You are currently browsing all posts tagged with 'biology'.

#biologicaltrans

  • Posted on April 6, 2022 at 8:17 pm

If there is one thing that gender-critical or anti-trans people do not understand, it is biology.

If there is one thing that they and the anti-woke culture-warriors need, it is what they fight against. Race, colonialism, patriarchy.

Without these, all the above have no cause, and yet simultaneously they do not understand them at all.

Nothing grates more – daily in current times – than journalists, politicians, social media opinionates, sounding off about ‘biological males’ and ‘biological females’. These terms are repeated without critical thought, on the assumption that of course we all know they represent a self-evident truth. Search ‘biology’ in the search bar of this blog and you can read a few reasons why that is not the case, with links elsewhere too. Yes, there are two overlapping Gaussian distributions for a number of sex traits in biology – and there is not one trait but many. Even chromosomes, hormones, gene expression, organ sizes and so on are not strictly binary. Personality and sense of identity follow a similar pattern. For any particular trait it might look like this, with a greater or lesser overlap:

graph of overlapping Gaussian distribution of sex traits

All of these are biological traits.

Observation or examination?

Yes, we look at people in the street and by and large we form quick opinions (not always) of a person’s gender. Yes, gender – not sex. Because we are looking at shapes, faces, clothes, presentation – in other words, outward appearance. When we talk about sex assigned at birth, we look at outward appearance of the baby’s body, and at birth this relates mainly to penis size. 1 in 200 live births present ambiguity, so what seems like clear observation of a single sex trait is not as clear as most would believe.

So, given the complexity of a number of sex traits that land individual humans near the middle of each of those overlapping Gaussian distributions, describing sex as a patently obvious binary is problematic to say the least. What about examination? We know for certain from our street observation, that further examination, like actually asking the person – not undressing them, please – would prove us wrong in a fair few cases. And why do we want to examine each other in this way, unless of course to disrespect them? Should we all have to carry gender certificates, so that the butch dyke in the women’s loos doesn’ have to strip off as proof when challenged?

A lot of us humans fall into the two broad sex categories and are happy to recognise clear opposites. Quite a lot fall in love with another from the other category and many of these thus reproduce. Many do not either reproduce – some because biologically they cannot – or do not fall in love with opposites. These days we are enlightened enough in most countries (though far from all) to accept that sexuality is innate. In other words, we accept there is some biology of sexuality that we cannot change.

What is biology?

Some gender critical folk like dictionary definitions (goodness knows why, since language is so fickle) with ‘woman: adult human female’ (seriously? without then defining adult, human and female in non-circular ways?). So what about biological male / female? Biology is just the study of living things. If you study sex traits there is no way you easily come out with simple things like ‘biological male’. I mean, does that term embrace other traits like sexuality and fertility, like personality and presentation, like sense of self and identity – and if not why not? Which bit of any of us is not, ultimately, biologically defined?

In the spirit of hashtags, I wish to tag myself as #biologicaltrans since that has no more or less meaning than those other hashtags. I am a living thing, and the traits I have regarding my body, my mind, my sexuality, my prenatal development, as well as my chromosomes (whatever they tell, because I have never had them tested) are contained within this organism that I call ‘me’. That and nothing else. I am not trans by socialisation, by choice, by persuasion or by behaviour. Therefore I am #biologicaltrans.

I very seriously propose that we all start using the terms: biological cis, biological trans, biological non-binary, if only to dissolve the ignorance of biological male / female and stop it being weaponised as something ‘don’t-you-dare-refute’ against trans and non-binary people.

I am also very well aware that much of this is not seriously about biology and variance at all – it’s about politics and power, distraction and ideology. But at least let’s point out the #biologicalstupid.

Continue reading #biologicaltrans »

Care to leave a comment? »

Tell us another

  • Posted on January 24, 2022 at 9:17 pm

When I began this blog it felt really important to narrate the self-discovery I was experiencing, as I myself was discovering that I was far from alone, and equally finding the ways in which I was. It wasn’t about trans rights, it was just my story. And that meant some real separation. As humans, we are inherently good at dividing things up, and I have said before that the result can be that there is nothing so lonely as being human. Uniquely as a species, we have complex language, and can therefore create concepts and stories that we share and which take on great importance.

