I want to offer an alternative take on the Imane Khelif case. First, I agree that the IOC is to blame. It is very easy to test for sex, by doing a simple non-invasive cheek-swab. That is what the IOC should have done. That, or just following the IBA that did that last year 2023, and basically concluded that Khelif is a man with xy-chromosomes. The IBA has a criterium that one has to be xx female to compete in the women´s category. Second, I disagree that Khelif is totally not to blame. A number of experts have opinioned that Khelif is a man with 5 alpha reductase deficiency like Caster Semenya. Even if Khelif was mistaken for female at birth, he went through male puberty, and now has a male body and male level of testosterone. I find it very hard to believe that Khelif is unaware of going through male puberty, or unaware of the similarities between his condition and Caster Semenya´s case. Rather than Khelif being totally unaware of being a male with mal-developed genitalia at birth, I think it is very likely that Khelif knows exactly what he has, and that both his country and Khelif want to cash in on winning olympic gold. I don´t think it is obsessing over what Khelif´s genitals look like, but rather that what is important is that Khelif has a male body, punches like a male, has male level of testosteron, and has gone through sex-testing in 2023 (IBA). Even if I don´t obsess with genitalia, I think also that once through male puberty, genitalia would not be mistaken for female. Caster Semenya has fathered 2 children, and is xy male. To insist on refering to Caster Semenya (father of 2 children) as intersex or woman is to needlessly complicate things. And, taking into account the IBA´s testing in 2023, the same is true for Khelif: Otherwise, the IBA would have allowed him to compete with the women in 2023. And they didn´t.
I agree and I think in this show they were really unfair to the women speaking out against Imane. I do not condone any threats of violence, but women are allowed to say a man is a man. Imane was told by the IBA that he is a man, and he still continued to fight women in matches he knew were unfair. And now he is going after people for speaking about it. He will get no sympathy from me.
The IOC were using “we’re too kind to do something that invasive” as an excuse not to test the boxer, thinking that we were too ignorant to know a simple cheek swab was all that was required
Khelif's birth cert was issued in 2018 specifically in order to fight (we don't actually know if his original one said female). He had an initial test in 2022. We've got a Spanish coach who knew a year or two ago and said he knew. We've got other coaching staff who knew a year or two ago and told female fighters the mountains changed his chromosomes. Khelif clearly hasn't dressed like Algerian women in a long time, most of his adult life. Possibly as a teenager. Then the likely condition will have become apparent to him at puberty (much like Semenya). Plus he clearly didn't appeal because he knew was male. It's very very clear like you say that he doesn't have a leg to stand on and is more than happy to trample all over women and women's sports for personal gain. Cheat. Every single time anyone is described as intersex in the media they're male. (if they talked about girls with DSD conditions they'd have to start showing that instead of treating them we're transitioning them and the connections with PCOS etc.) It's clearly part of the intersex gambit and the "brain gender" attack on women's rights and biological reality. It's also notable all of a sudden with Khelif they didn't say "assigned female at birth" but "born female" and "raised female" both false and clear attacks on language, reality, ideas about when sex is determined and if it can change. They don't let actual women say they're born female, only men, just like GLAAD reserve words for female anatomy exclusively for trans women. The fact most of the mainstream media used/is using this language is appalling. It's also noticeable they focused on Khelif not Lin Yu-ting because the latter has literally no redeeming position. There's no nonsensical time machine dependent (original test 2022 when he wasn't fighting a Russian) "Russian conspiracy" involving numerous nationalities to fall back on and not even an expired appeal and the Taiwanese government tried to censor speech about it. We should use Lin-Yu Ting first because it's the stronger and clearer argument.
I was very impressed by Sasha's hesitation to give Turbin ANY kudos. Nice work Sasha and Stella for keeping Alex in real time and in step with the current dialog
I don’t see any reason to change sex and gender being interchangeable words for the exact reasons Alex gives; use ‘gender roles’ (or ‘traditional gender roles’ if you want to acknowledge the often regressive nature of assigning, for example, certain interests, tastes or roles in a household to a specific sex). Stella argued with him that it works for ‘transgender’ people because a person cannot literally change their sex, and then she herself used ‘gender role’ in that sentence rather than just gender anyways. We all know no one can literally change their sex (or we should know), and I think Alex is in the right here. I will never use gender the ‘new’ way because the entire concept is offensive to me. I distinctly remember the first time I had some Gen Z brat jump down my throat for using the word gender ‘wrong’ - she immediately informed me that ‘sex’ was your biological presentation (‘assigned’ at birth, I’m sure) and gender was how you presented in terms of levels of masculine or feminine. I was like wait, are you talking about how well someone adheres to traditional gender roles?? Because to me, that is the more precise and proper way to describe what she was on about. Her being such a know it all about something I don’t think her not-fully-developed frontal lobe had properly considered the ramifications of pushing (and WORSE, she works in childcare). It would not be inaccurate to say that was the first spike in my journey to being ‘peaked’.
Thank god i was peaked and stopped calling myself a feminist. No ideologies at all please. Without feminists we would have no gender ideology and just transsexuals that transitioned for pragmatic reasons
Wooosh - the sound of this conversation going right over my head! Looking at the comments section I get the impression this is a subject that at the granular level is very subjective. I used to pride myself on having a handle on this, not anymore. Maybe if I make some strong coffee and watch it a third time and take notes ...
"Free to Be You and Me" is 50 years old now! How did we get so off course from the message of that wonderful children's film? I remember watching it in school when I was in first grade and when my daughter was young, I found it on UA-cam and we watched it together. She still got sucked into gender ideology when she was 13, but luckily her trans identity ran its course and was over after 4 years. Thanks for bringing up this childhood nostagia for me. The scene referenced in this episode is especially relevant. ua-cam.com/video/VUpLiJfV4_A/v-deo.html
I'm not sure you should give the Algerian boxer the benefit of the doubt because he was, or might be, inhibited by living in a Muslim country. His behavior in the ring after he "won" wasn't inhibited. Would someone considered a woman from, say, Afghanistan, be allowed to behave with such abandon in public? Could someone considered female from Afghanistan be exposed like that in public at all? I question how much pressure that boxer was really under to toe the female line.
Agree and no way does an Algerian man put a woman on his shoulders as the coach did when Imane won the Gold medal. I was married to an Algerian and the way women are treated in their country is in a very oppressive way. They aren't supposed to touch them until marriage.
There was no problem with gender being a synonym for biological sex in the gender essentialist context because 40 + years ago, trans people were transsexual with gender dysphoria. Without the push to accept autogynophiles and other non gender dysphoric individuals 'trans-gender' would be a redundant term. Not untill the non-binary and gender fluid concepts of gender were beginning to be fabricated did gender become redefined and marketed as politically prudent term for the wider concept including gender identity and non-binary/fluid context become useful. Note here that another term entirely could have been coined, but such is the nature of a pernicious ideology that changing the meaning of words is useful in coopting existing language and retraining beliefs. This is why newer religions coopt the customs and festivals of their predecessors. It's my opinion that it's where transsexualism departed from the corresponding gender essentialism and emerged as transgenderism, that the irrational and insideous political ideology took root. It became identitarian and the word gender was coopted. I also suspect this has been a deliberate political ideology for decades hence and not organic or natural. But I'm only @ 14:04, so let's see how much your guests confirms my suspicions.
AGP trans make up the majority of trans globally. Theye also experience "gender dysphoria". Including the first patient to undergo sex reassignment surgery, whose story was told in the film "The Danish Girl".
Glossed over was the fact that 'intercourse' now seems to refer only to 'having sex', whereas intercourse has long been used as a term for having a *conversation* with another person. IMO we cannot now use sex and gender as synonyms. The transologists have made that clear. They claim to change gender in order to then claim to have changed sex. I think it's important to see gender as now referring to the sex steteotypes my generation (child of the 1940s) rejected and fought free of and which obviously can be changed at will, and sex as referring exclusively to the two immutable biological classes into which the whole of homo sapiens can be scientifically and reliably classified.
But there is never really a "transition." A child who declares they are another sex and changes their name or clothing hasn't transitioned. He is just pretending to be the other sex. Once he starts talking puberty blockers and hormones, he has now started engaging in body modification procedures like other children who undergo plastic surgery, but very extreme body modification. So, we shouldn't use the word "trans kid," as it reinforces the idea that actual transition from one sex to another is possible. "Trans identifying" is better.
Interesting point, but firstly, it's very helpful (if you accept gender dysphoria as real) to alleviate a child's discomfort, by encouraging the social transition stuff and supporting it with therapy. The question of whether to call it transitioning is largely semantic, but if they are taught that social transition is a good and normal way to treat gender dysphoria then they can learn to understand the definition of trans as social transition primary means even as the rule for kids. Also if social transition is defined out of trans, it may reinforce that they need to be on puberty blockers and heavier medical interventions just to be accepted as trans. I do see your point that calling kids trans sounds inappropriate, but if it's just social transition then it's better to accept the compromise than ruin all hope that the non-medical approach will be accepted.
@skepticusmaximus184 As far as I understand it, social "transition" leads to the next step of medicalization, in most cases. If you mean allowing a child to change their name and clothing and presentation, then that is fine. It is giving children the freedom to explore their self-expression, which is what we want.
@daughter_of_earth That's a fine conclusion, letting them socialise without heavily imposing gender norms nor making a fuss if they experiment either way. The question of whether social transition leads to medical transition depends on who the parents are what they know, their attitudes and who else is involved. The whole purpose of organisations like Genspect is to facilitate non-medical social transition, psychotherapy and education to support parents and kids. The continuation of social transition into medical transitioning isn't by any means inevitable and it's not dependent on whether the nomenclature of what counts as transitioning includes the social aspect. If anything the social aspect used to be the most important and rigorous, just a couple of decades ago, when transition was done by transsexuals and they were expected to live as the opposite sex and attend ongoing therapy for a year or more before even beginning hormones. So social transition has a long and important history. This fast track to medical transition is dangerous especially for kids/teens and young adults. The reason(s) the medical transitioning has become a run away train, is because the ideologues have captured the institutions and the pharmaceutical companies have found a new market for heavy dependence and life long patient/customers/victims. The social transitioning is the MOST important aspect but when responsibility done it also involves gatekeeping/push back and filtering of kids for other behavioural conditions, disorders or just harmless experimental phases. Social transition is not a runaway train and it's supposed to have off ramps or checks and balances. It's diagnostic as well (if not more) than regulation and monitoring of potential (not inevitable) transition. Sorry for the long rant, but it's not the name that matters is the treatment.
