New study confirms probable genetic cause for classic transsexuality

[Natasha]

New study confirms probable genetic cause for classic transsexuality

http://radicalbitch.wordpress.com/2008/10/27/new-study-confirms-probable-genetic-cause-for-classic-transsexuality/
10/26/2008

The ink isn't even dry on this before the TG community has started trying to pick it apart but let's be realistic here. The Danish BSTc studies, the recent German studies confirming olfactory pheromone sensitivity in transsexual women falling within gendered (female) norms, the repeated several times studies on the sex specific cognitive function also confirming the truth behind, at least for male to female classic transsexuals, the truth that they have a neurologically female central nervous system and the "markers" for determining physiological different responses to estrogen in classic transsexual women and AGs pretty much confirm this is true.

[Purple Pimp]

So, us young, "classic" transsexuals are "real" women, while "autogynephiles" are not?  Sorry to put so many quotation marks in one sentence, they just belie my difficulty in believing in this stuff.

Lia

[Rachael]

Well, young not so neceserily, but autogenophiles i never considered women to start with... just men with a woman fettish....

I do think its a good sign though.

[nooneinparticular]

You know what has shocked me to the core in the last 48 hours?  Getting final confirmation that trans-activism is actually opposed to getting civil rights.  This is something I suspected for years, that the neo-gynophobia in the TG community runs so deep and true that they will actually actively oppose transsexual civil rights.

On places like the Betty Boards the refrain goes, "but I don't want to be considered disabled".......Newsflash, the disabled don't want to be considered disabled either but we take the coverage under the ADA to ensure a level playing field.  Disclosure:  I am physically disabled with severe back injuries that eventually will have me confined to a wheelchair.  Right now I still walk with a cane.  Do I want sympathy for that?......hell no, but if the ADA protects me from open discrimination in accomodations will I turn my back on that?  Again, hell no.......And that's what was just handed to the entire transsexual community.  Due to a lucky accident of bigotry in the writing of the ADA, the transsexual exclusion, to avoid dragging the intersexed into it, is specific about transsexuality not from physical causes.  What this means in simple terms is that transsexuality from physical causes (ie: genetics) is a protected class under the ADA in housing, employment and public accomodations.  Bingo!  No more need for ENDA, and given the difficulty proving who is and isn't classically transsexual if they have transitioned, the burden of proof would descend on the bigot.

But the TG activist and blogging crowd doesn't want this.  They want to be loved and accepted.  Errrr, you cannot legislate acceptance, you either get it personally by the way you live your life, or you don't.  My goal was always a level playing field, I could give an excrement if some random bigot loves me and accepts me but I'll be damned if I'll let him deny me the basics of life........and apparently that is the real issue that separates me from the TGs and the trans-activists.  If it were about civil rights, there would be celebrations in the streets, instead they are in mourning.......

[Rachael]

I dont think i've ever seen that put better...

[isterriis]

I truly believe that everyone that considers themselves Trans anything are intersexed in that you have a feeling that something is not correct with your body even though there are no physical outwards signs as is the case with intersexed people and that the root is genetics I would not call it a birth defect but an anomaly that can be corrected with surgery the level or amount of surgery is determined by the anomaly, some require extensive modifications while others can have minor surgery to correct the anomaly.... just my thoughts 

[Lisa Harney]

Well, young not so neceserily, but autogenophiles i never considered women to start with... just men with a woman fettish....

I do think its a good sign though.

Does anyone really believe that "->-bleeped-<-" actually exists as a primary reason to transition (and actually go through with the transition)? I know there are several women who claim to be ->-bleeped-<- (and I've been on a not ->-bleeped-<--related mailing list with Willow Arune in the past), but aren't their claims inconsistent with the definitions of ->-bleeped-<- as described by Bailey and Blanchard?

Isn't "->-bleeped-<-" a definition devised by Blanchard to explain why some women transition without having to actually believe what these women say about their own lives? And isn't it also part of the way trans women's sex drives and sex lives are pathologized just for being trans?

And if someone goes through the full process of transitioning and assimilates as a woman, does it really matter?

[Kate]

And if someone goes through the full process of transitioning and assimilates as a woman, does it really matter?

Nope!

NEEDS > EXPLANATIONS, imho

~Kate~

[nooneinparticular]

Lisa, Lisa, Lisa.......

First of all what does this have to do with the gaining of rights under the ADA.  Second of all, you are familiar with what I wrote in my own blog entitled "Towards Trans Sanity".  What you might not be familiar with is that particular entry was vetted by the International Psychiatrist of the Year, who just happens to be one of my closest friends and the current "go to" person in the psychiatric community on this very issue.

