the closet now.  I am so brave.  Oh no, I'm not transgender., I'm transracial.  Race is a social construct and yes, white was the race assigned to me at birth, but I have always known I am a black man imprisoned in a white body.  I have always loved rap and been great at basketball. I know  not all blacks like these things but as a social construct, many do.  I am beginning ny transition any dying ky skin so I can be happier in my body.  Yes, I recognize every cell in my body is 100% of European ancestry, but that doesn't matter, because I identify as black.  Just as a transgender person has the chroma somes of their  biological gender but identifies as something else.  Identity is more real than reality.  I have faced much transphobia.  Whites see me as a traitor to their race while blacks see me as just a white boy.  I hope  you all understand transracial is just as valid as transgender.  #call me black

[Santander]

Uh, yes, transracial is a thing.

[Idaho Conservative]

Uh, yes, transracial is a thing.

Yes, transracial is just as valid as transgender.

[publicunofficial]

Young nerds who spend all day every day getting mad about what people call themselves on Tumblr are my favorite political commentators. We def need more on this forum and in our lives in general.

[IceAgeComing]

Uh, yes, transracial is a thing.

Yes, transracial is just as valid as transgender.

Bold statement, sure you'll be able to back it up with some proof?

[Idaho Conservative]

Uh, yes, transracial is a thing.

Yes, transracial is just as valid as transgender.

Bold statement, sure you'll be able to back it up with some proof?

How isn't it valid?  It is my identity.  When it comes to idenity, physical reality doesn't matter. It is transphobic for you to say my transracial identity isn't valid.  Caitlyn  Jenner doesn't need proof she is a woman, she just needs words as proof.  It's not like Jenner's  dna has anything to do with its gender just like my ancestry has nothing to do with my race.  If gender is a social construct, race is as well.   You are an intolerant closeted bigot.