@@skepticusmaximus184I think you've got a few major flaws/unevidenced suppositions in your argument. You believe social transition helps gender dysphoric kids. It doesn't. There's no evidence it does and the Cass Review showed it often leads to concretizing the identity and is possibly connected to negative outcomes. This is because trans is a socio-cultural identity. The history of trans is largely that the society tells the child that they are x 3rd gender or that they can't possibly be a boy or a girl given their "gender non-conforming" behaviour. The child then believes that's their identity. It's similar for other forms of identity, kids think of themselves as Scottish or black or working class or pretty or intelligent or even associated with their own name largely based on people around them. It's why abusive parents who call their kids animals or stupid etc have such a damaging effect. Then if you listen to detransitioners they often talk about the social pressure to continue to present when they'd already internally decided against things. It's very difficult to turn back the tide when you've announced to the whole school that you're x new person. A lot of the kids seem to be able to detransition when they change school or go to college or leave friendship groups because it's easier than saying, yeah that thing I told you about for 2 yrs was a lie. It can be pretty humiliating. You seem to think Genspect is trying to facilite social transition. Disassociation and ideation are very harmful mentally and Sasha for example has spoken about how if you immediately affirm the identity (which social transition requires) then all exploration is off the table. If we start changing names or pronouns then you've already lost half the game because it means gender can't be explored. I'd also posit that the key is not social transition because the child doesn't need to change and shouldn't be changing. The whole point is they should just be shown that liking sports or pink or dancing or whatever is entirely irrelevant to being a boy or a girl. If a boy says in class, I'm a boy because I'm good at Maths, a good teacher or parent would challenge that idea. It's illogical to change tack just because the sex is changed. These sexist ideas need some level of pushback. And the child needs to know that they don't need to transition in order to be who they already are. None of their personality or interests are reliant on being a boy or a girl. The caveat I'd give is that I get do get that there's some issue of strategy and you might face someone doubling down or being stubborn if you're confrontational. Or if you get involved in making it a central theme of who they are (which social transition at school would do). But if you call it a transition then clearly many of the children understand it as a possible reality. This group has a particularly high prevalence of autistic or poorly functioning children. They do literally believe they can be a new person and that's often connected to some trauma or social awkwardness or body dysmorphia they're trying to escape. Go look at the adults who think they've literally changed s*x. The language clearly has an impact. Then with the idea of "living as the opposite sex" I think it's a bit less clear cut. As I've said I'm against it in children because childhood and teenage years involve a certain level of discovering who you are and this could directly concretize it. In adults it depends if we are allowing surgeries and medical interventions because we kind of say, well you're 18 now it's your body. But what does it really mean to "live as the opposite sex"? If you look at what the clinicians mean for the males it largely involves them invading female spaces which makes this socially permissible. That's clearly a step too far and damaging to society. Otherwise it's just clothing and make up. It's entirely unscientific. I think you'd find it very difficult to find an example of "responsible social transition" with appropriate gatekeeping. If you listen to the stories of trans widows and detransitioners and parents of the kids getting letters off the internet then lying is widespread. They just tell the clinician they've been doing all the steps for the required time and often exaggerate to get to the goal of surgery that they've obsessed about. There's no way of ascertaining if they've been doing it because there isn't even any criteria for "living as a man/woman". Then what exactly can you diagnose with the social transition? It can't be trans identity because that's socio-cultural. It can't be gender dysphoria because that diagnosis would precede it. It can't tell us if surgery would be successful because frankly the surgeries aren't successful and we've known that since 1976. We know most regret/desistance/detransition kicks in after almost a decade. The only thing it has going for it is the lengthening of the time frame. And the only benefit there is the actual therapy. Unless we're seeing it as plastic surgery/body modification in which case it's more a question of, are you really sure, which again seems to rely on the idea of men entering women's spaces. Something that shouldn't be an option. How can the social transition prepare you for removal of vital organs? I don't think it's logically sound.
@skepticusmaximus184 I didn't think Genspect encourages social transition. I object to the idea that "transition" is ever happening, even with transsexual adults.
It must be exhausting labelling people all the time. Skills, tasks, jobs, and chores, aren't feminine or masculine. Doing the dishes or fixing the light switch just needs to be done. No man vacuuming or sewing on a button is feminine, they are competent. No woman fixing a tire or mowing the lawn is masculine, they are competent. We seem to be endlessly judging people and trying to make them conform to stereotypes. People's natural interests, talents, and skills should let them navigate through life without being pigeonholed. Men in the arts aren't feminine, women in construction aren't masculine. Sure, some roles trend male or female and we need both to make a whole. Two consenting adults boffing is not an identity and is probably the least interesting thing about them.😊
Alex Byrne has such an excellent talent for understanding and describing all the sides of this issue. For instance, how (in a sense) a child who has socially transitioned is a "transgender child" while succinctly expressing the gender critical objection to the term. I think he can also, without being excessively critical or charitable (steelmanning/strawmanning) describe gender ideological beliefs in a way that is succinct, accurate, and recognizable to the people who actually hold that worldview. At the same time he doesn't hedge, or "both sides," or adopt a neutral observer stance.
An excellent podcast with a very wise and knowledgeable guest (I read his book earlier this year, highly recommend it). I found the discussion about Jack Turban both enlightening and disturbing. In order to become a psychiatrist one has to go through medical school. I find it hard to believe that a medical doctor can hold such bizarre and views about biological sex and gender (a gay doctor at that). He seems to have whole heartedly adopted queer theory without any qualms. It would be interesting to see what would happen if he left San Francisco and had to live and interact in a more conservative environment. I agree that it would be useful to have a discussion about masculinity and femininity. I personally have always viewed men and women as a combination of both (in Jungian psychology anima and animus). According to Facebook I am 67% masculine and 33% feminine, which is about right.
I would be interested in understanding this phenomena of gay men happily transitioning often gay ppl. It feels very counterintuitive. In Turban's case I find him rather sinister and he's funded heavily by pharmaceutical companies. I honestly don't get the sensation he believes what he's saying entirely. It's like a justification for some other goal. But I can't really figure out his motivations. Is it just money, power, fame? I don't get it. He produces clearly false studies that get ripped to shreds by other scientists and then just smiles like a Cheshire Cat. Is he just a pathological liar? He purposefully misrepresents opposing arguments all the time. I can't quite figure him out but he makes my blood boil and reminds me of the insufferable misogyny of Owen Jones.
@@robertmarshall2502 I think a clue was given in the interview with Alex Byrne. Jack Turban had a difficult relationship with his father. I can see someone like that becoming totally absorbed into the postmodern oppressor/oppressed mindset. He is also very bright and in my experience people with high IQs and are successful are less likely to course correct when new facts come to light.
There are a lot of bad doctors in the world. A lot of deeply unethical doctors who care more about remaining in the prestigious club they worked so hard to join then in the wellbeing of their patients. Covid should have taught you that. I understand (from doctor friends) that they also do not teach critical thinking skills at med school.
I really disagree with his definition of terms... "Why use gender as a term for gender roles - we have a term for that: gender roles" Well then, why use gender as a term for sex - we have a term for that: sex. I think the fundamental distinction is between SEX (our binary biology) and GENDER (gender roles). As to how much gender roles arise from our biology and how much from social conventions, that is a matter for debate, based on scientific study. It's complicated and difficult to untangle, but I think most scientists agree that it is some of both (nature/nurture), although they have different accounts of how much weight should be given to each.
Gender was used as a synonym for sex going back to the 1500s, Alex said. It has only more recently been used to mean "gender roles." It's nice having a synonym for sex when you mean male and female, since sex also means fornication. The word gender is used in laws all over the place and on forms and documentation. Since in all of those contexts it was put there as a stand in for the word "sex" we have created quite a mess by saying gender is something other than sex.
OK we do have a term for *biological* sex, but just calling it 'sex' fails to disambiguate it from 'sex' the verb. Maybe we should drop all redundant synonyms and only use the longer form expressions like gender roles and biological sex. But the term gender was originally a synonym for biological sex and (mis)appropriated to separate gender from biological sex by ideologs in the past few decades. The original definition was already a synonym for biological sex. The purpose for semantic shift was political and nefarious. It was a means of decoupling sex from biology and for the deliberate implementation of gender identity. Note that at this point it was only gender essentialism that was normative in the wider population. There was no pervasive concept of gender fluidity or non-binary identity, but the path was being cleared. Also note that the gender ideologs, could have just coined their own term for the psychological manifestation of feminine and masculine roles but it's easier to gaslight people into a new ideology if you use familiar words and gradually apply a manufactured definition. The objective for using gender in reference to roles is obviously so that self identified roles can be introduced to the vernacular and the idea that gender could be chosen at whim as a voulantary identity and 'oppressors' could be vilified for transgressions of a person's rights, if it just so happens they don't agree that sex can be chosen by personal preference. If gender was still coupled with biology the idea of choosing one's gender would be a very contentious issue. Now gender roles may still be binary but introducing gender as synonym for roles opens the door for self identity. The problem is neither gender dysphoria or autogynophilia are conditions that can be chosen and nothing about being trans in the transsexual sense has ever established gender as a matter of choice or a performative role. Nothing has ever overturned gender essentialism with empirical evidence and rigorous research. You think its a moot point perhaps, but the gender Ideologs have been working on this for about 50 years now, and the best they've come up with is Turbans "gender identity" means "a transcendent sense of gender." It's circular equivocal nonsense simply defining gender identity into existence. And if you come down on the side of gender as an identity (self selected) you can't simultaneously pretend it's also a condition luke dysphoria beyond your control or something assigned in any other way. But the gender ideologs keep trying to have it both ways. And also if gender is synonymous with roles we play, then the idea that a biological male is a woman in any sense other than a male attempting to live as a woman is off the table. The trans women ARE women trope is the gaslighting garbage of a nefarious political ideology. It's hardly a moot point anymore that gender radical ideologs are pushing an insideous ideology and that honest trans people, who accept binary gender and dysphoria as a psychological condition are being used as pawns. It's also clear that gender never was or never should have been assigned a definition other than the one compatible with gender essentialism and synonymous with biological sex.
"The historic meaning of gender, ultimately derived from Latin genus, was of "kind" or "variety".[21] By the 20th century, this meaning was obsolete, and the word gender was almost always used to refer to grammatical categories, although there are a small number of examples of gender being used as a synonym for sex prior to the 20th century," In the '70s, feminists popularised the use of the word gender to describe gender stereotypes as distinct from actual sex, championing the idea that whatever your biological sex (male or female), you should not be constrained by the gender stereotypes that were attached to it. This had nothing to do with claiming that you could become the opposite sex - only that the stereotypes attached the sexes were just that: stereotypes. This was the very opposite of queer theory, which has gone into the realms of fantasy and pseudo-scientific religion with claims of sex being a spectrum and/or gendered souls. Conflating the words "sex" and "gender" blurs this crucial distinction between sex (male and female) which is binary and unchangeable vs gender roles/stereotypes - and actually this conflation was the first move in gender woo's attack on feminism.
