It’s been found during MRI and fMRI of living patients too; I’ve posted on this (typically, transphobes on here discount the studies by claiming they are “MRI experts” who doubt the studies, but of course refuse to provide any actual facts or their Q&E, meaning in reality they’re high school trolls with good Google skills, but I digress…) I’ve had just such a brain MRI myself.
Really? Cool. (What’s an fMRI?)
I hate to do this, but Functional magnetic resonance imaging - Wikipedia .
Spain. The 44 is when I attended kindergarten and had that teacher who’d make me bunch up my left hand’s fingers to bang them with a cuadradillo (a ruler with a section of 1sq cm) if I used the Devil’s hand; at about the same time, my one year older cousin was having the same problem but his father intervened. Almost all my cousins on that side are lefties; the one my age can use both hands (so can I) but he writes with the left. I had problems for many years with sports teachers who insisted that I had to use my right (since it was the hand I wrote with) even though the left always worked better (both arm and leg are stronger on that side and I have better coordination using the left).
That will probably have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. If what you’re concerned about is transwomen having an unfair advantage in competing with cisgender women because of size/strength superiority, then why should you object to transmen competing against cisgender men? Surely if a transman can overcome size/strength disadvantages due to having a body that was assigned female at birth, to the point of being able to compete seriously against men who were assigned male at birth, we should cheer his achievement, not disqualify him.
[QUOTE=DerekMichaels00]
- That hetero cis men can find trans people repulsive without being called a bigot, and can say so in public
[/quote]
You can of course say in public that you personally are repulsed by the idea of getting sexual with a transwoman, because the idea of playing with penises other than your own is a turn-off for you. You might get some side-eye for oversharing, but I doubt you’ll be called a bigot.
But if you go around publicly calling other people repulsive because of what their bodies are like, then no, you can’t really expect not to be called a bigot.
[QUOTE=DerekMichaels00]
- That trans people don’t start trying to pass themselves off as “cis,” or regular people and deceive them into a relationship. I never wanna go to a bar and find out that the girl I’m about to lay down game to isn’t a girl. That’s disgusting.
[/quote]
As I’ve noted before on these boards, it’s unethical for people to deliberately lie about their sexual identity and/or history when asked about it by potential sex partners. It’s also unethical to try to seduce somebody who you know does not want to get involved with somebody of your sexual identity and/or history.
But that doesn’t make it unethical or deceptive simply to present and behave as the gender you identify with. Nobody is required to proclaim information about their sexual identity and/or history to all and sundry without being asked. Nor is anybody required to assume that everybody who’s attracted to them must be transphobic and therefore needs to be pre-emptively warned off.
Transwomen are women, and they don’t need anybody’s permission to look or behave like women. Some women were born with penises, and some of those women still have the penises they were born with. No transwoman is required to advertise that fact just because you personally are afraid of possibly “laying down game” (ewwww) to a transwoman in a bar.
If you can’t bear the notion that a woman you’re “laying down game to” might be transgender, then by all means feel free to confine your “game” to women you’ve gotten to know well enough to know whether or not they’re transgender. If you insist on hitting on strangers, you have to be prepared for the possibility that some of those strangers may be transgender, no matter how “disgusting” you consider it.
[QUOTE=DerekMichaels00]
- That given their small proportion of the population, their representation in media reflect that. What’s next: Playboy putting one of them on, to show “solidarity with equality?” Ew, no, never.
[/QUOTE]
Dude, this is the one aspect of the situation that you actually have some influence over, and you’re squandering it. The media are making a big fuss about transgender people because anti-transgender ideologues like you are having such newsworthy hissy fits about them.
If you all will just stop dramatically losing your shit over the essentially mundane fact that the human population contains a tiny proportion of men born with vaginas and women born with penises, the media will stop making such a big deal out of it.
Can’t pass up this possibly unique opportunity to say that octopus is absolutely right and I agree with him 100%. 
A recent invention of the far-left! Which is why you’d never find a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine (far and away the highest-impact medical journal in the world) from 1979 talking about it!
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM197905313002201
Yep, that’s one recent invention of the far left!
:smack:
Today, you can find quite a few papers talking about them. I bet Una Persson has a list, which I would love to have for discussions with people like you who think gender identity is something the left made up out of whole cloth, but here’s a short list I found in, oh, say, 5 minutes of googling:
http://www.eje-online.org/content/155/suppl_1/S107.short
And so on, and so forth. If you don’t thing gender identity is a distinct psychological thing within humans, then you are more than 30 years behind the existing research. If you don’t think there’s a physiological basis for it, I’d have to ask why you reject the various research papers pointing out that there is a physiological basis for it.
You have a very bizarre definition of “accept”. What, exactly, does your “acceptance” entail? You clearly aren’t going to tolerate their transition. You clearly aren’t going to be nice to them. You clearly aren’t even going to grant them a basic level of tolerance or respect. So what, pray tell, does your acceptance entail? What, exactly, is it that trans people should be working so hard to get? And why wouldn’t it be better attained by doing what they can to just shut people like you out of the conversation, much for the same reason people who think things were better before black people could vote get shut out of the conversation on racism? Maybe you should get past your own hang-ups and homophobia before you start talking about what other people need to do for you to accept them.
