Opinion Five lies TERFs tell about the trans community – debunked

Link (Archive)

Five lies TERFs tell about the trans community – debunked​

Sadly, there is still too much misinformation that targets trans and non-binary people in service of an anti-trans agenda.

Many of the arguments made to justify transphobia stem from either a misguided gut feeling about how humans are supposed to function, or conspiracy theories spawned from discredited studies or reports.

However they come about, no lie is bigger than the claim that trans people either don’t exist or aren’t valid.

We’ve debunked just a few of the myths that transphobes and TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminists) rely on when attempting to explain away the existence of trans and non-binary folks.

1. Autogynephilia​

Through the 1980s and 1990s, controversial American-Canadian sexologist Ray Blanchard published a series of psychological papers on the typology of transsexualism that, to this day, is used by trans-exclusionary groups to define trans women as men.

In his research, Blanchard claimed that transgender women could be categorised as either “homosexual transexuals” – individuals who he claimed are attracted to men while presenting feminine – and “non-homosexual transsexuals” or “autogynephiles” – individuals who Blanchard claimed are sexually attracted to the idea of wearing feminine clothes.

Despite the research being widely dismissed – including by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) – as the flawed findings of a researcher who would later go on to tell VICE that he believed trans people should be defined by their biological sex alone, the terminology is still used by so-called ‘gender-critical’ groups across the world.

The false notion that social transition is a byproduct of sexual orientation or fantasies has been debunked multiple times, including by prominent biologist and activist Julia Serano who said the theory promotes “male-centric presumptions” about women and LGBTQ+ people.

In a report from July 2020, Serano noted that Blanchard never took cisgender women into account when conducting his research. Later studies would find that 93 per cent of cisgender female subjects had experienced fantasies consistent with Blanchard’s theory of autogynephilia.

“Given that sexualisation is a tried-and-true tactic to dehumanise and socially exclude marginalised groups, it is unsurprising that social and religious conservatives – who routinely condemn women and LGBTQ+ people for their failure to conform to gender and sexual norms – increasingly invoke autogynephilia in their attempts to disparage transgender people,” Serano said.

2. Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD)​

The Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD)conspiracy theory was first introduced in 2016 after physician Lisa Littman hypothesized a “potential new subcategory” of gender dysphoria which arises through a nebulously defined ‘social contagion’.

The theory and the research it stemmed from were so discredited upon publication that Littman herself was forced to issue a corrective statement effectively admitting that ROGD should not be used as a formal mental health diagnosis.

Despite this, many gender-critical publications and groups use ROGD as justification for disregarding the needs of trans youth.

One of the biggest glaring issues with the research was that Littman had not interviewed any trans youth for a study about trans youth.

The research was purely built on the observations of parents who had been found through biased websites that suggest gender dysphoria or gender identity could be “socially contagious”.

Transgender academic and activist Florence Ashley has criticised and disregarded the findings, saying they came from parents who were “already encourage to view their children’s identities as false beliefs”.

“[The] biggest problem with the study is that Littman fails to consider alternative, more plausible explanations for her obervations,” Ashley wrote.

“One of the main findings of the study is that children’s mental health and parent-child relationships deteriorate after coming out. Littman interprets this as evidence of a new subgroup of trans adolescents for whom social and medican transition may not be indicated.

“However, parental acceptance of gender identity is a well-know predictor of mental wellbeing for transgender people and children who are not supported in their identities are unlikely to want to maintain a good relationship with their parents.”

3. ‘There are only two genders’​

Anti-LGBTQ+ bigots who use this argument usually do so under the guise of ‘basic biology’. They claim trans and non-binary people can’t possibly exist because even the most simplistic biology textbooks either say there are only two genders, or being transgender is never mentioned.

Proprioception is also rarely mentioned in school-grade biology textbooks about human senses, but it is a valid and true sense regardless.

People who use this argument tend to confuse the term gender – which is a social construct and always has been – with biological sex, which they believe is scientifically immutable.

But even this isn’t true. Not only do intersex people exist in nature, but species across the animal kingdom have shown signs of either changing between sexes or consisting of multiple sex distinctions. For some, it is even an innate part of their reproductive cycle!

One example of this is gynandromorphic stag beetles, which have both male and female sex characteristics. Since stag beetles have noticeable sexually dimorphic traits – the scale of different characteristics between two sexes – this can be abundantly clear when seeing one.