@@davidleemorgan When I studied History we used gender to refer to the societal understanding of man, woman or x 3rd/4th gender in terms of norms, roles, stereotypes, what values were desired, typical dress, typical lifestyle etc. The key was that it was very societally dependent. It made no sense whatsoever to talk about women in those terms speaking about Phoenicians and the Arawak at the same time and even individually you'd need to know which century was being referred to. I think there's still an argument it's useful in that sense. At least I find it useful to think that way because it helps me extricate the objective from the subjective. But "gender roles" without narrowing down what society we're talking about makes little sense. Sex and sex roles meanwhile make sense in all circumstances because they're objective (or at least try to be). I'm a bit frustrated that gender has started to mean "gender identity". It's particularly frustrating in a lot of legal systems where plenty of laws say gender but clearly mean it as a synonym for sex. We also obviously didn't think we even needed to define sex, gender, man, woman in the past because they were so obvious. Now we've got people changing the meaning of male and female and even the mtf or ftm or AFAB or amab are disingenuous. But I think if we got back to something like what you're saying then the inherent sexism (genderism?) of identifying as the opposite gender becomes more apparent. It also highlights that they're using gender roles from a different era which the rest of society doesn't want to live in. And therefore their depiction of men and women are antiquated regressive stereotypes. If we add in the way of using gender I was taught in History then it also debunks non-binary as a gender. And then this has a knock on effect on "gender affirming care" because why would be want to affirm gender when clearly we should be moving away from it and reducing it's importance? And how do you affirm genders that simply don't exist in a true societal sense? I'm not sure if I actually responded to anything you said or just talked at you but your comment made me think.
i'm up to about 8 mins, and i think one huge sticking point (that maybe is a thing to be established early doors in discussions Stella is referencing) is that yes, feminine/masculine refers to gender (so gender roles/stereotypes in this context), but some believe these are innate, and inappropriate for the 'wrong' sex to engage in, whereas others believe these are societally constructed/enforced (beyond some wriggle room for traits directly related to sex/bodies). Without knowing which idea of 'gender roles' is being discussed, I find it gets tricky pretty quickly. Let alone getting into the healthiest options (particularly for many detrans/sisted people!) probably being to not worry about what trait gets sorted in which box by culture (or i suppose, one's culture, as certain aspects of these gender roles change over time and place (except subordination/domination)) and just do what you like ha. Anyway, interested to hear the rest! Perhaps all this gets said haha.
If feminine/masculine refers to gender than you wouldn't have all these feminine girls calling themselves trans boys. Or hulking men with beards calling themselves transwomen. So "gender" alone cannot be a substitute for masculine/feminine. At least not alongside Turban's idea of the "transcendent sense of gender" which says masculine men can identify as trans women.
28:43 "So turban tries to explain what gender identity is and it it turns out to be like extremely complicated of sort of very hard to understand so the one he got various layers as he thinks of it so it's your relation to masculinity and femininity and it's includes or can include the way we feel about our bodies but it has this Central third component which is a Transcendent sense of gender." Well there's three problems here at least. Firstly who didn't learn in third grade English, that you should never define a word or expression in terms of itself. Firstly we need to know what 'gender' is before defining gender identity, but if some component of 'gender identity' is defined in terms of sense of gender the expression being defined is dependant on itself. It seems as if 'gender identity' and 'sense of gender' are almost synonymous. In any case the word gender shouldn't be in both the expression the definition of that expression. Secondly, there's an obvious gambit afoot here to manufacture some objective meaning or references in the word transcendent, what is this gender identity supposed to be transcending? Is it transcending the universe? No? The human mind? What? I don't believe theres anything transcending the universe that we know of. Anything transcending the mind is called objective and if it exists outside of the mind then we should be able to detect it with empirical methods. The word 'sense' in 'transcendent sense' obviously implies perception. Otherwise you're just defining something into existence. How was this Transcendent sense discovered and what is being sensed? How do we know a person isn't just manufacturing their own identity like a religious faith and even conforming to social norms in the same way? This is entirely subjective (even imaginary) if there is nothing transcendent. At best its an unsubstantiated and unfalsifiable claim that's merely being asserted and pulled out of a circular tautological definition; an imaginary concept being defined into existence. There are a plethora of religious and cult concepts defined into existence using semantic tricks like this to project the imaginary subjective model existing entirely in the mind, into an illusion of objective reality. Finally, it hasn't escaped my notice, that there seems to be a two faced equivocation going on here, using the word identity in two diferent ways. Trans people often assert their identity as a free choice and a liberty or right, to self identify in some gender nonconforming way. But if there is a sense of gender from some objective (mind independent) transcending source, then you are sensing (detecting) your gender and identifying it in a non-voulantary way. When we identify different kinds of rock, we are taking objective empirical data and making a categorical distinction. The kind of identifying we do by voulantary choice is again entirely subjective and not corresponding with any objective external or inate involuntary properties. Both the identied at birth and transcendent sense of identity strongly imply inate or objective involuntary causes for gender and identity as externaly imposed model, whereas libertarian gender identity, chosen at will is a performative and arbitrary voulantary model. They would seem to be incompatible, but that explains the convoluted and confusing model that tries to have it both ways. *Edit:* There is one other problem I thought of, it's that I see no reason for a cis gender person to also experience this transcendent sense of gender. I still presumably have a gender and a gender identity, I should also be able to sense my gender in just the same way as a trans person. I can report without hesitation, that the only sense of gender I have ever had, derives from my biological properties and the psychological effects of them. There's nothing transcendent in this sense experience so if any sense of gender needs to be formulated by some convoluted equivocal tautological definition that only works for gender radical trans people then it's obviously delusional ideological garbage.
This is an excellent breakdown of just some of the arguments Turban will never respond to. How do you have a transcendent sense of gender when gender is socially constructed and therefore dependent on which society you grew up/live in? My transcendent sense of gender is that of 7th century Byzantine man, how exactly do I proceed? Is it different to Renaissance Italian woman? Why doesn't anyone outside of Samoa have a transcendent sense of fafafine? Why have people only had a transcendent sense of non-binary this century? I'm pretty sure even if I said this to Jack Turban he'd prescribe affirmative care.
You have a sharp philosopher's mind and I'm wondering what your transcendent sense of philosophy is. Just kidding. Of course Turban's definition of gender is delusional ideological garbage - if it weren't, it would have a logically consistent and clear foundation, and wouldn't revolve around obfuscating reality. What a pleasure to read your breakdown!
I've commented it before, but my langauge didn't have a separate word for this supposed thing called "gender" and instead added what would translate to "sex identity" to accomodate trans identified people, it's made it easier to see just how forced the sex/gender debate is in English and how clunky it sounds to add a new word to desribe this new identity ideology.
I speak Spanish as a second language and I find filtering things through it really makes me notice where language has been captured. My fiancée (who only speaks Spanish) asked me why I was talking about "females" and "males" like we were just animals and I remembered 20 years ago that would have been seen as a degrading thing incels used to do to dehumanize and objectify women. I once asked someone Spanish why he put his pronouns on his profile and why in English. He found it bizarre to do it in Spanish but the penny never dropped. "They" as a pronoun never makes sense and "non-binary" has either this hilarious quality where you have to gender it or requires you to do an entirely clunky and impractical thing of adding -e/-es to all adjectives. A lot of the Spanish gender ideology (mixed up with inclusive language) is either only written because no one can say profoesor@ or Latinx or relies on using English words. There's a direct connection between English-speaking internet culture and language and trans-identification in Spanish-speaking youth. I agree that a second language can really help see through the terminology. I find when I can't translate a word to Spanish it's often bollocks.
You might be interested in this book about the bacha posh. It looks at the tradition in Afghanistan of dressing young girls as boys and treating them socially as boys for a period of time. The traditional belief is that a girl dressed as a boy can help to attract boy babies to be born into the family. The book discusses individual stories from bacha posh and problems that can arise if a female child is allowed to socially transition for too long (into adolescence). It's a fascinating look at social transition of children in a population.
I've looked into how DSDs like XY 5-ARD are handled in Algeria and the other Muslim MENA countries, and I think those societies/cultures have a much more humane, understanding & practical approach to DSD conditions than Sasha is giving them credit for. There was a landmark Algerian Supreme Court case circa 2018 which affirmed that in Algeria someone with a DSD like Imane Khelif would be fully protected under the law to switch their legal sex marker and social role, and to get any medical interventions they want, if they so chose. What Islam says about DSDs shows that it's not news to imams and regular people in the Muslim world that some children who appear to be girls as babies/young children will turn out to be boys when they reach puberty of adolescence. DSD conditions are not necessarily seen as shameful or shocking in conservative, traditional Muslim cultures. In fact, the approach that Islam recommends in the case of DSDs like XY 5-ARD is kind , practical & reasonable. Which is very different to, & far better than, the ways children with DSDs like XY 5-ARD have been historicaly regarded in many traditional cultures in sub-Saharan African countries and in Western countries in the era of modern medicine. One reason for this is is probably that certain genetic DSD conditions that are inherited through an autosomal recessive pattern have an unusually high prevalance in parts of the Muslim world - just the way that cystic fibrosis and hereditary hemochromatosis have unusually high prevalence amongst people in northern Europe or of northern European heritage, particularly amongst Irish and Scots. In fact, there's a male DSD that presents very much like XY 5- ARD called 17 beta-HSD3 that's estimated to occur in as many as 1 out of every 200-300 births amongst Muslim Arabs in MENA countries, particularly amongst Palestinians.
.Transcendent gender/sex awareness is actually an acceptance of one's whole being as themselves. It doesn't matter whether one ID's as a girl or a boy. It is about accepting yourself as yourself without attempting to make yourself fit into a restictive boy box or girl box. The old roles no longer fit anywhere.
If the transcendental sense of gender means anything, it is the human striving for harmony and wholeness. When the ideologue that Byrne mentioned suggested imagining yourself with the opposite sex one morning and how that might make you feel. Fear would be a reaction to disharmony. I mean, it's human nature to feel natural as harmonious. Trans enthusiasts probably have a different view.
In what sense does Caster Semenya "live as a woman." Caster is married to a biological female and has fathered children with his/her wife. Caster runs in races as a woman.
"Live as a woman" is just nonsense isn't it? My grandma apparently lived as a man because she drove and my grandad didn't, worked as a Maths teacher and took a car mechanics course. But then when she retired she did flower arranging for her church so I guess she detransitioned? It makes about as much sense of "live as a human" to me.
Trans is a preference. There is no biological basis for it. The trans person has the same sexual orientation that he or she had before transitioning, with or without the cosmetic surgery. I have never encountered an LGB person who said after coming out "Oh, I got that wrong, I will now revert to being hetero", Yet some trans people choose to detransition. Trans is a preference.
So Khelif can't come out as male, however, he must have known since puberty that he is male, so he should not have decided to be a boxer. That was a choice.
Many Fa'afine are not all gay boys.They are a social role, imposed on families who have no daughters, as a help mate to carry out the very sex exclusive roles required by the family unit. They recognize the importance of all those chores being done, but tie them to sex, so if there are no daughters to fulfill those important female roles, a son will be assigned a fa'fafine. Some may welcome this role, but it is not based on the sexual orientation, or innate masculinity or femininity of the boy. It is primarily a role created for males to deal with a shortage of females to carry out the many duties which families require to be done, in order for the functioning of the society.
IDENTITY CONFUSION: When Sasha says “we went to the APA” listeners don’t know whether she’s talking about the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association. I suppose when the psychiatrists settled on the name for their organization, acronym doubling wasn’t anticipated to be a problem, especially because there were only a few hundred psychologists at the time (now there are twice as many psychologist-type APA people). The American Philosophical Association is also “the APA”….