Whether we create religious narratives, philosophies, stories of preservation and survival, the bottom line is that life is finite and singular. I am an isolated being in the incalculable enormity of the universe. For some, the only life worth striving for is the next one. No-one else can inhabit our lives, be inside our minds, understand our thoughts, and no-one else can take responsibility for us. The most we can do is touch and share stories. Belonging becomes the need to be a character in a shared story.

A shared story is a bundle, and it can be like a bunch of flowers with a stalk of barbed wire. We can be careful, pick and choose the parts of the story we talk about or have to handle. Some of us scarcely belong in the stories. And yet our lives can instead be a long foraging for the flowers and leaves we like best, creating our own bouquet. And just sometimes we find another who holds out a similar self-selected bouquet, and we recognise something much more important than our sense of isolation.

Thanks a bunch

In my world, as I experience it, joining in fully feels like being handed the wrong bunches. Over here is a world of music, but with conflicts: at one time a drinking culture, at another very patriarchal, or again conflicting response to the climate emergency. Over there is a technical world with on the one hand fascination over possibilities, but on the other high consumerism, privilege or carelessness as to consequences. In writing I found a community, but also fellow writers who are gender critical, unable to cope with a very small number of people like me who seem to threaten their story of what it means to be a woman. How we need our stories in order to not feel alone! And so we create stories that keep others out, deceive ourselves, and end up feeling a lot less safe. Like Orwell’s 1984: so long as there is an enemy there is patriotism.

We divide ourselves in order to belong to groups we can feel are small enough to give us attention, and to whom we can relate. If we compete as groups we can have a sense of winning, being on top, being further ahead. And more than anything, we have disconnected ourselves from our ancestors, from our history and from our planet. We don’t belong to the planet any more, it’s too demanding, makes us too subservient and after all, we have subdued it as much as we can. It belongs to us. We are learning that this isn’t true, of course. A volcano, a procession of tornadoes, a tsunami, extreme weather, subsiding tundra, collapsing ice shelves quickly remind us how small and not in control we are. But just as quickly, we are no longer one species, we are tribes of masters of the universe. Nothing unites us as much as shattered human hubris, shared catastrophe isn’t far behind, but give us back our inequalities, and we are willingly split open.

I suspect billionaires don’t want a world of billionaires. Nor millionaires, similarly. But I bet there are very many people lucky enough to have £10,000 in the bank who would feel a whole lot better knowing that everyone had less than £100,000 and more than £10,000. Inequality is deeply corrosive, and it breeds a sense of being deserving and therefore deserving ever more. So what is the equality that we want? Is it levelling up? Levelling down? Evening out? There is no deserving.

We are all the product of fortune: what else makes a person entrepreneurial, super intelligent, excellent with their hands, a prodigy musician, bipolar, Aspergic, Downs, courageous, anxious … able to cope with their social upbringing, thrown into damaging subcultures or criminality? Not one of us can pull ourselves up by our own boot-laces. Does it make anyone more deserving if they steal someone else’s boots so they run slower? Did they create that propensity in themselves?

Friction from fiction

Do the gender critical among us want a world divided sharply and absolutely between ‘biological men’ and ‘biological women’? I feel that nobody needs patriarchy quite as much as the gender critical. They will say that gender is a social construct (a fancy way of saying ‘made up story’). But what is there in our heads, in our society, in our culture, in all our knowledge and science and history that is not a story, a fiction? When we make our divisive stories up, we’re looking for protection in numbers, a community to feel more safe in than out, and therefore creating strangers and outcasts. And so we create rights. Rights for ourselves, rights for those we include, that are not afforded to anyone else. Rights are given by those with power to do so, handed out perhaps with true humanity, but usually giving a little from those who have rather more. Because we choose to divide ourselves.