Humans, on the other hand, display relatively limited sexual dimorphism compared to other species, meaning that the distinction between male and female sex characteristics – characteristics, not gender – is significantly less pronounced.

Sexual dimorphism is also far more complicated than simply comparing characteristics between sexes, since, again, intersex people exist. It turns out biology might go a bit further than the school-grade biology textbooks anti-trans bigots constantly urge people to read.

4. Being trans is a phase​

Detransitioning is a tricky topic because of the reputation it has received for being used as a way to discriminate against trans people. Regardless of what anyone says, detransitioners are still valid, so long as they respect that being transgender is a real, legitimate thing.

That being said, detransitioners constitute such a small portion of those who apply for gender affirming care that, regardless of the validity of detransitioning, it should not be used to outright reject trans and non-binary people.

In the UK alone, a survey of more than 3,000 gender identity clinic applicants found that 0.47 per cent experienced transition-related regret and even fewer actually went on to detransition.

Statistics are less clear in the US, with anywhere from 2-8 per cent of respondents to a 2015 survey of 28,000 people saying they had detransitioned in some capacity.

What is clear, however, is that a whopping 62 per cent of respondents to that survey detransitioned not because their identity was a phase, but because of the maliciousness of transphobia.

Additionally, the idea that being trans is a phaseoften leans on the ‘social contagion’ conspiracy theory.

Anti-trans naysayers argue that children often pretend to be superheroes, but parents wouldn’t fuel the so-called ‘delusion’ that it was true. This, in itself, is a red flag since it is built on the idea that being trans is all just make-believe.

Trans youth care gender specialist Darlene Tando said in 2020 that much of the disbelief about the validity of being trans is because “cisgender people can’t really envision living life as a different gender”.

“They think if they tried they would ‘change their mind’ because it would not be authentic,” Tando said, “which is ironic if you think about the fact that all transgender people are really trying to do is be authentic.”

5. Trans people aren’t valid​

Yes, they are.

Trans women are women, trans men are men, and non-binary people are valid.
 
Trans community investigates self, finds they are completely normal... and it's their critics who are the deviant assholes.
 
Última edición:
1. It definitely is real. Shut up, YWNBAW you fetishist sicko.
2. What do you think skyrocketing LGBTQASDFG are then if not ROGD? You think kids WANT to be troons because they actually feel unmanly? No, it's for clout and/or easy pussy! It's very easy to sell your dick as a "girldick" and yourself as "trans" in a self-ID state and bang all the stupid leftoid bitches.
3. YES THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS YOU SICKO. Fetishes are not a gender, neither are genuine birth deformities, and neither are hobbies unusual for your sex. I and many other men will never forgive the potential tomboy gfs you took from us.
4. It fucking is a phase and/or gaming the ridiculous system. Stop making fake bullshit up.
5. You will never be a real woman. You have no womb, you have no ovaries, you have no eggs. You are a homosexual man twisted by drugs and surgery yada yada you already know how the pasta goes.

TOTAL. TROON. DEATH.
 
Muh heckin troons and pooners and non-binaries are valid because I said so!

:story:

Who are you trying to convince? Us, or yourself?

1473.jpeg
 
I wasn't any kind of "radical feminist" when I got called a TERF and SWERF the first time.

These are not radical ideas:
'Radical' does not mean 'extreme', it's from the Latin word for 'root'. The feminist split was between feminists who wanted to focus on addressing the root causes of misogyny (radicals) and feminists focusing on pushing legislation to fully equalise the genders under law (liberals).
 
and non-binary people are... fuck, we don't even know, they sort of give away the game. They're valid! Yeah, that's it, valid. While it is true that some are invalids, that does not invalidate their validity.
They're in another binary of Binary Genders and non-binary genders.
1699897444285.png
 
OK THAT one trigger me ngl.

Human sex determination scheme is XX / XY. XX individuals will make gametes all with sex-determining chromosome X, XY individuals are going to make gametes that are either X or Y. Fucking this up through a nondysjunction event doesn't invalidate the sex determination system, it just means you have some poor unfortunate cripples with aneuploidy disorders.
Also, most intersex people still have either an XX or XY genotype, because a lot of intersex disorders involve androgen insensitivity, constitutive activation, or some other downstream problem.