You were far far too generous to Jack Turban. Although I do enjoy his studies because every single one is followed by a correction or debunking and no right-minded or sincere person could ever reach the disingenuous conclusions he does. He gets paid to write a conclusion then design studies to reach it before he collects data and then has the rather difficult task of making it fit the evidence when it never does. He does this innovative ways like removing transitioners from the data set to prove regret is low. The fact that even this data set shows 40-odd percent had a major mental breakdown in the last month doesn't stop him claiming they are happy and healthy. I enjoy reading him fail every time. But for some reason he's made failure, incompetency and outright lies into a lucrative gig. My wild conjecture is that Turban got into psychiatry because he identifies with psychopathy. He does these horrible things where he smiles when describing women's spaces invaded my men and attacking them. Duper's delight all over his face a lot of the time.
51:30 - I actually once had a hyper-realistic dream where this happened. Freaked me out quite a bit and it affected me for a couple weeks. Anyway, I am a 5' 10" white male and I dreamed that I woke up as a 5' 3" partially Asian woman (Asian facial features, but I still had blue eyes). First felt confused, but then freaked out when I felt between my legs and couldn't find my usual bits. Never thought "oh this body is awful and terrible!", in fact I was glad to see that I was decently attractive, LOL. Totally willing to accept that I was a girl now since I had the body of one. My worries were more about how would I be able to tell anyone what had happened, and how to deal with my friends having no clue who I was. Was very relieved when I woke up and hadn't actually transformed into another person, but for the next two weeks I jumped every time I saw someone look at me since I guess I felt like there was a slight chance I might be unrecognizable.
It is known that 1970s feminists used the word gender to diffentiate from natal sex when discussing gender, gender identity, and the social construct of gender roles.
Sex should be retained to mean biological sex of male and female and gender should be used to indicate masculinity and femininity. Masculinity/femininity refer to psychological, social and cultural differences. When feminists made that distinction in the 1970s, they meant that whereas you can change gender for equality, you cannot change sex. Trying to change sex , you create chimaeras. Do not fiddle with nature. As we try to protect nature as our environment, we should try to protect our own nature - bodies.
There is no basis for for a transcendent sense of gender to be a protected class. So as useful a gender identity maybe for therapy it is not something that should be forced on the rest of society. Tolerance of individuals should be a goal of society but the government should stay out of it.
Kids learn roles - expected roles. Culture also imposes the rules. And when one doesn't fit into these roles it causes a level of internal disharmony. And what about the notion that the effect of toxins in the environment that affects the sex determination as in the impact of environmental toxins on anphibians? The old rules can no longer be imposed as a given.
But environmental causes don't change sex determination in humans. It might cause problems in children but sex is categorically determined at conception in humans. We also, until gender ideology took over in the last 15 years or so, lived in a world with far fewer gender-based expectations on kids. Clearly some parents are, consciously or not, imposing these roles on their so-called "trans children". But there's less of a potential disharmony than a century ago when playing sport or working or education might be out of reach for girls.
I have one question. What are the parts between your legs called? Gen italia?? Why would we use Gen der to describe the expression or feelings? It never made sense and never will. Just give it up. There's no such thing. The narcissism of humans to make things up and go along because it sounds cool is why we're here discussing bs.
Feminism is not monolithic, there are a number of 'schools' of feminism. Why does he insist on using the wrong-sex pronouns for those he's said are not that sex. Also, he seems to have not thought through some of his positions. As to what Sasha said about the XY Muslim boxer why was a supposed woman be carried on the shoulders & hugged by their coach if really a woman. In celebration the boxer and coach did this and that is supposedly not allowed by Muslims.
I really appeciate Byrne's contribution, but he's being very illogical in his opposition to the sex/gender distinction. Lot's of languages do just fine without it, and use terms like "biological sex", "sex role" etc, so I'm not saying it's conceptually necessary, but in English it exists. Why endorse the confusion of using sex and gender interchangeably? It makes no sense to try to clear up the confusion around the double meaning of "sex" by introducing the confusion of the redundant "gender" synonymous with "sex". Besides, "sex" is only confusing since it's a short form for "sexuality", "sexual relations" etc. Why not as well fight against that instead and try to restore "sex" to mean just male/female? The Swedish "kön" means both sex/gender and genitals/sexual organs and that doesn't really cause any confusion, so using the double meaning of "sex" as an argument against the sex/gender distinction is just silly. Byrne is fighting windmills trying to roll back time on the established meanings of "gender" in sexology and feminist theory. We can argue about those meanings and definitions, fine, but we can't just pretend "gender" is - or should be - synonymous with "sex". Besides, I don't think "gender" was ever introduced to clear up any serious linguistic confusion, I think it was introduced because Americans are prudes.
Ca 38: The "old" concept of "gender identity" is not in fact very interesting or useful. It's just how kids develop a "human identity" or any other identity, there's nothing special about it so no special concept needed. In fact it was designed to "explain" transsexualism and excuse experimenting on children with DSDs.
If l could program my brain into a computer that could not only see, but feel the mental and emotional side of this complex condition, blanchard theories on hsts/agp does not come into my equation as a Transsexual woman who was born male, xy chromosomes and obvious genitalia. Sexuality is too simple to explain what l have. The Transcendental side comes with no words to describe the mental environment that l had to deal with until puberty. It was almost like looking at your childhood from another dimension and perception distinct from the reality that you are living. It didn't ever go away, but is alleviated by hrt. I am aware of my biological sex/gender and now we can throw a whole lot of philosophies and ideologies on top of it. If the trans movement didn't exist, this condition is complex when you understand reality. My bet is that we need to be looking at fetal development and hormones in the womb. Wether these hormones are natural or syntheticly added to the Mother, they offer a scientific approach to Transsexualism. I'm 59 years of age and this was supressed in me at an early age by my environment. We are entering a new age of discovery. Never stop learning.🦄
How would you know what it feels like to be a woman? Does it hurt less to identify as trans-sexual, not male, even though you know you are male? You don´t have to respond, but i genuinely don´t understand. Surely, it is impossible to be male, and feel female: Logically, that is impossible. You can feel unhappy, but how does the trans movement change that?
@@WUB0105 ln no way did l say l was unhappy. This was about the transcendental side of being a child. What does a woman feel like. Over 4 billion answers would be correct. What does a male feel like? This becomes the point of transsexualism. I am male, grew up with males and still can't answer that question. This isn't about being a woman. It is so more complex when you understand biology/science and reality. I have no idea is what l am trying to say. This is brain developement. Not girl brain. It is about hormones acting incorrectly between my brain and reproduction system. We are not anywhere near understanding this condition. We are still looking at simple theories as hsts/ agp and a trans ideology/queer theory. As a straight male to have to take the opposite sex/gender hormones, well this becomes where we need to focus study. I would surmise to say that agp, which is not transsexual, it is a male sexuality and some of them transition, are more than likely to have suppressed hsts. They will hate that. But logically, if you have grs, then you are no use to a woman because you are not a lesbian. See what all this hand held device information has done to reality. I have no answer, only l have some differentiation as a male/female. For you to further your education on the subject, look up transcendence. No judgment hear, just trying to partly answer your question. I am very happy, but require no surgery. Thankyou for asking.🦄
@@BarbieBarb-i3x So your answer is basically that you have no idea? It never ceases to amaze me how superficial these answers from men who ought to have found some depth by now are. Transcendence is trans ideology nonsense speak right out of the Jack Turban playbook. It's religious/cultist terminology. All I get is that you think you feel better on hormones. It just sounds like drug use. Like you say you're nowhere dealing with underlying issue and seem very uninterested in finding out. There seems to be zero evidence for the hormone in utero theory except as a possible factor in sexuality but even then it's rather tenuous. Do you use women's spaces? Do you "live as a woman"? Or just take the hormones?
Whe you transition in my country you have to have psychiatric monotoring and endocrine monitoring to be able to recieve hrt. This is a complex condition and the change mentally and emotionally for me on hrt is incredible. And my brain new what it needed. If you take a contraceptive pill with to much testosterone you may be able to feel some of this and how hormones affect every part of our lives. My doctors say l don't have any other mental conditions and am pretty much normal.Where the transcendent part comes in is kind of lime in Brave New World where at the end after all this mental conditioning he still new his native self. Of course l am not a woman. I am a male. I can describe it to you as l am a male, not a man. A woman, not a female. Which if you can get your head around a male woman it is like if you can't open a jam jar and ask me to try. So many things in my life are so much easier naturally now. Studies on hormones during fetal developement are not fully studied because of the complexity. It is a complete mind f..k to explain but easier to live it. Somehow l'm just me. There isn't really the full emotive effect when we type. So sometimes we lose sight of what os meant when we read things. Seriously, l feel more attuned to myself like this. Being around guys is easy when it's about things and stuff but emotionally l just don't understand men. My brain has never been on tjat level. It was mpre l learnt to compete with them from a young age so l didn't get beaten up all the time. What did they beat me up for? Because l was a girl. I grew up thinking thete was something wrong with me because boys picked on the girls. Look, in my own mental state, yeah l am a woman. But outside of myself l tell women l am male. Most women l meat can tell but just treat me as one of the girls. It is pretty much effortless for them. I could ramble on for ever about it but it take another 59 years to explain to you and you still wouldn't get it. If you were to meet me in person, you would have more of an idea as to my being. Unfortunately the biggest voices come from trans ideologists and men whose sexuality is agp. I don't believe in trans ideology or spectrums or agp or the transgender umberella. I am still attracted to females although l would like to be treated like a ladie. That makes it difficult because most women are into men. A lot of men with agp are pushing Blanchard theory and won't agree that l am not hsts or agp. Hope this gives you more to question, we should never stop learning. Always welcome your response. And of course, you don't have to believe or understand any of this. Or even care. You asked, l try to help.🦄
Although I love this channel and the work they do and so will tick the "like" button as always, in support, this particular episode did not "grab" me like some of the others as it's sending my head round in circles. However noting your comment, ( as I started reading the comments whilst trying to understand the episode but gave up) you remind me very much of how someone I know describes themselves. Because of the age you state you are it is very unlikely that you are the same person but it is interesting to me because that is pretty much how their feelings were expressed as well. There never is one answer one explanation, one "solution" or one "type" of most things in my opinion.
I want to offer an alternative take on the Imane Khelif case. First, I agree that the IOC is to blame. It is very easy to test for sex, by doing a simple non-invasive cheek-swab. That is what the IOC should have done. That, or just following the IBA that did that last year 2023, and basically concluded that Khelif is a man with xy-chromosomes.
The IBA has a criterium that one has to be xx female to compete in the women´s category.
Second, I disagree that Khelif is totally not to blame. A number of experts have opinioned that Khelif is a man with 5 alpha reductase deficiency like Caster Semenya. Even if Khelif was mistaken for female at birth, he went through male puberty, and now has a male body and male level of testosterone. I find it very hard to believe that Khelif is unaware of going through male puberty, or unaware of the similarities between his condition and Caster Semenya´s case. Rather than Khelif being totally unaware of being a male with mal-developed genitalia at birth, I think it is very likely that Khelif knows exactly what he has, and that both his country and Khelif want to cash in on winning olympic gold.
I don´t think it is obsessing over what Khelif´s genitals look like, but rather that what is important is that Khelif has a male body, punches like a male, has male level of testosteron, and has gone through sex-testing in 2023 (IBA). Even if I don´t obsess with genitalia, I think also that once through male puberty, genitalia would not be mistaken for female.
