Rediscovering Pema

[Lori Dee ✅]

I am not convinced.

There were, and are, proponents who believe that race is a social construct. An anthropologist did a multi-decade study and has published several essays on this. What he found was interesting.

Forensic anthropologists can identify the race of a skeleton by measuring the size of bone structures. They are classified into three very general groups: Caucasian (European), Asian, and African. He explains how evolution caused the bone structures to develop.

He expanded his research to include IQ Test results, body measurements, international crime data, genetic studies, and medical data such as hormone levels.

What he found is that many "traits" that were considered "stereotypical" have some basis in biology, and are not a result of some social construct.

That leads me to believe that the same is true of gender identity. That there is some yet undiscovered biological connection. Researchers at MIT and other institutions were investigating various things like genetics, hormonal influence of mothers upon fetal development, and so forth. Then a certain bigot in the White House shut down funding for such research. I guess he doesn't want to be proven wrong: that there is no such thing as "gender ideology" and that gender is a biological fact.

[Pema]

Lori, can you provide names/links for those race-biology studies? The consensus of current mainstream research is that race is not biological and that there are no biological correlations between traits and assigned races. The most prominent proponents of the theory have largely been shunned by their peers as far-right eugenicists.

In fact, just looking very quickly, this is near the top of Wikipedia's (very long) page on Race (human categorization) 🔗 [Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_​(human_​categorization)/]:

"Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society."

If there's something new and credible, I'd love to know more about it.

[Lori Dee ✅]

Lori, can you provide names/links for those race-biology studies? The consensus of current mainstream research is that race is not biological and that there are no biological correlations between traits and assigned races. The most prominent proponents of the theory have largely been shunned by their peers as far-right eugenicists.

In fact, just looking very quickly, this is near the top of Wikipedia's (very long) page on Race (human categorization) 🔗 [Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_​(human_​categorization)/]:

"Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society."

If there's something new and credible, I'd love to know more about it.

His essays are not new. Many have criticized his writings as "profiling," but I did some research on his claims and found his research solid. I think the issue is that some people fear that if this were true, somehow race would define a subspecies of humans. And that could be easily weaponized by bad actors. So they reject any subject that remotely hints in that direction.

We have a similar situation within the transgender community. The fear is that if a biological connection to gender identity can be found, then bad actors could use that to target people suspected of being transgender, whether they are or not.

It is important to understand that even in genetics, a given outcome is not guaranteed. It only implies a potential for a certain outcome, not something definitive. Some people are opposed to determining the sex of a child before birth. Others worry about genetic manipulation, etc., etc.

Note, as I stated, this view is widely considered to be pseudoscience and is rejected by the mainstream scientific community, so I won't post the link here. I'll send it to you via PM. Let me know what you think.

[Pema]

Thank you. I look forward to seeing it. As a born and trained scientist, there aren't many things that the scientific community agrees is pseudoscience that I wind up finding very credible. It usually involves sloppy assumptions and methodology, and the scientific method (usually) works pretty well. But I'm always interested in being surprised.

Meanwhile, there's *tons* of stuff out there about the lack of correlation of genetics with what we call "race" - and even how to define what "race" is.

On the gender side, I'm not sure how we reconcile a biological origin with the cultural variations of gender expression, just one example being the Bugis people of Indonesia who have 5 genders. As @Asche has so eloquently said:

I think just about everything said about gender, and even most of the research, is pure BS, but it's part of the world I have to live in, sort of like the current US administration, so I can't just ignore it.

I don't feel any differently, really, and I'm *very* interested in research that clarifies it. I just have yet to see any.

We are not born biologically into membership in any religion or political party or sports fandom. By whatever mechanism, whether innate or acquired, we all discover within ourselves deep, strongly held values that (I hope) inform and guide how we live our lives. We find people who share those values and associate and identify with them to the point where we adopt the label of the group. We can experience that profound sense of identity without it having a genetic basis and it can still be as valid as any other aspect of our identity. To require that it be attached to any physical attribute makes as much sense as believing that you have to have red hair to love classical music.

Nobody has to play along with "prove to me that your experience is valid in a game where I get to make the rules." We're more complex and more interesting than that, and I think that's a good thing.

[Lori Dee ✅]

I agree with what you are saying.

I am not saying there is a biological connection with gender expression. I believe there may be a biological connection (cause? potential?) with gender dysphoria. People experience it in many different ways, react to it in many different ways, and to many different degrees. I think that gender expression is related to that degree (or lack of) dysphoria, and the obvious environmental factors that would allow or disallow that expression.

[Pema]

I believe there may be a biological connection (cause? potential?) with gender dysphoria.

There may. I just haven't seen anything indicating that there is. I'm open to seeing it when it arrives.

[Asche]

The reason "race" is called a social construct is that it is not only rather arbitrary -- think of the "one-drop rule" -- but the definitions change over time.  There was a time in the USA when Italians were not considered "white."