There is but one human species. There have been more, and perhaps Denisovans, Neanderthals and Sapiens all got along pretty fine at one time. Then language, then stories and ideologies. It was probably differential abilities to deal with climate change (over a much longer period than presents itself to us now) that filtered us out, and here we are with stories about race being a species thing, when it isn’t, and calling some cultures superior and more deserving than others. Patriarchy is rooted in stories of superior physical or intellectual strength and has no more grounds to it than hypothesised races. Everything we think about ourselves, our roles, origins, interactions and grouping, is fiction, made by ourselves to group and divide.

Writing our own

Being trans or non-binary is therefore a very subversive thing. We don’t create ourselves as a story in order to have somewhere to belong, and indeed we have many different stories. But by and large we have one thought in common: we know what we are not. The stories we have been told about ourselves are not true, and in order to live authentic lives, we have to live a different story. Sometimes we hold these bouquets out to each other, and recognise that they are different from the rest of the world. We chose not to have the strands of barbed wire in what we were handed, but to forage our own.

Are we asking for rights? From whom? Who, in our stories, are the rights holders to beg from? Why do some think trans rights limits their rights?

Are we asking for equality? To be treated the same as who, brought in as a special case into someone else’s story?

Or are we looking for justice, not just for ourselves but everyone? That gives us a lot to undo.

 

* The title Tell us another may be a Yorkshire expression, meaning ‘I don’t believe your story!’

Continue reading Tell us another »

Care to leave a comment? »

Biological Sex and Transgender People

  • Posted on January 12, 2019 at 5:29 pm

I’ve nothing against trans people, but they are not …

It’s fun to work out how many ways you can say a trans person is either of no gender or definitely the ‘oppposite’ of what they say they are. Isn’t it?

This is a particular form of protectionism that can be very hard to understand. A justified fear of male violence leads to assumptions that all trans people (no, let’s be honest, trans women) are a potential danger.

  • There is no evidence that this is true.
  • Trans women are much more likely to be attacked violently than non-trans women.
  • No man intending harm to women is protected by trans rights, and trans rights do not better enable him.
  • Policing people by their outward appearance harms androgynous people everywhere.
  • Presenting gender identification documentation at every venue will never be a requirement.
  • Gender documentation is no defence for criminal behaviour or intent.

Anyone with antipathy against patriarchy wants equal and fair treatment. Destroying patriarchy is not destroying men or maleness, nor is it creating a matriarchy (though I often feel that might be better and safer). By putting trans and/or intersex people into a category or categories of their own may not seem harmful, but is a distinct way of othering them, and originates primarily from a lack of understanding that intersex people and those with what has become described as gender dysphoria, are what they are as a result of their pre-natal development. Being trans is not a behaviour and is not a psychological disorder, and trans people are everywhere and always have been. This attitude of trans people as other helps no-one, solves nothing and undermines the principles of equal and fair treatment. You do not know or notice most of us, but by othering trans people as a class, you attack that anonymity – and everyone has a right to that kind of anonymity.

Trans people aren’t weird, do not behave uniquely or distinguishably, and their gender or sex has nothing to do with their equally innate sexuality. Why do trans people make you uncomfortable?

  • They dress strangely. (Well, you never notice the ones who don’t.)
  • I don’t like talking to a woman with a deep voice or a man with a high one.
  • I used to know this person as the ‘opposite’ of what they are now.
  • God doesn’t make mistakes; this is just wrong behaviour.
  • I like to know where I stand when I meet someone and people who don’t match my stereotypes mean I don’t.
  • It’s all about sex isn’t it? (You mean sexual behaviour, which surely must be odd, perverted or strange.)

Why are we happy to acknowledge intersex conditions as ‘what can happen during prenatal development’, as an effect of in utero hormones and developmental triggers, and yet not acknowledge the same for trans people? This article sets out some comparisons, if you will excuse the term ‘transsexualism’:

I am not saying that intersex conditions and transgender are the same, just pointing out both have underlying causes that may be very similar.

Sex is absolute, gender is a social construct

It depends on your language and your culture even whether sex and gender are different words. Some languages do not distinguish, and you could examine the history and past use of the two words in English, but it wouldn’t help. Words convey concepts, they have their own definitions for shared understanding, but they define nothing.