Caster Semenya has fathered 2 children, and is xy male. To insist on refering to Caster Semenya (father of 2 children) as intersex or woman is to needlessly complicate things. And, taking into account the IBA´s testing in 2023, the same is true for Khelif: Otherwise, the IBA would have allowed him to compete with the women in 2023. And they didn´t.
I agree and I think in this show they were really unfair to the women speaking out against Imane. I do not condone any threats of violence, but women are allowed to say a man is a man. Imane was told by the IBA that he is a man, and he still continued to fight women in matches he knew were unfair. And now he is going after people for speaking about it. He will get no sympathy from me.
The IOC were using “we’re too kind to do something that invasive” as an excuse not to test the boxer, thinking that we were too ignorant to know a simple cheek swab was all that was required
Khelif's birth cert was issued in 2018 specifically in order to fight (we don't actually know if his original one said female). He had an initial test in 2022. We've got a Spanish coach who knew a year or two ago and said he knew.
We've got other coaching staff who knew a year or two ago and told female fighters the mountains changed his chromosomes. Khelif clearly hasn't dressed like Algerian women in a long time, most of his adult life. Possibly as a teenager. Then the likely condition will have become apparent to him at puberty (much like Semenya). Plus he clearly didn't appeal because he knew was male.
It's very very clear like you say that he doesn't have a leg to stand on and is more than happy to trample all over women and women's sports for personal gain.
Cheat.
Every single time anyone is described as intersex in the media they're male. (if they talked about girls with DSD conditions they'd have to start showing that instead of treating them we're transitioning them and the connections with PCOS etc.) It's clearly part of the intersex gambit and the "brain gender" attack on women's rights and biological reality.
It's also notable all of a sudden with Khelif they didn't say "assigned female at birth" but "born female" and "raised female" both false and clear attacks on language, reality, ideas about when sex is determined and if it can change. They don't let actual women say they're born female, only men, just like GLAAD reserve words for female anatomy exclusively for trans women. The fact most of the mainstream media used/is using this language is appalling.
It's also noticeable they focused on Khelif not Lin Yu-ting because the latter has literally no redeeming position. There's no nonsensical time machine dependent (original test 2022 when he wasn't fighting a Russian) "Russian conspiracy" involving numerous nationalities to fall back on and not even an expired appeal and the Taiwanese government tried to censor speech about it. We should use Lin-Yu Ting first because it's the stronger and clearer argument.
@@amaryllisequistraand the photo of him being carried on shoulders of a trainer they all know he is a man as he does
I agree with you completely.
Very well said!
He knows he’s a man as he has no shame or humility.
I was very impressed by Sasha's hesitation to give Turbin ANY kudos. Nice work Sasha and Stella for keeping Alex in real time and in step with the current dialog
Alex "gets" it. Cuts right through the manufactured confusion being promoted currently. So glad you had him on.
I don’t see any reason to change sex and gender being interchangeable words for the exact reasons Alex gives; use ‘gender roles’ (or ‘traditional gender roles’ if you want to acknowledge the often regressive nature of assigning, for example, certain interests, tastes or roles in a household to a specific sex). Stella argued with him that it works for ‘transgender’ people because a person cannot literally change their sex, and then she herself used ‘gender role’ in that sentence rather than just gender anyways. We all know no one can literally change their sex (or we should know), and I think Alex is in the right here. I will never use gender the ‘new’ way because the entire concept is offensive to me.
I distinctly remember the first time I had some Gen Z brat jump down my throat for using the word gender ‘wrong’ - she immediately informed me that ‘sex’ was your biological presentation (‘assigned’ at birth, I’m sure) and gender was how you presented in terms of levels of masculine or feminine. I was like wait, are you talking about how well someone adheres to traditional gender roles?? Because to me, that is the more precise and proper way to describe what she was on about. Her being such a know it all about something I don’t think her not-fully-developed frontal lobe had properly considered the ramifications of pushing (and WORSE, she works in childcare). It would not be inaccurate to say that was the first spike in my journey to being ‘peaked’.
Ann Oakley defined it all in Sex, Gender and Society in 1972 or so! But sadly she revised it somewhat later on.
Thank god i was peaked and stopped calling myself a feminist. No ideologies at all please.
Without feminists we would have no gender ideology and just transsexuals that transitioned for pragmatic reasons
Wooosh - the sound of this conversation going right over my head!
Looking at the comments section I get the impression this is a subject that at the granular level is very subjective.
I used to pride myself on having a handle on this, not anymore. Maybe if I make some strong coffee and watch it a third time and take notes ...
"Free to Be You and Me" is 50 years old now! How did we get so off course from the message of that wonderful children's film? I remember watching it in school when I was in first grade and when my daughter was young, I found it on UA-cam and we watched it together. She still got sucked into gender ideology when she was 13, but luckily her trans identity ran its course and was over after 4 years. Thanks for bringing up this childhood nostagia for me. The scene referenced in this episode is especially relevant. ua-cam.com/video/VUpLiJfV4_A/v-deo.html
I have read Alex's book "Trouble With Gender". I think it really is an exceptionally good read - lucid and logical. Highly recommended.
Thank you for your work!!❤
Why not have Dr Emma HIlton on dsd?
I'm not sure you should give the Algerian boxer the benefit of the doubt because he was, or might be, inhibited by living in a Muslim country.
His behavior in the ring after he "won" wasn't inhibited. Would someone considered a woman from, say, Afghanistan, be allowed to behave with such abandon in public? Could someone considered female from Afghanistan be exposed like that in public at all? I question how much pressure that boxer was really under to toe the female line.
Agree and no way does an Algerian man put a woman on his shoulders as the coach did when Imane won the Gold medal. I was married to an Algerian and the way women are treated in their country is in a very oppressive way. They aren't supposed to touch them until marriage.
There was no problem with gender being a synonym for biological sex in the gender essentialist context because 40 + years ago, trans people were transsexual with gender dysphoria. Without the push to accept autogynophiles and other non gender dysphoric individuals 'trans-gender' would be a redundant term. Not untill the non-binary and gender fluid concepts of gender were beginning to be fabricated did gender become redefined and marketed as politically prudent term for the wider concept including gender identity and non-binary/fluid context become useful.
Note here that another term entirely could have been coined, but such is the nature of a pernicious ideology that changing the meaning of words is useful in coopting existing language and retraining beliefs. This is why newer religions coopt the customs and festivals of their predecessors. It's my opinion that it's where transsexualism departed from the corresponding gender essentialism and emerged as transgenderism, that the irrational and insideous political ideology took root. It became identitarian and the word gender was coopted. I also suspect this has been a deliberate political ideology for decades hence and not organic or natural. But I'm only @ 14:04, so let's see how much your guests confirms my suspicions.
AGP trans make up the majority of trans globally. Theye also experience "gender dysphoria". Including the first patient to undergo sex reassignment surgery, whose story was told in the film "The Danish Girl".
Glossed over was the fact that 'intercourse' now seems to refer only to 'having sex', whereas intercourse has long been used as a term for having a *conversation* with another person.
IMO we cannot now use sex and gender as synonyms. The transologists have made that clear. They claim to change gender in order to then claim to have changed sex.
I think it's important to see gender as now referring to the sex steteotypes my generation (child of the 1940s) rejected and fought free of and which obviously can be changed at will, and sex as referring exclusively to the two immutable biological classes into which the whole of homo sapiens can be scientifically and reliably classified.
But there is never really a "transition." A child who declares they are another sex and changes their name or clothing hasn't transitioned. He is just pretending to be the other sex. Once he starts talking puberty blockers and hormones, he has now started engaging in body modification procedures like other children who undergo plastic surgery, but very extreme body modification. So, we shouldn't use the word "trans kid," as it reinforces the idea that actual transition from one sex to another is possible. "Trans identifying" is better.
Interesting point, but firstly, it's very helpful (if you accept gender dysphoria as real) to alleviate a child's discomfort, by encouraging the social transition stuff and supporting it with therapy. The question of whether to call it transitioning is largely semantic, but if they are taught that social transition is a good and normal way to treat gender dysphoria then they can learn to understand the definition of trans as social transition primary means even as the rule for kids. Also if social transition is defined out of trans, it may reinforce that they need to be on puberty blockers and heavier medical interventions just to be accepted as trans. I do see your point that calling kids trans sounds inappropriate, but if it's just social transition then it's better to accept the compromise than ruin all hope that the non-medical approach will be accepted.
@skepticusmaximus184 As far as I understand it, social "transition" leads to the next step of medicalization, in most cases. If you mean allowing a child to change their name and clothing and presentation, then that is fine. It is giving children the freedom to explore their self-expression, which is what we want.
@daughter_of_earth That's a fine conclusion, letting them socialise without heavily imposing gender norms nor making a fuss if they experiment either way. The question of whether social transition leads to medical transition depends on who the parents are what they know, their attitudes and who else is involved. The whole purpose of organisations like Genspect is to facilitate non-medical social transition, psychotherapy and education to support parents and kids. The continuation of social transition into medical transitioning isn't by any means inevitable and it's not dependent on whether the nomenclature of what counts as transitioning includes the social aspect. If anything the social aspect used to be the most important and rigorous, just a couple of decades ago, when transition was done by transsexuals and they were expected to live as the opposite sex and attend ongoing therapy for a year or more before even beginning hormones. So social transition has a long and important history. This fast track to medical transition is dangerous especially for kids/teens and young adults. The reason(s) the medical transitioning has become a run away train, is because the ideologues have captured the institutions and the pharmaceutical companies have found a new market for heavy dependence and life long patient/customers/victims. The social transitioning is the MOST important aspect but when responsibility done it also involves gatekeeping/push back and filtering of kids for other behavioural conditions, disorders or just harmless experimental phases. Social transition is not a runaway train and it's supposed to have off ramps or checks and balances. It's diagnostic as well (if not more) than regulation and monitoring of potential (not inevitable) transition. Sorry for the long rant, but it's not the name that matters is the treatment.
@@skepticusmaximus184I think you've got a few major flaws/unevidenced suppositions in your argument.
You believe social transition helps gender dysphoric kids. It doesn't. There's no evidence it does and the Cass Review showed it often leads to concretizing the identity and is possibly connected to negative outcomes.
This is because trans is a socio-cultural identity. The history of trans is largely that the society tells the child that they are x 3rd gender or that they can't possibly be a boy or a girl given their "gender non-conforming" behaviour. The child then believes that's their identity. It's similar for other forms of identity, kids think of themselves as Scottish or black or working class or pretty or intelligent or even associated with their own name largely based on people around them. It's why abusive parents who call their kids animals or stupid etc have such a damaging effect.
Then if you listen to detransitioners they often talk about the social pressure to continue to present when they'd already internally decided against things. It's very difficult to turn back the tide when you've announced to the whole school that you're x new person. A lot of the kids seem to be able to detransition when they change school or go to college or leave friendship groups because it's easier than saying, yeah that thing I told you about for 2 yrs was a lie. It can be pretty humiliating.
You seem to think Genspect is trying to facilite social transition. Disassociation and ideation are very harmful mentally and Sasha for example has spoken about how if you immediately affirm the identity (which social transition requires) then all exploration is off the table. If we start changing names or pronouns then you've already lost half the game because it means gender can't be explored.
I'd also posit that the key is not social transition because the child doesn't need to change and shouldn't be changing. The whole point is they should just be shown that liking sports or pink or dancing or whatever is entirely irrelevant to being a boy or a girl. If a boy says in class, I'm a boy because I'm good at Maths, a good teacher or parent would challenge that idea. It's illogical to change tack just because the sex is changed. These sexist ideas need some level of pushback. And the child needs to know that they don't need to transition in order to be who they already are. None of their personality or interests are reliant on being a boy or a girl.
The caveat I'd give is that I get do get that there's some issue of strategy and you might face someone doubling down or being stubborn if you're confrontational. Or if you get involved in making it a central theme of who they are (which social transition at school would do). But if you call it a transition then clearly many of the children understand it as a possible reality. This group has a particularly high prevalence of autistic or poorly functioning children. They do literally believe they can be a new person and that's often connected to some trauma or social awkwardness or body dysmorphia they're trying to escape. Go look at the adults who think they've literally changed s*x. The language clearly has an impact.
Then with the idea of "living as the opposite sex" I think it's a bit less clear cut. As I've said I'm against it in children because childhood and teenage years involve a certain level of discovering who you are and this could directly concretize it. In adults it depends if we are allowing surgeries and medical interventions because we kind of say, well you're 18 now it's your body. But what does it really mean to "live as the opposite sex"? If you look at what the clinicians mean for the males it largely involves them invading female spaces which makes this socially permissible. That's clearly a step too far and damaging to society. Otherwise it's just clothing and make up. It's entirely unscientific.
I think you'd find it very difficult to find an example of "responsible social transition" with appropriate gatekeeping. If you listen to the stories of trans widows and detransitioners and parents of the kids getting letters off the internet then lying is widespread. They just tell the clinician they've been doing all the steps for the required time and often exaggerate to get to the goal of surgery that they've obsessed about. There's no way of ascertaining if they've been doing it because there isn't even any criteria for "living as a man/woman".
Then what exactly can you diagnose with the social transition? It can't be trans identity because that's socio-cultural. It can't be gender dysphoria because that diagnosis would precede it. It can't tell us if surgery would be successful because frankly the surgeries aren't successful and we've known that since 1976. We know most regret/desistance/detransition kicks in after almost a decade. The only thing it has going for it is the lengthening of the time frame. And the only benefit there is the actual therapy. Unless we're seeing it as plastic surgery/body modification in which case it's more a question of, are you really sure, which again seems to rely on the idea of men entering women's spaces. Something that shouldn't be an option. How can the social transition prepare you for removal of vital organs? I don't think it's logically sound.
@skepticusmaximus184 I didn't think Genspect encourages social transition. I object to the idea that "transition" is ever happening, even with transsexual adults.
9:19 "Is it millilitres or like percentages..." Gender would be millilitres would be in millilitres because it's gender fluid.
it’s like feminine beauty as measured in “mili-Helen’s” after Helen of Troy being able to launch a thousand ships.
@@damiencasey8428 To me that sounds like a measure of a woman's intelligence and rhetorical skill referencing Helen Joyce as a baseline
It must be exhausting labelling people all the time.
Skills, tasks, jobs, and chores, aren't feminine or masculine.
Doing the dishes or fixing the light switch just needs to be done.
No man vacuuming or sewing on a button is feminine, they are competent.
No woman fixing a tire or mowing the lawn is masculine, they are competent.
We seem to be endlessly judging people and trying to make them conform to stereotypes.
People's natural interests, talents, and skills should let them navigate through life without being pigeonholed.
Men in the arts aren't feminine, women in construction aren't masculine.
Sure, some roles trend male or female and we need both to make a whole.
Two consenting adults boffing is not an identity and is probably the least interesting thing about them.😊
Exactly.
Alex Byrne has such an excellent talent for understanding and describing all the sides of this issue. For instance, how (in a sense) a child who has socially transitioned is a "transgender child" while succinctly expressing the gender critical objection to the term. I think he can also, without being excessively critical or charitable (steelmanning/strawmanning) describe gender ideological beliefs in a way that is succinct, accurate, and recognizable to the people who actually hold that worldview.
At the same time he doesn't hedge, or "both sides," or adopt a neutral observer stance.
An excellent podcast with a very wise and knowledgeable guest (I read his book earlier this year, highly recommend it). I found the discussion about Jack Turban both enlightening and disturbing. In order to become a psychiatrist one has to go through medical school. I find it hard to believe that a medical doctor can hold such bizarre and views about biological sex and gender (a gay doctor at that). He seems to have whole heartedly adopted queer theory without any qualms. It would be interesting to see what would happen if he left San Francisco and had to live and interact in a more conservative environment.
I agree that it would be useful to have a discussion about masculinity and femininity. I personally have always viewed men and women as a combination of both (in Jungian psychology anima and animus). According to Facebook I am 67% masculine and 33% feminine, which is about right.
I would be interested in understanding this phenomena of gay men happily transitioning often gay ppl. It feels very counterintuitive.
In Turban's case I find him rather sinister and he's funded heavily by pharmaceutical companies. I honestly don't get the sensation he believes what he's saying entirely. It's like a justification for some other goal. But I can't really figure out his motivations. Is it just money, power, fame? I don't get it. He produces clearly false studies that get ripped to shreds by other scientists and then just smiles like a Cheshire Cat. Is he just a pathological liar? He purposefully misrepresents opposing arguments all the time. I can't quite figure him out but he makes my blood boil and reminds me of the insufferable misogyny of Owen Jones.
@@robertmarshall2502 I think a clue was given in the interview with Alex Byrne. Jack Turban had a difficult relationship with his father. I can see someone like that becoming totally absorbed into the postmodern oppressor/oppressed mindset. He is also very bright and in my experience people with high IQs and are successful are less likely to course correct when new facts come to light.
There are a lot of bad doctors in the world. A lot of deeply unethical doctors who care more about remaining in the prestigious club they worked so hard to join then in the wellbeing of their patients. Covid should have taught you that. I understand (from doctor friends) that they also do not teach critical thinking skills at med school.
9:20 The unit of gender is a butler. "I am three butlers more feminine than I was last week"
I really disagree with his definition of terms...
"Why use gender as a term for gender roles - we have a term for that: gender roles"
Well then, why use gender as a term for sex - we have a term for that: sex.
I think the fundamental distinction is between SEX (our binary biology) and GENDER (gender roles). As to how much gender roles arise from our biology and how much from social conventions, that is a matter for debate, based on scientific study. It's complicated and difficult to untangle, but I think most scientists agree that it is some of both (nature/nurture), although they have different accounts of how much weight should be given to each.
Gender was used as a synonym for sex going back to the 1500s, Alex said. It has only more recently been used to mean "gender roles." It's nice having a synonym for sex when you mean male and female, since sex also means fornication. The word gender is used in laws all over the place and on forms and documentation. Since in all of those contexts it was put there as a stand in for the word "sex" we have created quite a mess by saying gender is something other than sex.
OK we do have a term for *biological* sex, but just calling it 'sex' fails to disambiguate it from 'sex' the verb. Maybe we should drop all redundant synonyms and only use the longer form expressions like gender roles and biological sex. But the term gender was originally a synonym for biological sex and (mis)appropriated to separate gender from biological sex by ideologs in the past few decades. The original definition was already a synonym for biological sex. The purpose for semantic shift was political and nefarious. It was a means of decoupling sex from biology and for the deliberate implementation of gender identity. Note that at this point it was only gender essentialism that was normative in the wider population. There was no pervasive concept of gender fluidity or non-binary identity, but the path was being cleared. Also note that the gender ideologs, could have just coined their own term for
the psychological manifestation of feminine and masculine roles but it's easier to gaslight people into a new ideology if you use familiar words and gradually apply a manufactured definition.
The objective for using gender in reference to roles is obviously so that self identified roles can be introduced to the vernacular and the idea that gender could be chosen at whim as a voulantary identity and 'oppressors' could be vilified for transgressions of a person's rights, if it just so happens they don't agree that sex can be chosen by personal preference. If gender was still coupled with biology the idea of choosing one's gender would be a very contentious issue. Now gender roles may still be binary but introducing gender as synonym for roles opens the door for self identity.
The problem is neither gender dysphoria or autogynophilia are conditions that can be chosen and nothing about being trans in the transsexual sense has ever established gender as a matter of choice or a performative role. Nothing has ever overturned gender essentialism with empirical evidence and rigorous research.
You think its a moot point perhaps, but the gender Ideologs have been working on this for about 50 years now, and the best they've come up with is Turbans "gender identity" means "a transcendent sense of gender." It's circular equivocal nonsense simply defining gender identity into existence. And if you come down on the side of gender as an identity (self selected) you can't simultaneously pretend it's also a condition luke dysphoria beyond your control or something assigned in any other way. But the gender ideologs keep trying to have it both ways. And also if gender is synonymous with roles we play, then the idea that a biological male is a woman in any sense other than a male attempting to live as a woman is off the table. The trans women ARE women trope is the gaslighting garbage of a nefarious political ideology.
It's hardly a moot point anymore that gender radical ideologs are pushing an insideous ideology and that honest trans people, who accept binary gender and dysphoria as a psychological condition are being used as pawns. It's also clear that gender never was or never should have been assigned a definition other than the one compatible with gender essentialism and synonymous with biological sex.
"The historic meaning of gender, ultimately derived from Latin genus, was of "kind" or "variety".[21] By the 20th century, this meaning was obsolete, and the word gender was almost always used to refer to grammatical categories, although there are a small number of examples of gender being used as a synonym for sex prior to the 20th century,"
In the '70s, feminists popularised the use of the word gender to describe gender stereotypes as distinct from actual sex, championing the idea that whatever your biological sex (male or female), you should not be constrained by the gender stereotypes that were attached to it. This had nothing to do with claiming that you could become the opposite sex - only that the stereotypes attached the sexes were just that: stereotypes. This was the very opposite of queer theory, which has gone into the realms of fantasy and pseudo-scientific religion with claims of sex being a spectrum and/or gendered souls.
Conflating the words "sex" and "gender" blurs this crucial distinction between sex (male and female) which is binary and unchangeable vs gender roles/stereotypes - and actually this conflation was the first move in gender woo's attack on feminism.
@@davidleemorgan When I studied History we used gender to refer to the societal understanding of man, woman or x 3rd/4th gender in terms of norms, roles, stereotypes, what values were desired, typical dress, typical lifestyle etc. The key was that it was very societally dependent. It made no sense whatsoever to talk about women in those terms speaking about Phoenicians and the Arawak at the same time and even individually you'd need to know which century was being referred to.
I think there's still an argument it's useful in that sense. At least I find it useful to think that way because it helps me extricate the objective from the subjective. But "gender roles" without narrowing down what society we're talking about makes little sense.
Sex and sex roles meanwhile make sense in all circumstances because they're objective (or at least try to be).
I'm a bit frustrated that gender has started to mean "gender identity". It's particularly frustrating in a lot of legal systems where plenty of laws say gender but clearly mean it as a synonym for sex. We also obviously didn't think we even needed to define sex, gender, man, woman in the past because they were so obvious. Now we've got people changing the meaning of male and female and even the mtf or ftm or AFAB or amab are disingenuous.
But I think if we got back to something like what you're saying then the inherent sexism (genderism?) of identifying as the opposite gender becomes more apparent. It also highlights that they're using gender roles from a different era which the rest of society doesn't want to live in. And therefore their depiction of men and women are antiquated regressive stereotypes. If we add in the way of using gender I was taught in History then it also debunks non-binary as a gender. And then this has a knock on effect on "gender affirming care" because why would be want to affirm gender when clearly we should be moving away from it and reducing it's importance? And how do you affirm genders that simply don't exist in a true societal sense?
I'm not sure if I actually responded to anything you said or just talked at you but your comment made me think.
i'm up to about 8 mins, and i think one huge sticking point (that maybe is a thing to be established early doors in discussions Stella is referencing) is that yes, feminine/masculine refers to gender (so gender roles/stereotypes in this context), but some believe these are innate, and inappropriate for the 'wrong' sex to engage in, whereas others believe these are societally constructed/enforced (beyond some wriggle room for traits directly related to sex/bodies). Without knowing which idea of 'gender roles' is being discussed, I find it gets tricky pretty quickly.
Let alone getting into the healthiest options (particularly for many detrans/sisted people!) probably being to not worry about what trait gets sorted in which box by culture (or i suppose, one's culture, as certain aspects of these gender roles change over time and place (except subordination/domination)) and just do what you like ha. Anyway, interested to hear the rest! Perhaps all this gets said haha.
If feminine/masculine refers to gender than you wouldn't have all these feminine girls calling themselves trans boys. Or hulking men with beards calling themselves transwomen. So "gender" alone cannot be a substitute for masculine/feminine. At least not alongside Turban's idea of the "transcendent sense of gender" which says masculine men can identify as trans women.
The best new diagnostic label I’ve heard is identity based obsessive compulsive disorder… It fits some presentations for sure (but not all)
28:43 "So turban tries to explain what gender identity is and it it turns out to be like extremely complicated of sort of very hard to understand so the one he got various layers as he thinks of it so it's your relation to masculinity and femininity and it's includes or can include the way we feel about our bodies but it has this Central third component which is a Transcendent sense of gender."
Well there's three problems here at least. Firstly who didn't learn in third grade English, that you should never define a word or expression in terms of itself. Firstly we need to know what 'gender' is before defining gender identity, but if some component of 'gender identity' is defined in terms of sense of gender the expression being defined is dependant on itself. It seems as if 'gender identity' and 'sense of gender' are almost synonymous. In any case the word gender shouldn't be in both the expression the definition of that expression.
Secondly, there's an obvious gambit afoot here to manufacture some objective meaning or references in the word transcendent, what is this gender identity supposed to be transcending? Is it transcending the universe? No? The human mind? What?
I don't believe theres anything transcending the universe that we know of. Anything transcending the mind is called objective and if it exists outside of the mind then we should be able to detect it with empirical methods. The word 'sense' in 'transcendent sense' obviously implies perception. Otherwise you're just defining something into existence. How was this Transcendent sense discovered and what is being sensed? How do we know a person isn't just manufacturing their own identity like a religious faith and even conforming to social norms in the same way?
This is entirely subjective (even imaginary) if there is nothing transcendent. At best its an unsubstantiated and unfalsifiable claim that's merely being asserted and pulled out of a circular tautological definition; an imaginary concept being defined into existence.
There are a plethora of religious and cult concepts defined into existence using semantic tricks like this to project the imaginary subjective model existing entirely in the mind, into an illusion of objective reality.
Finally, it hasn't escaped my notice, that there seems to be a two faced equivocation going on here, using the word identity in two diferent ways. Trans people often assert their identity as a free choice and a liberty or right, to self identify in some gender nonconforming way. But if there is a sense of gender from some objective (mind independent) transcending source, then you are sensing (detecting) your gender and identifying it in a non-voulantary way. When we identify different kinds of rock, we are taking objective empirical data and making a categorical distinction. The kind of identifying we do by voulantary choice is again entirely subjective and not corresponding with any objective external or inate involuntary properties.
Both the identied at birth and transcendent sense of identity strongly imply inate or objective involuntary causes for gender and identity as externaly imposed model, whereas libertarian gender identity, chosen at will is a performative and arbitrary voulantary model. They would seem to be incompatible, but that explains the convoluted and confusing model that tries to have it both ways.
*Edit:* There is one other problem I thought of, it's that I see no reason for a cis gender person to also experience this transcendent sense of gender. I still presumably have a gender and a gender identity, I should also be able to sense my gender in just the same way as a trans person. I can report without hesitation, that the only sense of gender I have ever had, derives from my biological properties and the psychological effects of them. There's nothing transcendent in this sense experience so if any sense of gender needs to be formulated by some convoluted equivocal tautological definition that only works for gender radical trans people then it's obviously delusional ideological garbage.
It is all "the emperor´s new clothes".
This is an excellent breakdown of just some of the arguments Turban will never respond to.
How do you have a transcendent sense of gender when gender is socially constructed and therefore dependent on which society you grew up/live in?
My transcendent sense of gender is that of 7th century Byzantine man, how exactly do I proceed? Is it different to Renaissance Italian woman? Why doesn't anyone outside of Samoa have a transcendent sense of fafafine? Why have people only had a transcendent sense of non-binary this century?
I'm pretty sure even if I said this to Jack Turban he'd prescribe affirmative care.
You have a sharp philosopher's mind and I'm wondering what your transcendent sense of philosophy is. Just kidding. Of course Turban's definition of gender is delusional ideological garbage - if it weren't, it would have a logically consistent and clear foundation, and wouldn't revolve around obfuscating reality. What a pleasure to read your breakdown!
This atheist agrees with you.
I've commented it before, but my langauge didn't have a separate word for this supposed thing called "gender" and instead added what would translate to "sex identity" to accomodate trans identified people, it's made it easier to see just how forced the sex/gender debate is in English and how clunky it sounds to add a new word to desribe this new identity ideology.
I speak Spanish as a second language and I find filtering things through it really makes me notice where language has been captured. My fiancée (who only speaks Spanish) asked me why I was talking about "females" and "males" like we were just animals and I remembered 20 years ago that would have been seen as a degrading thing incels used to do to dehumanize and objectify women.
I once asked someone Spanish why he put his pronouns on his profile and why in English. He found it bizarre to do it in Spanish but the penny never dropped. "They" as a pronoun never makes sense and "non-binary" has either this hilarious quality where you have to gender it or requires you to do an entirely clunky and impractical thing of adding -e/-es to all adjectives. A lot of the Spanish gender ideology (mixed up with inclusive language) is either only written because no one can say profoesor@ or Latinx or relies on using English words. There's a direct connection between English-speaking internet culture and language and trans-identification in Spanish-speaking youth.
I agree that a second language can really help see through the terminology. I find when I can't translate a word to Spanish it's often bollocks.
I love Alex Byrne.
You might be interested in this book about the bacha posh. It looks at the tradition in Afghanistan of dressing young girls as boys and treating them socially as boys for a period of time. The traditional belief is that a girl dressed as a boy can help to attract boy babies to be born into the family. The book discusses individual stories from bacha posh and problems that can arise if a female child is allowed to socially transition for too long (into adolescence). It's a fascinating look at social transition of children in a population.
Sorry... the book is The Underground Girls of Kabul. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Underground_Girls_of_Kabul
I've looked into how DSDs like XY 5-ARD are handled in Algeria and the other Muslim MENA countries, and I think those societies/cultures have a much more humane, understanding & practical approach to DSD conditions than Sasha is giving them credit for. There was a landmark Algerian Supreme Court case circa 2018 which affirmed that in Algeria someone with a DSD like Imane Khelif would be fully protected under the law to switch their legal sex marker and social role, and to get any medical interventions they want, if they so chose.
What Islam says about DSDs shows that it's not news to imams and regular people in the Muslim world that some children who appear to be girls as babies/young children will turn out to be boys when they reach puberty of adolescence.
DSD conditions are not necessarily seen as shameful or shocking in conservative, traditional Muslim cultures. In fact, the approach that Islam recommends in the case of DSDs like XY 5-ARD is kind , practical & reasonable. Which is very different to, & far better than, the ways children with DSDs like XY 5-ARD have been historicaly regarded in many traditional cultures in sub-Saharan African countries and in Western countries in the era of modern medicine.
One reason for this is is probably that certain genetic DSD conditions that are inherited through an autosomal recessive pattern have an unusually high prevalance in parts of the Muslim world - just the way that cystic fibrosis and hereditary hemochromatosis have unusually high prevalence amongst people in northern Europe or of northern European heritage, particularly amongst Irish and Scots. In fact, there's a male DSD that presents very much like XY 5- ARD called 17 beta-HSD3 that's estimated to occur in as many as 1 out of every 200-300 births amongst Muslim Arabs in MENA countries, particularly amongst Palestinians.
Thanks for the info. Could that be due to Islam's apparent lack of taboo on first cousin marriage?
.Transcendent gender/sex awareness is actually an acceptance of one's whole being as themselves. It doesn't matter whether one ID's as a girl or a boy. It is about accepting yourself as yourself without attempting to make yourself fit into a restictive boy box or girl box. The old roles no longer fit anywhere.
Why not accept yourself without never ending lists of lables, medication and surgeries?
If the transcendental sense of gender means anything, it is the human striving for harmony and wholeness. When the ideologue that Byrne mentioned suggested imagining yourself with the opposite sex one morning and how that might make you feel. Fear would be a reaction to disharmony. I mean, it's human nature to feel natural as harmonious. Trans enthusiasts probably have a different view.
In what sense does Caster Semenya "live as a woman." Caster is married to a biological female and has fathered children with his/her wife.
Caster runs in races as a woman.
"Live as a woman" is just nonsense isn't it? My grandma apparently lived as a man because she drove and my grandad didn't, worked as a Maths teacher and took a car mechanics course. But then when she retired she did flower arranging for her church so I guess she detransitioned?
It makes about as much sense of "live as a human" to me.
Trans is a preference. There is no biological basis for it. The trans person has the same sexual orientation that he or she had before transitioning, with or without the cosmetic surgery. I have never encountered an LGB person who said after coming out "Oh, I got that wrong, I will now revert to being hetero", Yet some trans people choose to detransition. Trans is a preference.
So Khelif can't come out as male, however, he must have known since puberty that he is male, so he should not have decided to be a boxer. That was a choice.
Many Fa'afine are not all gay boys.They are a social role, imposed on families who have no daughters, as a help mate to carry out the very sex exclusive roles required by the family unit. They recognize the importance of all those chores being done, but tie them to sex, so if there are no daughters to fulfill those important female roles, a son will be assigned a fa'fafine. Some may welcome this role, but it is not based on the sexual orientation, or innate masculinity or femininity of the boy. It is primarily a role created for males to deal with a shortage of females to carry out the many duties which families require to be done, in order for the functioning of the society.
IDENTITY CONFUSION: When Sasha says “we went to the APA” listeners don’t know whether she’s talking about the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association. I suppose when the psychiatrists settled on the name for their organization, acronym doubling wasn’t anticipated to be a problem, especially because there were only a few hundred psychologists at the time (now there are twice as many psychologist-type APA people). The American Philosophical Association is also “the APA”….
You were far far too generous to Jack Turban.
Although I do enjoy his studies because every single one is followed by a correction or debunking and no right-minded or sincere person could ever reach the disingenuous conclusions he does. He gets paid to write a conclusion then design studies to reach it before he collects data and then has the rather difficult task of making it fit the evidence when it never does. He does this innovative ways like removing transitioners from the data set to prove regret is low. The fact that even this data set shows 40-odd percent had a major mental breakdown in the last month doesn't stop him claiming they are happy and healthy.
I enjoy reading him fail every time. But for some reason he's made failure, incompetency and outright lies into a lucrative gig.
My wild conjecture is that Turban got into psychiatry because he identifies with psychopathy. He does these horrible things where he smiles when describing women's spaces invaded my men and attacking them. Duper's delight all over his face a lot of the time.
51:30 - I actually once had a hyper-realistic dream where this happened. Freaked me out quite a bit and it affected me for a couple weeks. Anyway, I am a 5' 10" white male and I dreamed that I woke up as a 5' 3" partially Asian woman (Asian facial features, but I still had blue eyes). First felt confused, but then freaked out when I felt between my legs and couldn't find my usual bits. Never thought "oh this body is awful and terrible!", in fact I was glad to see that I was decently attractive, LOL. Totally willing to accept that I was a girl now since I had the body of one. My worries were more about how would I be able to tell anyone what had happened, and how to deal with my friends having no clue who I was. Was very relieved when I woke up and hadn't actually transformed into another person, but for the next two weeks I jumped every time I saw someone look at me since I guess I felt like there was a slight chance I might be unrecognizable.
It is known that 1970s feminists used the word gender to diffentiate from natal sex when discussing gender, gender identity, and the social construct of gender roles.
Sex should be retained to mean biological sex of male and female and gender should be used to indicate masculinity and femininity.
Masculinity/femininity refer to psychological, social and cultural differences.
When feminists made that distinction in the 1970s, they meant that whereas you can change gender for equality, you cannot change sex. Trying to change sex , you create chimaeras. Do not fiddle with nature. As we try to protect nature as our environment, we should try to protect our own nature - bodies.
I grew up with Free to Be and this example is so disheartening.
In David Rimer's case, he received testosterone suppressors and dealt with puberty this way. Did not work well anyway.
Who or what book claims that drag is in all cultures?
ARe there any conversations about reproductive development and the impact of toxins on the sex/gender development?
There is no basis for for a transcendent sense of gender to be a protected class. So as useful a gender identity maybe for therapy it is not something that should be forced on the rest of society. Tolerance of individuals should be a goal of society but the government should stay out of it.
100% It's like making being a Taurus or Sagittarius or identifying as a dog person instead of a cat person a protected class.
Kids learn roles - expected roles. Culture also imposes the rules. And when one doesn't fit into these roles it causes a level of internal disharmony. And what about the notion that the effect of toxins in the environment that affects the sex determination as in the impact of environmental toxins on anphibians? The old rules can no longer be imposed as a given.
But environmental causes don't change sex determination in humans. It might cause problems in children but sex is categorically determined at conception in humans.
We also, until gender ideology took over in the last 15 years or so, lived in a world with far fewer gender-based expectations on kids. Clearly some parents are, consciously or not, imposing these roles on their so-called "trans children". But there's less of a potential disharmony than a century ago when playing sport or working or education might be out of reach for girls.
I have one question. What are the parts between your legs called? Gen italia?? Why would we use Gen der to describe the expression or feelings? It never made sense and never will. Just give it up. There's no such thing. The narcissism of humans to make things up and go along because it sounds cool is why we're here discussing bs.
And Gen etics.
Jack Turban's career is not going to age well.
Feminism is not monolithic, there are a number of 'schools' of feminism. Why does he insist on using the wrong-sex pronouns for those he's said are not that sex. Also, he seems to have not thought through some of his positions. As to what Sasha said about the XY Muslim boxer why was a supposed woman be carried on the shoulders & hugged by their coach if really a woman. In celebration the boxer and coach did this and that is supposedly not allowed by Muslims.
❤🇬🇧❌❌
Religion
I really appeciate Byrne's contribution, but he's being very illogical in his opposition to the sex/gender distinction. Lot's of languages do just fine without it, and use terms like "biological sex", "sex role" etc, so I'm not saying it's conceptually necessary, but in English it exists. Why endorse the confusion of using sex and gender interchangeably? It makes no sense to try to clear up the confusion around the double meaning of "sex" by introducing the confusion of the redundant "gender" synonymous with "sex". Besides, "sex" is only confusing since it's a short form for "sexuality", "sexual relations" etc. Why not as well fight against that instead and try to restore "sex" to mean just male/female? The Swedish "kön" means both sex/gender and genitals/sexual organs and that doesn't really cause any confusion, so using the double meaning of "sex" as an argument against the sex/gender distinction is just silly. Byrne is fighting windmills trying to roll back time on the established meanings of "gender" in sexology and feminist theory. We can argue about those meanings and definitions, fine, but we can't just pretend "gender" is - or should be - synonymous with "sex". Besides, I don't think "gender" was ever introduced to clear up any serious linguistic confusion, I think it was introduced because Americans are prudes.
Ca 38: The "old" concept of "gender identity" is not in fact very interesting or useful. It's just how kids develop a "human identity" or any other identity, there's nothing special about it so no special concept needed. In fact it was designed to "explain" transsexualism and excuse experimenting on children with DSDs.
If l could program my brain into a computer that could not only see, but feel the mental and emotional side of this complex condition, blanchard theories on hsts/agp does not come into my equation as a Transsexual woman who was born male, xy chromosomes and obvious genitalia. Sexuality is too simple to explain what l have. The Transcendental side comes with no words to describe the mental environment that l had to deal with until puberty. It was almost like looking at your childhood from another dimension and perception distinct from the reality that you are living. It didn't ever go away, but is alleviated by hrt. I am aware of my biological sex/gender and now we can throw a whole lot of philosophies and ideologies on top of it. If the trans movement didn't exist, this condition is complex when you understand reality. My bet is that we need to be looking at fetal development and hormones in the womb. Wether these hormones are natural or syntheticly added to the Mother, they offer a scientific approach to Transsexualism. I'm 59 years of age and this was supressed in me at an early age by my environment. We are entering a new age of discovery. Never stop learning.🦄
How would you know what it feels like to be a woman? Does it hurt less to identify as trans-sexual, not male, even though you know you are male? You don´t have to respond, but i genuinely don´t understand. Surely, it is impossible to be male, and feel female: Logically, that is impossible. You can feel unhappy, but how does the trans movement change that?
@@WUB0105 ln no way did l say l was unhappy. This was about the transcendental side of being a child. What does a woman feel like. Over 4 billion answers would be correct. What does a male feel like? This becomes the point of transsexualism. I am male, grew up with males and still can't answer that question. This isn't about being a woman. It is so more complex when you understand biology/science and reality. I have no idea is what l am trying to say. This is brain developement. Not girl brain. It is about hormones acting incorrectly between my brain and reproduction system. We are not anywhere near understanding this condition. We are still looking at simple theories as hsts/ agp and a trans ideology/queer theory. As a straight male to have to take the opposite sex/gender hormones, well this becomes where we need to focus study. I would surmise to say that agp, which is not transsexual, it is a male sexuality and some of them transition, are more than likely to have suppressed hsts. They will hate that. But logically, if you have grs, then you are no use to a woman because you are not a lesbian. See what all this hand held device information has done to reality. I have no answer, only l have some differentiation as a male/female. For you to further your education on the subject, look up transcendence. No judgment hear, just trying to partly answer your question. I am very happy, but require no surgery. Thankyou for asking.🦄
@@BarbieBarb-i3x So your answer is basically that you have no idea? It never ceases to amaze me how superficial these answers from men who ought to have found some depth by now are.
Transcendence is trans ideology nonsense speak right out of the Jack Turban playbook. It's religious/cultist terminology.
All I get is that you think you feel better on hormones. It just sounds like drug use. Like you say you're nowhere dealing with underlying issue and seem very uninterested in finding out.
There seems to be zero evidence for the hormone in utero theory except as a possible factor in sexuality but even then it's rather tenuous.
Do you use women's spaces? Do you "live as a woman"?
Or just take the hormones?
Whe you transition in my country you have to have psychiatric monotoring and endocrine monitoring to be able to recieve hrt. This is a complex condition and the change mentally and emotionally for me on hrt is incredible. And my brain new what it needed. If you take a contraceptive pill with to much testosterone you may be able to feel some of this and how hormones affect every part of our lives. My doctors say l don't have any other mental conditions and am pretty much normal.Where the transcendent part comes in is kind of lime in Brave New World where at the end after all this mental conditioning he still new his native self. Of course l am not a woman. I am a male. I can describe it to you as l am a male, not a man. A woman, not a female. Which if you can get your head around a male woman it is like if you can't open a jam jar and ask me to try. So many things in my life are so much easier naturally now. Studies on hormones during fetal developement are not fully studied because of the complexity. It is a complete mind f..k to explain but easier to live it. Somehow l'm just me. There isn't really the full emotive effect when we type. So sometimes we lose sight of what os meant when we read things. Seriously, l feel more attuned to myself like this. Being around guys is easy when it's about things and stuff but emotionally l just don't understand men. My brain has never been on tjat level. It was mpre l learnt to compete with them from a young age so l didn't get beaten up all the time. What did they beat me up for? Because l was a girl. I grew up thinking thete was something wrong with me because boys picked on the girls. Look, in my own mental state, yeah l am a woman. But outside of myself l tell women l am male. Most women l meat can tell but just treat me as one of the girls. It is pretty much effortless for them. I could ramble on for ever about it but it take another 59 years to explain to you and you still wouldn't get it. If you were to meet me in person, you would have more of an idea as to my being. Unfortunately the biggest voices come from trans ideologists and men whose sexuality is agp. I don't believe in trans ideology or spectrums or agp or the transgender umberella. I am still attracted to females although l would like to be treated like a ladie. That makes it difficult because most women are into men. A lot of men with agp are pushing Blanchard theory and won't agree that l am not hsts or agp. Hope this gives you more to question, we should never stop learning. Always welcome your response. And of course, you don't have to believe or understand any of this. Or even care. You asked, l try to help.🦄
Although I love this channel and the work they do and so will tick the "like" button as always, in support, this particular episode did not "grab" me like some of the others as it's sending my head round in circles. However noting your comment, ( as I started reading the comments whilst trying to understand the episode but gave up) you remind me very much of how someone I know describes themselves. Because of the age you state you are it is very unlikely that you are the same person but it is interesting to me because that is pretty much how their feelings were expressed as well. There never is one answer one explanation, one "solution" or one "type" of most things in my opinion.