I'm going to kill them for mangling Biology like this one day I swear.
The vast majority of these freaks are male, except for that famous british and indian who actually looked 100% female, hideous but still female; But the tranny defenders will not let you rest until you accept that every single genetic aberration/abomination could potentially be female.
I try not slide down the slope or play by their rules, but I do enjoy flipping it on them with the "So, your parents are related eh?"
 
In a report from July 2020, Serano noted that Blanchard never took cisgender women into account when conducting his research. Later studies would find that 93 per cent of cisgender female subjects had experienced fantasies consistent with Blanchard’s theory of autogynephilia.
Oh my god. This is a whole new level of degeneracy. I think I might be sick.

"No, bigot, I'm not a sick freak because my dick gets hard to the idea of me wearing women's clothes! I actually only fantasize about being plowed in a dress because my brain is the same as every other woman's!"

Humans, on the other hand, display relatively limited sexual dimorphism compared to other species, meaning that the distinction between male and female sex characteristics – characteristics, not gender – is significantly less pronounced.

Go fuck yourself, you gender blob. I'm renovating my entire house right now and I have to carry a ridiculous amount of crap to and from my car, by myself. Is that because of a social construct? No. It's because I'm literally twice the size of the woman who is helping me in every other aspect. Limited sexual dimorphism, try 10 inches of height and probably 50 lbs on average, you twat.
 
Última edición:
Despite the research being widely dismissed – including by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) – as the flawed findings of a researcher who would later go on to tell VICE that he believed trans people should be defined by their biological sex alone, the terminology is still used by so-called ‘gender-critical’ groups across the world.
Oh, well if the worldwide tranny research group says the research has been dismissed, who are we to argue lmao
including by prominent biologist and activist Julia Serano who said the theory promotes “male-centric presumptions” about women and LGBTQ+ people.
The "biologist" (and "woman") in question. Gee, I wonder why "she" might be opposed to this research on homosexual transsexuals lmao:
1699898046775.jpeg
The theory and the research it stemmed from were so discredited upon publication that Littman herself was forced to issue a corrective statement effectively admitting that ROGD should not be used as a formal mental health diagnosis.
Here is the struggle-session in question.

In short, it in no way "discredits" the original paper; it merely adds context that the troon squad infecting social sciences and psychology demanded.

In short: this phenomenon literally first described in the paper is not a "formal mental health diagnosis" (duh, this is the first paper describing it in depth) and that they didn't ask the insane children about their feelings (rather, they asked their caring, loving parents about the horrors of watching their beautiful teenage daughters becoming zippertits). That is it.

My favourite quote that the troons writing this "epic debunking" just seemed to ignore:
It has come to light that a link to the recruitment information and research survey was posted on a private Facebook group perceived to have a pro-gender-affirming perspective during the first week of the recruitment period (via snowball sampling). This private Facebook group is called “Parents of Transgender Children” and has more than 8,000 members. This means that parents participating in this research may have viewed the recruitment information from one of at least four sites with varied perspectives.
Basically, what happened is the author plastered links to her study on dozens of tranny-parent sites, this pro-troon FB group got wind of it and made a post containing links to 4 of those sites which had a more gender-critical slant, and went "look at this horrible anti-tranny researcher trying to bias her own data! Let's all fill this out and show her what a real ally looks like!".

