Re: OT: Trans Day of Visibility 2025 AMA

On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:08:12 -0700, erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/7/25 11:23 PM, LDagget wrote:

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:34:39 +0000, DB Cates wrote:
 

On 2025-03-31 11:38 a.m., Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2025-03-31 16:19:18 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
>

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 08:04:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com>:
>

On 3/30/25 7:00 PM, Kestrel Clayton wrote:

>
The last day of March is the Transgender Day of Visibility, a day to
improve awareness of transgender people, to draw attention to the
challenges and oppression we face, and help people understand us
better.
The TDoV is more important than ever in 2025, as the Trump
Administration has put us squarely in its target sights.
>
One of the ways I can fight for my existence, and that of several
of my
friends and loved ones, is by being visible as myself, answering
questions, and demystifying trans people.
>
I am a transgender woman. I am visible. Ask me anything.
>

Intending no disrespect, I'm sympathetic to anyone with gender
dysphoria.  It's probably a conclusion that you and others have
reached
only after some serious introspection.  That's your business, not
mine,
and doesn't disturb me in the slightest.  I do object to biological
males competing in women's sports, and I think it's a very bad idea
for
minors to do anything irrevocable before their brains are at least
soft-boiled.
>

Agreed. All.

>
Agreed. All.
>
>

Sort of agreed, but re: sports, how exactly do you define 'biological
male' and how would you plan to enforce it? And yes, it is a bad idea
for minors to do anything irrevocable. The cases I know of are in late
adolescence with a long history of really knowing what they want and
decisions made by doctor/parent in cases of infants with ambiguous or
damaged genitalia. I'm okay with the first but dead against the second.

 
I'm somewhat disappointed in the way the term "gender dysphoria" gets
tossed around. In rigid clinical terms it works but tends to quickly
drift outside of rigid clinical use. By that, I mean it gets used to
insinuate mere discontent with whichever gender is most likely to have
been used as a label on a birth certificate.
 
No, I'm not bending over backwards to be woke or tolerant or liberal.
It's a matter of science, and science on sex determination goes beyond
boys have a penis, girls have a vagina, or XY, XX.
 
This is science that needs to be recognized and kept in mind. I'm
referencing things like Executive Orders which seek to declare by fiat
that there is a singular biological reality of male XY, female XX
and any discussion of anything else is propaganda. That's happening.
It's canceling NIH grants to understand things in greater detail.
It's being used in a prior restraint manner to silence anyone who
would dare to offer an alternative perspective.
 
The asserted simplistic male::female dichotomy is false, even if it
represents strong bimodal norms.
 
The reality is that biology is sloppy. Genotype doesn't fully
dictate phenotype. And trivializing genotype to karyotype makes for
a worse predictor. Athel in particular knows this well.
 
All the above goes what should remain apolitical scientific reality.
 
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler,"
and in that mode the attempts to simplify everything to male::female
has gone too far toward simpler.
 
Now exactly what to do about the boundary conditions is more of a
political question. To that I offer the advice of not discounting
science because it makes you uncomfortable, and to treat others
with as much respect and dignity as you can --- and then think
about how you can perhaps do even better.
 
To the end, I applaud Kestrel's efforts and offers to explain.
 

I have no political axe to grind. I'm all in favor of people being happy
and comfortable in the lives they choose, except for creeps who are only
happy when they're bullying or hurting others.  If happiness is being a
lumberjack who puts on women's clothing and hangs around in bars, so be it.

There are those who do have a political axe to grind who will not
allow you to sit on the fence.  Even doing nothing is tacit support of
those who make up alternate facts to legislate away the rights of a
minority.  Remember "... and then they came for me".

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge