It's a piece of crap, really. ħuman 03:45, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
- And the hate on so many sexually advanced speakers and thinkers, from this one blindered perspective, is incredibly embarrassing. ħuman 04:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
- Remember to write something about Trans* panic--Token Conservative (talk) 13:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Pseudoscience section could use expansion
Currently, the "pseudoscience" section of the article focuses entirely on autogynephilia. This is only scratching the surface in terms of all the pseudoscientific nonsense mustered to attack trans* folk. The most common I've seen, from wingnuts and TERFs alike, is the "biology is transphobic" argument. The people who use these arguments claim that science is not on the side of transgender people because "you can't change your biology" or similar, framing it as TruFax vs. political correctness. Recently, someone on the GMOLOL Facebook group, who I thought would know better, argued about "sexual dimorphism" in humans as though this was some inescapable reality. She ended with what was basically a strawman, claiming trans advocates think that "a small number of intersex people means sexual dimorphism does not exist." I did not engage her, as I did not wish to argue with someone with TERF sympathies in a derailed discussion, but it got me thinking about how poorly informed the public is about this topic. To someone not well-versed in biological sciences, this can be frighteningly convincing, making it important for us skeptics to promote scientific literacy in this area. In this example, her argument is bunk because sexual dimorphism consists of phenotypic differences, i.e. secondary sex characteristics. These can be changed with HRT, so human dimorphism is something we can control using medical science (and so not destiny). Another little nugget of info to use against the "But biology!" crowd is that actual biologists recognize no less than three types of biological sex: Genotypic (genetic), gonadal (genitals), and phenotypic (the aforementioned secondary sex characteristics). Phenotypic and to some extent gonadal sex can be changed, and while genetic sex can't be changed (as far as I know), biologists consider it the least important type when assessing the sex of animals, especially where it contradicts the other two. Anyway, I'm surprised there is little on this wiki in the way of debunking transphobic cargo cult science. It would be cool if we had a more thorough takedown of the transphobic argument cluster, perhaps similar to the FAQs we have on nuclear energy and GMOs. The One They Call Mars (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
could anyone tell me how to change wikipedia
seems like the wikipedia entry on radical feminism on terfs is incredibly biased in favor of them; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism#Views_on_transgenderism
what can i do?
- More or less the same as you can do here - so long as you conform to WP:Neutrality. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
support of conversion therapies
Is there really going to be no examination of the common belief that people who advocate that effeminate men/masculine women should be converted and surgically/chemically altered is transphobia? Or is that out of bounds since there are official psychological associations that share such a bigoted view? — Unsigned, by: 184.108.40.206 / talk / contribs
- If you wish to add it, then go ahead and add it. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 17:56, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Add it Bazer63 (talk) 15:52, 04 January 2015 (UTC)
Transphobia and Non-bianry idenities
- One person one gender is the goal. I'm a transmenstrualhemorrhoidwouldbelabia and I deserve respect.220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I didn't want to have to do this, but here's the talk page section. Call Gerard or one of your other monkeys to ban me if it becomes necessary, I don't care. I know that the section is horrible and I will stand by that view. If Aleksandra96 (I don't know how to usertag) wishes to rewrite it and justify their claims with faulty evidence then that's fine, but the section is snarky with no point of view because it presented nothing to view other than its own assertions, with no sources, links or even a "for example" clause.--18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I obviously don't believe autistic trans people are just following a special interest. I am autistic and trans myself. Gender is a special interest for me now, but only after I came out. Before that, I had a different special interest, but still woke up thinking I should be female, had gender dysphoria, and wanted to be a really convincing crossdresser because it was the closest thing to actually being female. Also, special interests are usually temporary, whereas gender identity is usually consistent.
But why would it matter if autistics were likely to be trans or have gender dysphoria (not the same thing)? Autistics are more likely to have depression, anxiety, OCD, epilepsy, and IBS. Nobody would say that this proves these disorders are just fixations or attempts to find acceptance. Maybe LGBTQIA+ communities should stop trying to distance themselves from the icky autistics?