Transgender identities and brain studies

[Haven]

Over on another section of the forum, a discussion began about transgender* identities and their relation to brain-based biological factors. I said that the evidence supports a biological origin for transgender identities, and OpenYourEyes disagreed. What do you think?

To start, I'll offer this as evidence: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn ... rain-scan/


Debate question: Do brain studies show a biological origin of trans identities?

Thread rules:

1. NO PREACHING. This is a debate over the science, not religious interpretations or beliefs. Please kindly check your theistic (or atheistic) beliefs at the door.

2. No bare assertions. Support all claims with evidence, preferably peer-reviewed.

3. No transphobic language. It's perfectly fine to disagree with transgender identities, but misgendering someone (calling them something other than their preferred name/pronouns) or using transphobic slurs ("tr*nny," etc.) is not acceptable.

______
*For those who don't know, a transgender person is someone who has a gender identity or gender expression that doesn't match their sex assigned at birth. A transgender person may identify as a man, a woman, neither, or both, or (under broader definitions of transgender) may identify with their assigned birth sex but have a gender nonconforming presentation (e.g., butch women, femme men).

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 134 by DanieltheDragon]

I think the Op is certainly about whether or not people are putting the cart before the horse. I'm on the side of mind over matter. And I don't doubt that a person with gender dysphoria would show brain imaging that differs prortionately with the degree of 'wishful thinking' that is taking place.

How do you suppose research scientists will quantify 'wishful thinking' so it can be measured in MRI?

The OP asked if transgender identity conditions have biological causes. Cynical personal opinions should be ignored, especially if they are deliberately provocative.

[OpenYourEyes]

It is entirely possible that nueroplasticity plays a role in transgender brain structures. We do not yet understand everything about the brain, let alone all the ways behavior effects our brain structure and even the expression of our genes!

I'm not sure what to say about this, so I guess I'll just express that I find it odd that you agree with the above, yet kept bringing up 'solely biological'.

No one here it seems thinks it is solely biological. You included. Perhaps we can continue this thread with the word 'solely' being off limits since it is truly just a distraction to discuss such an thing? What's the point in arguing for or against Ramen noodles being a cause if no one here finds such an idea as reasonable?

It's not solely biological (or at least not reasonable to think so IMO) nor is it caused by Ramen noodles. Anyone's mind blown here?

Debate question: Do brain studies show a biological origin of trans identities?

Thanks to whoever it was that said (twice I think) that 'solely biological' would be like claiming that your height is entirely determined solely by biology. Nutrition etc... be damned!

My objective here is to counter some of the views that stem from pro-LGBT propaganda. The OP simply mentions biological origins with no further specification, so one valid meaning of that is caused solely by biology. I won't assume that all of the viewers and participants here will understand biological origins to mean biology playing one role as opposed to the sole role. And unless it's specified in the OP, I will go ahead and presume that biological origins is being considered as the sole role just to preempt any misunderstandings.

Openyoureyes. I'm curious, do you have any non biological causes for us to consider (not that it means you hold to them of course) and if so, why?

Non-biological causes for transgenderism? If that, then yes. Transgenderism stems from 'gender dyspohria' and gender dysphoria is just gender identity, except that it's one that doesn't match the biological sex of the person.

There are a countless number of studies that shows that environment plays a role in shaping gender identity. Most of the theories involve gender identity being a learned behavior, learned from our culture, learned from experience, learned from parents, etc. I referenced some studies in post #34. I even took it a step further in post #41 showing people being raised as the opposite sex of their genetic sex, like for instance, a genetic female born with ambiguous genitalia being raised as a man after having sex reassignment surgery at birth. The latter case is clearly a BIOLOGICAL and observable reason for a gender problem but yet in some cases these intersex or pseudohermaphrodites can successfully accept the gender that they were raised as.

[OpenYourEyes]

There are already plenty of threads countering Christian arguments but there are a lack of threads countering pro-LGBT propaganda, that is, until i came along along with some help from both theists and atheists alike.

Could you list the salient claims of pro-LGBT "propaganda" you see yourself as countering here? Is it still this strawman about sexual orientation (or identity) being sufficiently determined by genes, or do you actually have something in mind that figures into most (or much, or even any) advocacy of LGBT rights/equality?

In general, you can say I'm also here to counter ignorance or unscientific conclusions, like the view that people are born gay or that there's a gay gene. I referred you to a poll that showed that 43% of Americans believed that gays are born gay. Recently I watched Bill Maher's documentary called, Religulous, where he mentioned that people are born gay, and later he appeared with a scientists asserting that the 'gay gene' had been discovered. Millions will see this and may very well be misled by this propaganda. You may not see any harm in it, but it doesn't take away the fact that it is propaganda in that it's not scientific.

[Lion IRC]

...Cynical personal opinions should be ignored, especially if they are deliberately provocative.

^^^
This seems like a cynical personal opinion, so guess what I'm going to do?

[Haven]

[Replying to post 142 by Lion IRC]

Referring to gender dysphoria (a real condition that causes millions of people extreme physical and psychological distress) as "wishful thinking" is very ignorant and is deeply offensive to many people, myself included. I realize that your religious beliefs compel you to oppose transgender identities and rights, but could you please show people the respect and courtesy of not dismissing a condition that causes them significant pain as "wishful thinking?"

How would you feel if someone dismissed your Christian faith as "wishful thinking" or a "delusion?" That's how a trans person feels when you invalidate their identity and reduce their dysphoria to "wishful thinking."

Please use compassion when considering those not like you.

[enviousintheeverafter]

In general, you can say I'm also here to counter ignorance or unscientific conclusions, like the view that people are born gay or that there's a gay gene. I referred you to a poll that showed that 43% of Americans believed that gays are born gay.

And, as noted before, many such people are almost assuredly responding on the basis of the common and inadequate way in which this issue is typically framed- as between either being born gay or choosing to be gay. Its not only possible but highly likely that many people who give such an answer mean "people are born gay" to be a denial of choice, not a positive assertion of an absence of any environmental factors. Moreover, that homosexuality is not determined by factors present before birth (for instance, as an interplay between genetics and chemical/hormonal/epigenetic factors during fetal development) has not been conclusively shown anyways (to my knowledge anyways- and that includes sources cited in the various threads on the topic here), so regarding it as ignorant or unscientific is either disingenuous or mistaken anyways.

And even if that wasn't the case, wouldn't you say there are far more pernicious misconceptions regarding homosexuality that should perhaps be prioritized first; like, say, virtually everything commonly asserted/argued by the anti-SSM and fundamentalist Christian crowd?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 134 by DanieltheDragon]

I think the Op is certainly about whether or not people are putting the cart before the horse. I'm on the side of mind over matter. And I don't doubt that a person with gender dysphoria would show brain imaging that differs prortionately with the degree of 'wishful thinking' that is taking place.

Moderator Comment
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'wishful thinking'. It's certainly not a phrase that I find to be used in a civil way ever.
Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 86 by OpenYourEyes]

Mr. Moderator, its one thing to say you dont believe me but it's another thing to continually assert it as truth such as Hamsaka has done. Not to mention that it's a personal comment about me. Are you aware that I created a thread stating my precise reasons why i discuss the LGBT issue a lot on this forum?

Moderator Comment
OpenyourEye - please refer to members by their chosen forum name and or an appropriate abbreviation such as for example, OYE. And whilst there is no rule in having one I suggest you lose the chip on your shoulder.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Lion IRC]

[Replying to post 142 by Lion IRC]

I realize that your religious beliefs compel you to oppose transgender identities and rights, but....

How would you feel if someone dismissed your Christian faith...

In deference to your thread rules which state that;
"...This is a debate over the science, not religious interpretations or beliefs"
I am intentionally ignoring your (off-topic) opinions about my religious views.
I would love to respond but I will not.

[Lion IRC]

[Replying to post 134 by DanieltheDragon]

I think the Op is certainly about whether or not people are putting the cart before the horse. I'm on the side of mind over matter. And I don't doubt that a person with gender dysphoria would show brain imaging that differs prortionately with the degree of 'wishful thinking' that is taking place.

Moderator Comment
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'wishful thinking'. It's certainly not a phrase that I find to be used in a civil way ever.
Please review the Rules.

In accordance with paragraph 3. of the "Policy on responding to moderator actions" I am formally apologising for my inadvertent use of the expression 'wishful thinking' - including the use of inverted commas which were deliberately placed there to indicate that I was using the term in the psychological context of personal desire to be that which a trans person sincerely wishes to be seen as.

I sincerely regret if my casual use of that term causes offence in any way to people here who identify as transgender. I emphatically acknowledge my ignorance of the subtle nuances of language and inference which exist in this sensitive space.

Accordingly I am going to refrain from posting anything further in order to avoid possible infractions.