Many ancient cultures and traditions have more than two sexes and/or more than two genders. Naturally, because that’s the way we find human beings. And yet certain modern western feminist ideologies, borrowing from western religious ideologies and culture, insist there are only two ‘biological’ sexes and only offer minor and unhelpful reference to intersex people as exceptions. More people are intersex than have red hair.

As of October 2018, the Trump administration in the USA has tried to move to binary determinism: that every person is irreversibly the sex given to them at birth. And yet many cases of intersex are not identified at birth, maybe only late into puberty. And so the US HHS (Health and Human Services) has proceeded to delete all references to ‘gender’ from their website, the US Department of Justice has ruled that transgender people (presumably because they no longer are supposed to exist) can be discriminated against in any way from health to rights of property or services, or to employment, and the USA is reported to be urging the United Nations to eleiminate all reference to ‘gender’ in favour of only referring to ‘sex’. (See above about different languages and terms.)

Understanding sex is the business of scientists and clinicians, not religion or politics

There is plenty of material from a clinical point of view that explains the complexities of sex determination. Everything that follows from the argument that ‘biological sex’ is a clear and binary thing has no real foundations.

So you still think that sex or gender is a clear binary thing? What do you intend to do with every person who does not fit within a certain median percent that matches all your criteria? You don’t know who they are, and quite often they do not know themselves. Are you right in the middle, having tested your chromosomes, checked your physiology and come to a researched conclusion? Or might you be like a deeply racist person who discovers from their DNA that they are 30 per cent what they hate? What would you do if you discovered that you have mosaic chromosomes, for example (where you have both XX and XY  combinations in different cells)?

Or do you simply find it simpler to go on believing it is a clear binary? You will have to run counter to science, to medicine and to honest human endeavour in pursuit of knowledge – but then plenty of people do run counter. Welcome to conspiracy theory, flat-earth, climate change denying society, you are not alone.

I have nothing against trans people, but …

I think what you really mean is that, like any group of people by any characteristic, some people who identify as trans are really quite marginal. There are strident feminists, there are strident trans people. There are criminal red-heads, there are criminal trans people. There are lovely kind policemen, and there are those who shoot with racial bias. And some are trans. Treating individuals based on a presumption of class characteristics is almost always unfair and wrong. And dangerous to some fellow human beings.

I would urge you simply to let the flock run away a while, stop and do your own Internet research about what determines sex determination, and prevalence of intersex and trans people in the world. Maybe you will come to realise that we do not choose this, we are this. And we are not to be feared, excluded, mistrusted or discriminated against. Every day, after all, you meet, are served by and interact with both intersex and trans people without knowing it. You may not even yourself be as 100 per cent as binary in biological terms as you think.

Continue reading Biological Sex and Transgender People »

Care to leave a comment? »

Trans is not a word to understand

  • Posted on September 14, 2018 at 11:28 pm

I think some people try to understand what it is to be transgender by trying to understand the words. If they can construct an argument about the words, their origins and use, they have grasped how real, people like me are.

Surely, I would be happy to have made no changes to my body or life if only this social construct of gender did not exist. Yes! I could have lived happily with a male body, dressed as I wished, shaved, gone bald with age and maintained all that cut and thrust of testosterone – because no-one would have minded. I could have just ‘been myself’!

Not so, dear reader, not so.

I am not a term to be understood. Etymology and use do not come near expressing what it is to be trans. Like old shoes, words get baggy with much use and don’t fit anymore.

I was not ‘born in the wrong body’ at all, any more than someone with red hair who hates it, or someone with a disability, or someone who has simply grown too tall from hormone problems. It is not the wrong body. I am what I am. It is just that brain and body development got a bit out of kilter somewhere early on. I can’t change my innate sense of self, but I can change my body.

What about you? Are you definitely a woman, or definitely a man? Are you sure? Or is your first question prefixed by ‘physically’, or ‘biologically’? If you do, you need to read up on the many aspects of what define ‘biological’ sex. Big time.

Or do you just know? I don’t think you need a mirror in the morning, or to have a feel around just to be sure. I don’t think you need a second opinion, and if it differed or was doubtful, I don’t think you might change your mind. When did you last dig out your birth certificate just to check out that your opinion of yourself matches that of the doctor or midwife?

Even if you live a non-binary life and dislike the idea of actually ‘being’ non-binary … you know what you are not.

Do you understand what it is to know if you are male, female or neither or a bit of both?

  • Seven years ago I began to understand.
  • Six years ago I began to live in a new way.
  • Five years ago I lived alone.
  • Four years ago I had transforming surgery.
  • Someone told me: ‘this is just the beginning’
  • Three years ago I began living with someone I deeply love.
  • And since then I have understood that for all the beginnings and endings, some will never understand.

I have been told that I am not a woman. I have been told that I am a man. I have been told that I am trans, or deluded, and many other things. I have been told that I am not lesbian, that I must be gay, or that I am still a hetero man because I used to be married while registered as a man.

I have been told many times what I am, what I am not, and effectively what I am not allowed to be.

What do you think? And where did you get your ideas from?

When my children were much younger, they had a friend who was the most tomboy a child I have ever known. A little later, my son had a trans friend at school. That was it. No issue or problem. Unlike me (yeah, well!), they had gay and lesbian kids in their school, and that’s just how they were. Friends I had at university were gay, lesbian and bi. I came to know people with intersex conditions. I discovered that there are men born with micro-penis, women born without a uterus. A colleague had a hysterectomy at a very young age, and so could never experience what most women share. And friends with polycystic ovaries and hormonal imbalances. More and more women who divorce men and begin lesbian relationships.

I wonder what their many life experiences have each been like. Could I segregate them by their life experience confidently and exclusively as women and men? If I DNA tested them and mapped their chromosomes, would that help? What about their sexual attractions (or lack of)? Would that help me divide them into straight, bi, gay and lesbian? I wonder how clearly I could research and gather physical, psychological, social and mental attributes in such a way as to divide them up?

But why?

Surely their needs are different. Medically? Socially? Surely a trans person is not as really the gender they claim, as someone born with unquestionably clear genitals and chromosomes and sexuality? I mean, it is so confusing that someone born with enough of a penis but XXY, who used to appear straight male, lives as female and has a female partner and calls themselves lesbian. I mean, surgery doesn’t really change your sex does it?

You say it is only confusing because we squish people into socially constructed boxes. If only the boxes didn’t exist, we would all be happy; no conflict of definitions. Well, I place myself in society where I feel I belong. Why do you want to place me where you think I belong?

I find this kind of narrative about sex, sexuality and gender no different from nationalism. Once upon a time there was a golden age, where everyone lived and worked happily together, the sun shone equally on all, there was a roof over everyone’s head and bread on the table. Wars did not happen, no-one was cheated or downtrodden; a benevolent king was on the throne and life was … good. That must have been before others came in, invaded and spoiled it all, with different languages, different ideas.

Was there not also a time when men were men, women were women and we all knew our place? Well that wasn’t so good for women, was it? So now we have feminism, we must protect at all costs what it means to ‘be a woman’. And that’s where the parallel golden age of gender breaks down. It was never good. The patriarchy still rules, just as first nations people all over the world constantly face erasure and victors rule the historical narrative.

Keeping transgender people out protects nothing, and only ingrains trans resentment against the gender nationalists, even those who define ‘woman’ and throw gender out as false. Let’s be clear, a feminist who is more radical and excludes trans women as not being female or women, is a trans-exclusionary radical feminist. It isn’t just a slur, it isn’t derogatory, it is a description of a formula of feminism, originating in 2008, to distinguish feminists who were, and who were not against inclusivity of trans women.

However, if we are to be a society that listens, accepts diversity and seeks unity rather than division, it is no good boxing people up. But why not do it by letting people choose their boxes, and letting them choose their own mix? That isn’t a threatening or undermining thing to do, and it’s the way the human species has ultimately made its way all along. What we haven’t done so well, is add equality. ‘If you’re going to be that, you can’t do this.’

That takes us on to rights. Rights. Trans rights. LGB rights. What are they? Principally, they are protections to ensure equal treatment of people who are disliked and discriminated against, not for what they choose to do, but for what they are, in their being, in their humanity.

But I don’t want rights. I just want equality. And that comes from understanding that it is me you need to understand, know and respect, not words and ideas you don’t like, or feel are confusing. You don’t need to get your inner construct sorted, or your philosophy of gender or sexuality. Don’t fit me to your ideas in order to understand what I say I am, because that will only make me acceptable to you in your terms.

Anything else simply puts me in a ‘reserve’ box because you don’t really want me to belong anywhere too close to you.

Trans is not a behavour.
Lesbian is not a behaviour.
I don’t need accommodating.
I am here.
I am.
Just like you; no less.

Continue reading Trans is not a word to understand »

Paradox of visibility

  • Posted on December 20, 2017 at 10:21 pm

I wrote a great deal during the years of transition, and whilst it felt like forever, suddenly I am realising that this is the sixth Christmas without my family. I have grown a significant distance from the urgency of transition, and it it quite difficult to actually remember life before. I do sometimes come across photographs of that former existence. It isn’t a former self, not a separate former life, just me before I found peace with myself and the world. I hardly recognise it as me, and yet I am very much the same inside. And so it is that I find myself at times caught between not wanting to need to tell my story, and understanding how important it nevertheless is.

I know that my life marks me out forever, and that in places, or in future times, it may almost become an important secret to keep. There are places in the world, where politics, religion and culture are becoming better educated, and others where science and knowledge are becoming subservient. This lengthy blog will remain to inform and help, even if I add little to it beyond some poetry and occasional comment like this. It will turn some away from people like me too, because it invites challenge to preconceived ideas.

But is this blog, this story, just ‘thought-provoking’?

I do want to provoke thought, but I also want to change it. I was in a situation recently where a topic of discussion was a third sex option being offered for intersex people in Germany. The language presents difficulties, because whilst in English ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ have become differentiated in use, there is only one word in German. ‘Social sex’ more or less means gender presentation, but already suggests something optional rather than innate. And so the conversation came to include transgender people as well. Ah, but how comes I knew so much about a topic others were new to? There is only one honest answer, so I gave it, and passed on the URL to this blog. I can digest the experience of transgender, or the research, by way of explanation, but I think people have to find their own path, perhaps with story that touches, rather than facts that educate.

I don’t think anyone will ever say they read all of this. I guess it’s actually tedious. But I hope it invites a bit more reading and thinking, not just a first dip.

Meanwhile, at work, I still don’t know who knows my back story. If they do it doesn’t matter. But if they don’t, I still feel some concern that I could be accused of being deceptive for not saying.

I still think that very few non-trans people really grasp what it is and what it means, and I still wonder what my lost family and friends think and feel now. There has been so much opportunity in the media to see different perspectives, from trans people of all ages, in documentary, comedy and story, but I wonder whether those who chose never to meet me ‘like this’, or who resented it so much, or who could not adapt their own ideas – or who simply needed me not to be trans – even want to move on in understanding.

And so I need to be both visible but also not visible. I want to show that someone as ordinary as I am, represents a majority of trans people; that we are not dodgy, suspect, something to be uncertain and unsure about. We are just people whose biological make-up has been deliberately suppressed in the interests of social conformity and for particular reasons. Being invisible proves that, but doesn’t tell it. And it doesn’t make fellow human beings nice, kind or just towards us, especially towards those who find it hard, or just don’t want, to conform to one gender anyway.

I will never know the minds and the changes in those who wanted me to go on living and looking as I used to. I hope they do change, and forgive the desperate need I had to change myself. I was a ship that crossed a treacherous reef because that’s the way the wind blew. I had no choice. But they did, and still do.

As a life experience for me, it has been pure gold in terms of the enrichment. But it came from ore. And I understand that some cannot face smelting and would rather keep a rough rock on the shelf.

Continue reading Paradox of visibility »

Care to leave a comment? »