This isn't to say that different populations of humans don't have different distributions of traits, including visible ones, but that there's enough overlap between populations that if you're going to try to assign an individual to a "race" based on physical characteristics, there are going to be a lot of people who could be assigned to several different "races," and which race someone is assigned to will depend upon what criteria you choose.  There was a time when scientists spoke of "subspecies," but that has turned out to be as clumsy and unworkable as epicycles.

The same issue applies to gender.  There are a large number of characteristics that people use to "gender" people, and depending upon which characteristics you choose, you'll get different distributions of "male", "female," and "undetermined."

[Asche]

I believe there may be a biological connection (cause? potential?) with gender dysphoria.

If I may rephrase this as "a biological component to gender dysphoria," I don't think this is all that remarkable.  After all, there is clearly a biological component to personality, as anyone who has had several children and noticed how differently they react even as soon as they are born.  Dysphoria results when someone is forced to live in a way that isn't compatible with their nature, whether it's gender rules or career or what.  (My own non-gender example is when my father talked me into trying to sell "Bestline" soap door-to-door one summer.  It was an almost comical train wreck!)

[Dances With Trees]

Thanks, Asche, for providing such an eloquent resolution (in my mind) to the discussion between Pema and Lori. Gender expression is cultural. Gender self-identity is derived from a variety of components ranging from anatomy to spirituality and is an innate and compelling force. Almost as compelling as the social construct determining gender expression.

[Lori Dee ✅]

There may. I just haven't seen anything indicating that there is. I'm open to seeing it when it arrives.

The studies are preliminary for several reasons. As a small segment of the population, it is challenging to recruit a large number of study participants. When they do happen, the scientific community cites the "small study" results as being "statistically insignificant".

Nothing has been proven. Theories are being explored. Again, this has nothing to do with gender expression. The study is trying to find a biological link to gender dysphoria. And since, even within our own tiny community, dysphoria is experienced in such a wide spectrum of intensity, it can be even more difficult to measure. Then, trying to factor in environmental, societal, or familial influences adds to the challenge.

Genetic Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Sex Hormone Signaling
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30247609/ 🔗

In a discussion of this study, Professor Harley, who led the study, stated:

"While it should not hinge on science to validate people's individuality and lived experience, these findings may help to reduce discrimination, lend evidence towards improving diagnosis or treatment, promote greater awareness and acceptance and reduce the distress experienced by transgender people in our communities," Prof Harley said.

"What makes you feel like a male or female is complex and involves interactions between many different genes, much like height, weight or blood pressure. However, while genes play a role, they are not the only factors involved in determining gender identity," he said.
https://hudson.org.au/news/written-in-dna-study-reveals-potential-biological-basis-for-transgender/ 🔗

Another article that discusses the same theory, but a different study.

Trans Genes?
https://cashp.columbian.gwu.edu/trans-genes 🔗

In every case, the researchers make it clear that these are just theories being tested; they are not conclusive, and by no means are they the only factor influencing dysphoria or gender expression. Gender expression is an individual choice (voluntary or involuntary), but the studies focus on why dysphoria exists at all.

[Pema]

Lori, thank you for sending me the links to the articles. After reading them, I have to say that I'm even more convinced that their claims that race is biological are entirely without merit. Both authors make clear that the underlying motivation of their claims is to "predict behavior" [ultimately to justify profiling, discrimination, and subjugation]. When I read about those (white, cishet) men's lives and affiliations, racism and homophobia are a common thread. Theirs is what I'd call "junk science 🔗 [Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_​science/]" - cherry-picked data with no replicability, unsupported assumptions, and no concrete analysis. It's all vibes that support their desired outcome. As goofy as epicycles seem today, they were at least devised to explain universally agreed-upon observations. This is more like phrenology. And, in the 30+ years since these writings, genome sequencing has shown very clearly that humans are more alike than they are different and there is literally nothing to support a claim of categorization by race as anything but cultural and social.

Thank you, too, for the link to the Foreman, et. al paper on the genetic link to gender dysphoria. Published in a respected, peer-reviewed journal, I absolutely consider that to be quality research. I also note that words like "proposed" and "may" and "could" appear frequently in the paper and the articles written about it. At the moment, it is a hypothesis, a glimpse of a possibility.

For my part, I think it's unwise and unnecessary to look for validation from [well, anyone, but...] people who would willingly exaggerate and fabricate data to suit their racist agenda. There's a huge overlap between them and those who say that transgender people pose a threat to society.

I don't need or even want anyone to "prove" that I'm right when I say that I know who I am and have a right to be me. Whether they agree or don't, I'll continue to live my life the way I want within the bounds of what's possible in the world that I live in.

I think most people who are at all tuned in to who they are experience dysphoria about something at some point in their lives. For many, it's not severe or prolonged enough to result in dysfunction; for others it is. I think the norms for gender expression are imposed on us by the culture we live in, and if they simply don't work for us, we should be free to choose something that does. Trying to quantify a person's incapacity to function within these norms seems like a waste of effort to me.

I really appreciate you all contributing to this conversation.

[Emma1017]

Pema, if you get a chance, read some of Julia Serano's writing.  She is a trained biologist who is also transgender.  She has written a lot and is easy to Google.  She is an interesting read.

[Pema]

Thank you, Emma. I'll look into her.