I soft pedal the figures but the actual current ratio of AG to classic transsexuals presenting for evaluation is estimated at 65 to 35........and we can separate them with what Harvard Medical states is close to 100% accuracy now.  Psychiatry considers this important because:  there is approaching zero dissatisfaction with surgical outcome even when less than perfect among the classical transsexuals.  Among the AGs the figures run closer to 50-50 regardless of the outcome.  This might not be significant to you, but to a profession that wishes to do no harm and also cover it's own butt, this is pretty darn important.

AG is in the DSM, it ain't coming out because the deck was stacked with the revision team to make sure it didn't.  What is coming with the revision is a redefinition of all non-classical transsexuality (medical model it's called in the trade) as fetishist.  Don't shoot the messenger, it's just how it was stacked.  And since I need to spell it out to you........there isn't a legislator in the world who will vote to protect a sexual fetish class.......ergo, an end to transgender dreams of protection via an inclusive ENDA.

I started warning the trans-activist crowd more than a decade ago this was coming.....now it's too late to stop it.

Posted on: October 27, 2008, 01:04:52 pm

And if someone goes through the full process of transitioning and assimilates as a woman, does it really matter?

Nope!

NEEDS > EXPLANATIONS, imho

~Kate~

Hey, once through the hoops, no, it's no longer an issue unless you make it one.

[jenny_]

So, us young, "classic" transsexuals are "real" women, while "autogynephiles" are not?  Sorry to put so many quotation marks in one sentence, they just belie my difficulty in believing in this stuff.

Lia

I've no idea what the blog is going on about classic transsexuals for, but in the article it linked to, it talks about a genetic link to transsexualism without using blanchard's categories.  Same with the abstract of the journal article (though i haven't been able to find the actual article yet), talks about mtf transsexuals without grouping them into HT/->-bleeped-<-.

(http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/bps/content/0800425abs) - abstract

Posted on: October 27, 2008, 07:15:01 pm

...there is approaching zero dissatisfaction with surgical outcome even when less than perfect among the classical transsexuals.  Among the AGs the figures run closer to 50-50 regardless of the outcome.

Really?  If thats true i'd be incredibly surprised!  Where do you get these figures from?

[Kate]

I soft pedal the figures but the actual current ratio of AG to classic transsexuals presenting for evaluation is estimated at 65 to 35........and we can separate them with what Harvard Medical states is close to 100% accuracy now. Psychiatry considers this important...

I didn't think the the existence of so-called AGs was accepted much outside of the Bailey crowd?

~Kate~

[Alyssa M.]

I think studies like this are interesting from the point of view of sheer curiousity.

Using them to "normalize" transsexuality is problematic. Science has no method to differentiate "normal" from "abnormal" -- it just describes what is. When I hear HBS supporters declare, in effect, that "science" has pronounced them to be normal, I can't help but hear the echo of the pro-life crowd that declare that "science" had pronounced that human life begins at conception.

As noip said, you can't legislate acceptance. And, yes, an accepting society is the goal; anything less is a compromise along the way. The problem is not that some bigots discriminate against transsexual people. It's that we as a society use arbitrary criteria to demonize anyone who we deem abnormal. So while I rejoice at the possibility that an interpretation of these results could lead to legal protection, I worry that the same interpretation perpetuates bigotry.

[Seshatneferw]

I'd like to make some observations and ask a couple of questions, if you don't mind too much.

Second of all, you are familiar with what I wrote in my own blog entitled "Towards Trans Sanity".  What you might not be familiar with is that particular entry was vetted by the International Psychiatrist of the Year, who just happens to be one of my closest friends and the current "go to" person in the psychiatric community on this very issue.

Being vetted by 'the International Psychiatrist of the Year' sounds impressive. However, that's all it does -- it does not tell us anything by which we could see where your claims come from and try to assess their validity. This is especially true since, first, you do not cite any references for some of the more esoteric claims and, second, since a quick internet search did not reveal what exactly an 'International Psychiatrist of the Year' is and who appoints them. The title is also sufficiently vague to protect the identity of the psychiatrist in question from trivial googling.

In short, while I do not doubt that your friend is a well-respected psychiatrist you have not convinced me that your blog entry is authoritative just because they read it before it was posted.

I soft pedal the figures but the actual current ratio of AG to classic transsexuals presenting for evaluation is estimated at 65 to 35........and we can separate them with what Harvard Medical states is close to 100% accuracy now.