My wife, who is…slightly older than you… was also harangued from a young age into being a righty by teachers and family, and this was in America. Forcing lefthanded people to change is a practice that has only fallen by the wayside in the past few decades, and we can be glad it’s gone.
To be fair, they might not use the word “bigot”. But you can’t really complain about negative reactions when you go around calling strangers of any sort “repulsive” in public.
In those cultures I mentioned before where the word that would be the direct translation of “gender” isn’t in general-population use, people do not say that transgender people don’t exist or that they should “just suck it up” - they’re called what would be directly translated as “transexual”. People in those cultures don’t need to have a short word for “pigeonholing prejudice based on sexual-assignment perceptions” to agree that whatever sex you were assigned at birth doesn’t define your whole life whether you want to have a different assignment (trans) or not (cis). Now, I do agree that those countries where the UHC system pays for the reassignment process are pretty leftist from an American PoV, but hey, if respecting other human beings and wanting them to be happy and comfortable with themselves is leftist, call me a Commie 
Didn’t they find the same for gay men vs. straight men? That I accept. So whats the difference between trans and gays’ brains?
yea, we don’t go around trying to change “traditional masculinity,” blaming “patriarchy” for “marginzalizing” us, calling for “safe spaces,” expecting magazines to put us naked on the cover, etc.
Tricky issue, I admit, but so far I can’t really say it’s of any huge importance. I suppose a chromosome requirement (i.e. the lack of a Y) might eventually be added to professional/Olympic women’s sport, or a hormone test with a testosterone limit or something.
Well, now you’re demanding the right to free speech, while demanding that others don’t have the right to free speech in response. That’s not going to fly on any issue.
Simple solution - you don’t go to bars.
Playboy did, back in September 1991. And “the media” should be free to represent as they choose, unless you want to restrict others’ freedom of expression (already established in point 2, I guess).
Anyway, I doubt anyone here will ever tell you that you don’t have the right to “ew” at whatever you like. You just don’t have the right to universal acclaim/silenced critics if you choose to discuss it publicly.
Please provide an actual cite regarding this statement. Has anyone done a poll?
The two transwomen I am most familiar with are married to women, one of them still married to the women she was married to prior to her transition. See, I can pick and choose examples, too.
Someone who goes through the required years of counseling and treatment prior to some serious surgery is not “experimenting”.
I`m not a doctor but a quick google search would seem to indicate that the difference between cisgendered and transgendered brains lies in the distribution of white matter in the brain. The difference between straight and gay brains seems to lie in the symmetry of the brains hemispheres as well as the number of neural connections between the two.
Again, I`m not a doctor and the above results from a quick google search before work so I am not sure how current these ideas are but it certainly seems that the differences that can determine gay vs. straight are different than those that can help determine cis vs. trans.
It may be that transgender athletes will be barred from certain categories of sport based on their medical history, just as certain athletes requiring certain types of medication may be banned from high level competition. The jury is still out on that one.
Another point is that a LOT depends on when the transition occurs. The earlier it happens in life the less effect the hormones of the birth sex have on the body. It’s not the presence of a Y chromosome that makes for stronger bones and muscles, it’s the effect of male hormones. XY women are no more stronger or denser boned than other women, for example, and because they don’t react to male hormones at all they’re actually at a disadvantage compared to other women and can’t even cheat, because even if you did inject them with male hormones their cells won’t react to them.
Finally, while over time some men have attempted to fake being female, I really really doubt any cisgender man would have the SURGERY to pass as a woman in order to win medals.
Chromosome testing was used for awhile but ran into problems with the occasional XY woman, who after all has had a female body from birth and is arguably at a disadvantage to XX women who can benefit from the normal level of androgens in a woman’s body. But if you use hormone testing what do you do with women by nature have unusually high levels of testosterone compared to other women? And it’s always been a problem with the intersex. There was an instance of an athlete in 1967 whose cells were a mix of XX and XY (a condition known as “mosaicism”) Have a wiki on the topic.. The Olympics have been wrestling with this for decades.
And do what? Use the Asian bathrooms? As far as I am concerned, people can call themselves any race they wish. Race is a stupid human construct. Where is the chromosome for race? How do you tell who is Asian? By their slanty eyes and yellow skin? Some Asians have neither, so they will slip through any system designed to treat Asians differently. There is a word for general conclusions that are based on how someone looks.
Back when racial segregation was a thing a very dark-skinned Caucasian might get into trouble for using the “wrong” bathroom, and a very light-skinned person of African descent trying to pass as white risked serious consequences if they were outed.
Fortunately, such things have passed into history.
Yes it is. And yet it is allowed, protected even, from the mockery it deserves. One could take it to the Pit, I suppose, but that feeds into the pretense that Great Debates is actually about debate rather than the spewing of hateful ignorance.
Bigotry is not protected speech in Great Debates.
Exhibit A: this thread.