Talk:Transgender

	This Gender related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

As an inborn characteristic

If anyone has ideas for this section or sources they can submit here, I can perhaps try to incorporate them. Originally the page just had the "brain science" section, which I feel is (if given alone) a weaker premise for biological origin than it looks. So I want to give more weight to other research relevant to this. I have on my mind twin studies, the PCOS-FTM link, genetics, the autism-transgender link (I will approach this cautiously — no worries), the non-heterosexual/transgender link, and the intersex-transgender link. I wonder if there's anything I'm forgetting. Chillpilled (talk) 22:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Also, if anyone has any idea where this study went, I'd love to know. Sadly, I have a hunch that it simply never received funding. Chillpilled (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Where is Bright Guardian Akira?

I think she is a notable transgender person. So in a nutshell, she is a Warrior Cats YouTuber and such and such.The Krusty Krab (talk) 17:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

At current the YouTubers included have no less than a million subscribers, unless they're also notable for some other reason, only example of which I immediately spotted was Emma Ellingsen who has 427k and along with that is notable for being a model appearing in magazine covers, newspapers, etc.

I debated adding Kalvin Garrah for another example but decided against despite his notoriety of sorts, his subscribers aren't even as high as Ellingsen and he basically disappeared a couple years ago.

In short, if we included every trans person as notable as Bright Guardian Akira (who to be honest I had never heard of before this section was opened), the list would become insufferably long. Chillpilled (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

“A Warrior Cats YouTuber.” You have to be fucking kidding me. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

This section only further cements my view that YouTube is a harmful social contagion. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

There are 300,000 channels with 100k+ subscribers. Do all of them deserve a mention on RW?

Also, googled BGA, I got what appears to be a furry channel. Unless Akira becomes famous for something else beyond a bunch of subscribers, they aren't really notable. CorruptUser 00:33, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@CorruptUser P.S. Akira goes by she/her pronouns. P.P.S. Warrior Cats is not furry stuff. The Krusty Krab (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Why do we have this listicle anyway? I don't see how the whole section is useful to be honest. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

To me, it's useful to illustrate the diversity of the trans community (particularly career-wise, as there are some stereotypes here) and introduce readers to interesting trans individuals they may not have otherwise heard of. Especially those who have made scientific contributions or are notable for some historical reason. I have had plans to create a history section, albeit more community-wide focused than individual-focused, and for the moment this is kind of a stopgap for that purpose too, listing some trans people from thirty or more years ago (and especially 70+ years ago as such figures fade into obscurity it can be helpful to re-highlight them).

And also, I inserted some trans authors who wrote important books on various aspects of transgender topics (Sandy Stone, Shon Faye, Julia Serano, Susan Stryker); these authors are often still alive today and giving their views on trans topics. Many of the musicians (and other entertainers) are very well-known within their genre, but a reader unacquainted with said genre would likely not have heard about them. Chillpilled (talk) 00:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I'm sold. I'll add Deirdre McCloskey to the list later. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Elagabalus

Should the Roman Emperor be seen as trans - this refers.

The case for Elizabeth I of England is less clear cut than suggested - she was using the terminology of the time. Anna Livia (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

As your source itself states the whole thing may be "ancient hostile propaganda meets presentism." We have no solid evidence Elagabalus was actually a transgender woman.-Flandres (talk) 20:04, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

That source is the Daily Mail. Accounts from Philo and Marcus Manilius in the first century mention trans people in the Roman Empire (see here, here, and here). I would say the presentation of Elagabalus as trans is dubious for the reason given, that it may have been a character assassination, but equally it might not have been. It also shows that this was a concept the people of the time could have heard about. Chillpilled (talk) 20:25, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Though, here I would think the Daily Mail would be completely pleased to link trans people to a short-governing emperor with a reputation for "extreme repulsive degeneracy"! But I guess there are other myths more important to advance first, such as "trans people suddenly appeared some ten years ago". Elagabalus's apparent complete disregard for social norms makes me think: why would his enemies need to make this particular part up? The aspect about wanting to give away half the empire for a genitalia replacement is pretty extreme though, which does make me think it could be character assassination. But I have to confess to not knowing enough about Elagabalus nor those enemies in question to know their character and whether they would do/lie about any of these things. Chillpilled (talk) 20:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Trust me, Roman writers were more than willing to make shit up about people they hated when they already didn't need to. Emperors viewed as "bad" were attributed almost every form of atrocity or degeneracy that the writer could think of. It doesn't help that one of our chief sources for Elagabalus is the Historia Augusta, which even by Roman standards is in a class of its own when it comes to sensationalized lying at every turn.

Also, where are the public inscriptions or coins portraying him as female? Since he cared so little about offending his subjects there is no reason for him not to do so.

The burden of proof is on the people suggesting Elagabalus was a transgender woman. They have failed to provide that proof.-Flandres (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

The topic of 'trans etc in various parts of the ancient world' is worth mentioning in RW - as is 'modern prurient interest (whether academic or popular). The position of eunuchs in such matters is possibly too marginal for RW. Anna Livia (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

There's a BBC article to get rid of the stench of the Daily Fail.

Personally... this declaration from the museum seems premature. From what I am reading from the Elagabalus Wiki article, much of the statements characterizing him as trans comes from Cassius Dio, who is not considered the most reliable narrator by any means. There's probably better sources to document transgenderism in the Roman Empire, if such is a goal. BobJohnson (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

On the more general topic, I'm gathering sources. There is a page on the other wiki, transgender history. I'm not sure whether I should make a whole page such as that, with a summary of it here, or if it should only be a section here. And if it would be a section here, how to structure it (as I've got plus will get more of a lot of stuff; I think a timeline would be awkward but that's how I'm structuring my notes). I think I'd need to shorthand the references a bit. I've been trawling news archives to find more obscure late-modern cases (you won't always find them on Wikipedia or sometimes anywhere at all!), which is kind of fun. Even on the other wiki, that page seems to omit stuff you could find on other of their pages (though some of its inclusions are also to some extent debatable, similar to Elagabalus). I could certainly throw something together here soon but I don't know about doing that yet. I kind of want to know as much as possible first and also have more of an idea how I want to communicate it. I think something I want to communicate is general trends, using cases I find as examples: I found a late/mid 1800s case where it was clear that there was prejudice. I have found accounts that suicide was an issue (these you can find yourself relatively easily: Magnus Hirschfeld and Jennie June mention it around the same time). Chillpilled (talk) 23:38, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I think it's important enough to have its own article. Transgender people have a long and frankly undercovered history that deserves to be brought to light. Carthage (talk) 23:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

For nonbinary history, there's the Public Universal Friend. I don't know if they have an article here or not. Carthage (talk) 23:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Public Universal Friend and Chevalier d'Eon socially transitioned within only a year of each other funnily enough. Chillpilled (talk) 23:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Which were the 'esoteric cults' in the Roman Empire which were cross-dressing etc - and Nero went in for less-ordinary (by Roman or our standards) relationships, while the use of namecalling etc by Cassius Dio, Suetonius 'and others of their ilk' indicates that such activities were known about and considered possible.

There are aspects covered by this thread as they actually existed in various parts of the Ancient World, and then there are modern interpretations according to various theories and positions of the present day - which might not be the same thing. Anna Livia (talk) 00:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Non-binary vs. trans

So it seems to me that there's either a misunderstanding or perhaps a difference of opinion, on whether or not non-binary people are trans on this wiki. This came up because many sections both here and on the Non-binary gender article refer to it as such, and just recently because of an edit about Judith Butler. In my experience, as a person who talks with interacts with both trans people and non-binary people on a near-constant basis, being non-binary is not, de facto, being transgender. Non-binary trans people invariably exist, but one is not a subcategory of the other. Maybe other people feel differently, and I'm open to that conversation, but I think assigning transness to all NB people is not accurate to what I've seen. Monochroma (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Butler was assigned female at birth, describes feeling alienated from that assignment, and has since legally transitioned genders. Straightforwardly transgender. Why is there supposed to be some special case here just because their identity is outside the binary? You know other, completely separate people who don't like the word "transgender" being applied to them, and happen to be non-binary too? I could go around citing edge cases of binary trans people who didn't like the specific term "transgender" to make this same case. Why treat it like some kind of dirty word and as if the word has no definition? Chillpilled (talk) 20:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why you're being so adversarial. I'm not calling it some "dirty word" and acting "as if it has no definition", and saying that I am feels extremely bad faith. I am stating, as a matter of fact, that many non-binary people do not identify as transgender. Here are several different sources showing this to be the case. I don't particularly care about Judith Butler's characterization, because I don't think they would care, either. Transgender and nonbinary identities are necessarily entangled with self-identification. Non-binary people say they are not de facto trans, and there's data to back this up. Treating non-binary as a subcategory of transgender is not a given and is not remotely a universally agreed upon position. As such, writing this page as if they are plainly so is inaccurate. Monochroma (talk) 10:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Butler only straight up said "I’ve been identified variously as butch, queer, trans* for over 50 years." But gee, who's to say? Chillpilled (talk) 11:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

As for adversariality, I considered it an erasure attempt or perhaps basically a headcanon about a real person. I see this kind of thing in trans history all the time, no matter how much evidence for someone being trans/gay/whatever there is, meeting any of several definitions, no amount of evidence is accepted unless the person announced "I AM TRANSGENDER!", certified by a notary of course. Chillpilled (talk) 11:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I just said I don't care about Butler being categorized as such. It's not what I'm actually talking about. Why are you insisting that we continue to talk about it? I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the general categorization on the wiki of nonbinary and transgender identity. Monochroma (talk) 15:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I misread you. I thought this lack in overlap in identities was a lot less common than it is, too. Chillpilled (talk) 07:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm glad we've cleared that up, then. In any case, this is just something I think we should be conscious of when editing about this topic in the future. Most of the time it's just going to be a matter of wording. Monochroma (talk) 12:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Barely coherent transphobic screed

Ahoy, matey! Beware, for there be a great sea of Concern Troll Bullshit ahead!

The article and this entire wiki needs to fix its position on transgender people. This site is Fully dedicated to a 100% pro trans view and I am not sure that it is truly correct. I am not anti trans I just think transgender ideology is not falsifiable. Trans people do exist but does it mean there view of themselves is legit or just a mental illness? Fundamentalists exist too but does that mean fundamentalism is true. Transgender people use a few arguments that.I will debunk below.

TRANSGENDER PEOPLE KILL THEMSELVES

Answer; this is emotional blackmail. If creationists threatened to harm themselves every time someone said the creation story is nothing but a myth would you believe it.

TRANS PEOPLE EXIST IN OTHER CULTURES

Ok yes they do but just because it is a thing in other cultures doesn't mean it is true.

ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC PROOF

Ok some people have provided actual scientific proof of trans being legitimate. But wouldn't this require gatekeeping . any one can say they are transgender does it actually mean there are

So in short we should debate this topic more. That doesn't mean that we should make the site unsafe and hostile to any trans users just that we should debate. ^{— Unsigned, by: 2601:152:A80:4D30:A088:C1E5:6C7D:AB29 / talk / contribs}

There were some major issues with the old gatekeeping regime. One of these was that it strictly enforced gender stereotypes on transgender people. If someone wasn't strictly gender-conforming and heterosexual (from the viewpoint of their gender identity), they would usually be rejected from transitioning treatments. There was a whole complex of expectations from doctors like that. And it caused poor doctor-patient relationships, because transgender people learned to just lie to their doctors and present a total conforming picture of themselves in order to get treatment. Some form of gatekeeping might be advisable, that's debatable (I don't necessarily agree but I can see why someone would support some gatekeeping — I'm talking about light stuff such as really making sure someone knows what they're getting into), but I think this is the background that looser care protocols evolved out of. It was kind of in reaction to how twisted and stringent the old systems were.

Doctors have to measure different risks (costs/benefits) against each other, and in this case one of those risks is that a patient might e.g. malnourish themselves to stunt puberty (if they're a minor) or try to get their hands on non-prescribed hormones (whether adult or minor), the latter of which can involve some really inadvisable behavior like taking birth control (as an MtF). Chillpilled (talk) 00:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

To the OP, saying that "anyone can identify as transgender" in the suggestion that people will do so inauthentically is entirely hypothetical. Sure, we can take that premise as true, but then despite that, only a very small percentage of the population identifies as being trans -- what best explains that? Also you can say the same thing about being gay, or bisexual, or lesbian, etc. Anyone can say they are gay, but what does that entail? I don't think that entails that we should form policies around the possibility of some people "pretending to be gay" to restrict gay people's access to certain kinds of healthcare services (i.e. HIV testing, LGBT+ friendly therapy, etc), or that we should roll back employment protections, or anti-housing discrimination laws designed to protect gay people. Some gay men can be predatory, but we don't then conclude that we should limit gay men's access to bathrooms or changing rooms on the small chance that some gay guy may sexual assault another man. "Anyone can identify as x inauthentically" being a universal statement that speaks modally isn't a falsifiable statement either. If falsifiability is a standard for acceptability then you may want to reject any and all possibility-specific universalizations. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 00:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

There are always shit-stirrers and dishonest people. But when implementing policy we want there to be more benefit to people rather than cost, overall. You don't want to create policies that hurt or hinder more innocent people than they help. An example of a policy that I could see having more benefit than cost, would be restricting prisoners from being placed in women's prisons if they only began expressing a trans identity post-arrest or post-imprisonment (but to accommodate those who did in some other way as well). This would probably benefit more people than it'd hurt possibly even by orders of magnitude. In like 95-99% of cases with gatekeeping towards trans people: the cost/benefit ratio does not seem to be on its side from my perspective. But then, I don't take a perspective of valuing cisgender lives over transgender lives, which I've come to think is a bias some people do have whether they admit it or not, or at least view cisgender as so "default" that that means it's "inherently desirable" so we should have as few trans people as possible (perhaps zero, as Janice Raymond and Michael Knowles et al. advocate) and policy should reflect it. Chillpilled (talk) 01:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Driver's license update and notable people

As of 2024 Florida is banning driver's license gender marker change so it's no longer all 50 states.

On a more positive note, Lena Raine should absolutely be credited for more than just Minecraft contributions, and that reminds me Maddy Thorson should be added too as the lead creator of one of the greatest 2D platformers ^{— Unsigned, by: Zmovie / talk / contribs}