How do you know that  ->-bleeped-<- in fact exists as a real condition? Where does this 65:35 ratio come from? How can the two conditions be separated? Please cite your sources, I'd really like to know -- and I'm pretty sure there are gender therapists all over the world who would like to know at least the answer to the last one, too.

Psychiatry considers this important because:  there is approaching zero dissatisfaction with surgical outcome even when less than perfect among the classical transsexuals.  Among the AGs the figures run closer to 50-50 regardless of the outcome.

Again, I'd really like to know your sources.

AG is in the DSM, it ain't coming out because the deck was stacked with the revision team to make sure it didn't.  What is coming with the revision is a redefinition of all non-classical transsexuality (medical model it's called in the trade) as fetishist.

Do you have any information regarding the diagnostic criteria? What is this 'classical transsexuality' and how is it different from the 'fetishistic' gender identity disorders?

Hey, once through the hoops, no, it's no longer an issue unless you make it one.

Or unless someone else makes it an issue by claiming that you are not a woman but instead a fetishistic man who has deceived the medical system into mutilating his body.

  Nfr

[Kate]

So while I rejoice at the possibility that an interpretation of these results could lead to legal protection, I worry that the same interpretation perpetuates bigotry.

I resent the whole search for explanations, to be honest. The search for "explanations" by science, as well as the embracing of supposed physical causes IMHO is all spurred by the same underlying assumption:

IT'S WRONG TO CHANGE ONE'S SEX!

Why don't people try and find the gene that "causes" people to buy SUVs? Or drink Dr. Pepper?

But no, some "outsiders" think it's so weird and wrong to change sexes that they feel they have to explain it somehow, with the unspoken intention of "curing" it. And the community is so wrapped up in embracing it's guilt and shame about their needs that they cling to every "it's not my fault!" explanation handed to them by the same.

~Kate~

[Alyssa M.]

Kate,

I'm not sure I'd be terribly interested in genetic factors that predispose some people to driving trucks. But things like music, language, gender, sexuality, mathematical ability, social introversion or extraversion, love -- the things that make us human -- yes, I'm interested in how they emerge. It the science is done from this point of view, then I have no problem.

But that's just me being optimistic. Realistically, I agree with you. And personally, I'm more interested in why electrons have mass than any of those other things.

~Alyssa

[lisagurl]

 This gene science is such a small sample and has not been duplicated, all is you can be sure about is the question needs to be investigated more fully by several groups. This type of research borders on pseudo science. They have also announced a religious gene. Unless more evidence is found the error could be just a subjective view.

[darius82501]

Why don't people try and find the gene that "causes" people to buy SUVs? Or drink Dr. Pepper?

But no, some "outsiders" think it's so weird and wrong to change sexes that they feel they have to explain it somehow, with the unspoken intention of "curing" it. And the community is so wrapped up in embracing it's guilt and shame about their needs that they cling to every "it's not my fault!" explanation handed to them by the same.

Buying an SUV and or drinking Dr. Pepper are absurd analogies. That statement sounds like a girl I had in a class one time stating that being homosexual was like choosing a bad career. WOW

I think the goal is to understand ->-bleeped-<-. An understanding can help society to accept transgendered individuals. How many people have stereotypes of people who are trans? A lot, most people don't even know what the term means not alone wrapping their minds around the concept. It is a proven fact that education and knowledge on a topic leads to less discrimination and more positive attitudes. If I had a kid and saw them suffering like I have I would be interested in how to fix it. Whether that be better surgeries or understanding the genetic links to it. i think it is interesting because ->-bleeped-<- is so rare and I am interested in solid research. Just my opinion. Would I take a pill to get rid of feeling as if I am male. .not sure?

Brady

[lisagurl]

I'm not sure I'd be terribly interested in genetic factors that predispose some people to driving trucks. But things like music, language, gender, sexuality, mathematical ability, social introversion or extraversion, love -- the things that make us human -- yes, I'm interested in how they emerge. It the science is done from this point of view, then I have no problem.

There is not enough information stored in DNA to determine all these details of life. Life experiences are a greater factor on how you will live. Genes like food help in achieving things with a little less work as they also can require more work to overcome a deficiency.

[Caroline]

New study confirms probable genetic cause for classic transsexuality

The funny thing is, the only person I know who took part in this study is non-binary identified.  Call me cynical but to make statements about "classic transsexuality" rather than just MTF spectrum trans people you actually need to be doing research specifically on "classic transsexuals" (whatever the hell that means) do you not?

[lisagurl]

->-bleeped-<- is so rare and I am interested in solid research

1 in 3000 is not that rare.