It is telling that the results still indicate ROGD is a real phenomenon, despite this obvious attempt to fuck with the data by agenda-driven white women whose children were insufficiently oppressed to satisfy their Munchausen-by-proxy syndrome.
People who use this argument tend to confuse the term gender – which is a social construct and always has been – with biological sex, which they believe is scientifically immutable.
There's some historical revisionism if I've ever seen it! But I suppose once everyone who was alive in the 1980s is dead, all the textbooks will say that gender and sex were never used synonymously and there won't be anyone left who can disprove that. History is written by the clinically-insane victors, after all.
But even this isn’t true. Not only do intersex people exist in nature, but species across the animal kingdom have shown signs of either changing between sexes or consisting of multiple sex distinctions.
Some people are born with 6 fingers; doesn't make us a "6-fingered species". If your strongest argument for mutilating yourself is that some people are born with deformities, consider taking toaster-bath.
In the UK alone, a survey of more than 3,000 gender identity clinic applicants found that 0.47 per cent experienced transition-related regret and even fewer actually went on to detransition.
From the article; emphasis mine:
Patient assessment reports created between August 1st 2016 to August 1st 2017 were scanned electronically for words related to detransition or regret. The reports that were retrieved in the search were reviewed by study authors to identify evidence that patients had detransitioned or expressed regret related to their transition. Data extraction included patients’ age, gender identity, gender assigned at birth, and descriptions of their detransition or regret.
Results and Conclusions
Of the 3398 patients who had appointments during this period, 16 (0.47%) expressed transition-related regret or de- transitioned.
Well golly-gee, I wonder why the people who continue to attend your transgender clinic, where you give them hormones and surgery, don't have many detransitioners actively seeking treatment? Maybe they stop coming to your tranny-palace once they decide they're making a huge mistake? Let's check a different report from the UK:
Results: The treatment pathway was completed by 56.1%. All interventions initially sought were accessed by 58%; 94% accessed hormones but only 47.7% accessed gender reassignment surgery; 21.7% disengaged; and 19.4% were re-referred. Multivariate analysis identified coexisting neurodevelopmental disorders (odds ratio [OR] = 5.7, 95% CI = 1.7-19), previous adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) per reported ACE (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1-1.9), substance misuse during treatment (OR = 4.3, 95% CI = 1.1-17.6) and mental health concerns during treatment (OR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.4) as independently associated with accessing care. Twelve people (6.9%) met our case definition of detransitioning.
So, 44% of people didn't go through with it, including 21.7% who started and then stopped, 6.9% who went through with it and then changed their mind, and 19% who were referred for other mental health issues... which is good, because being a tranny apparently comes with a 5.7x higher chance of being "neurodivergent", a 1.5x chance of being abused as a child, and a 4.3x higher chance of being a drug addict... basically, they're all Keffals (Lucas).

Keep these fucking lunatics away from your children, put a filter on your Internet, don't let them watch anime (the gateway drug to trannyism) and don't let them talk to Discord groomers. If your son comes home with cat ears or painted nails, send him to military school.
 
3. ‘There are only two genders’
It's an interesting strategy to lead with pointing out the equivocation which allowed you fuckers to confuse everyone in the first place. Yes, english speakers often would swap "sex" for "gender" when they mean "sex".

The problem is you're walking into the form of the argument which is actually weaker by going for the fringe and claiming that edge cases and completely different species are at all relevant to human sexual dimorphism. Sure it sounds strong to bring up a counter example to the norm, but what you actually did was dismiss the gender argument entirely which is far more confusing and easy to get lost in the weeds of, leaving you with "but muh intersex", which anyone with a functioning brain can point at and say "that's the exception to the rule and doesn't change the rule, or the obvious bulge/stank in the room which betrays you".
 
Última edición:
The entire TL;DR of the entire article is: "Want proof that transgenders are women? TRANSGENDERS ARE WOMEN, BIGOT!!"

As someone who was alive during the 2000's religious-right culture war, the modern woke left are no different than the fundamentalist Christians from the previous years. I used to argue with bible-thumpers all the time back then, and they would give me shitty brainlet pamphlets "deboonking" evolution. Every single arguement consisted of "Oh, so you think evolution is real! Oh yeah, well it's not in the bible! Checkmate, atheists! Oh, so you think the earth is billions of years old? Oh yeah, well not according to the bible! Checkmate, atheists! Oh, so you think god isn't real? Well, the bible says he's real! Checkmate, atheists!"

This sort of thought process (or lack thereof) was prevalent among fundamentalist Christians I knew IRL and on social media. Any arguement you presented about why you're non-religious -- no matter how well-crafted and rational it was -- was instantly refuted with "Oh yeah? Well god's real and the bible is real! Take that, atheists!"

Woketards and the LGBTBBGHDTV+ community are no different. You can tell them a million times that XX/XY chromosomes are permanent and that a man simply can't become a woman because he updated his pronouns on social media, and the immediate rebuttal is, "Oh yeah? If he's not really a woman, then why are transwomen women!? Take that, TERF cis scum!" (+10,000 Reddit updoots)
 
"Noooo, you're wrong because I said so!!!"

How many of these article do they need? It seems like a new one comes out almost weekly saying the same things. Is this some kind of retarded attempt at brainwashing through repetition or a belief that if they say it enough times it automatically becomes fact/true?

I also get a strong "who are you trying to convince" kind of feel from these.
 
Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo