I was just thinking ...

Hi,

I was just thinking I had not written much on here for a while, being busy with the bike blogs and screwing up some part orders.

Then I stumbled upon this on facebook:

I wrote a reply, and as I was writing it I thought, "hang on its getting long winded, why not expand this into blog?"

So I have. ;-) 

Here's the reply:

As a trans woman, this meme is funny, but maybe a little unhelpful. Or perhaps incomplete. It's problematic because it conflates biological arguments with sociological ones and creates "a fact" from a categorical definitional argument that is somewhat subjective. It cites a same argument premise that is used by the opposition to denigrate trans rights. "namely i believe it, therefore its fact therefore all contrary opinions are wrong" In doing so any detractor or discussion is shut down as inappropriate, whether you agree with the bottom statement or not. Food for thought perhaps.

So, to expand on that:

Firstly I'm going to say I broadly agree with the meme. Or, at least the part that says trans women/men are women/men. I agree with it's inclusive sentiment. However:

Lets take the first statement. 

"Saying that some some women have a penis and some men a vulva and is biologically accurate".

Two questions need to be asked here. 

1) Is it true?

2) And how would we know this? 

1) Some people are born with indeterminate or ambiguous genitalia. Some are born with what appears to be normally formed genital antomy, and then later in life express feelings or desires that would lead them to identify with an "opposite" social gender group in some way. The first people we call "intersex", the second group "trans". The reasons as to why this occurs are wrapped up in discussion of anatomical, physiological and genetic human development. Thus it centres around the male and female categories. These terms are still being un picked, due to the erroneous conclusions of an early 20th century biologist being given false credence. However it is the case that some people who present in the social groupings of  "women" or "men" may have genitalia more commonly associated with an "opposite" gender group. 

(I go in to much more detail on this here )

Thus the first statement may be true. I say "may" and the reason for that will become apparent shortly. 

2) We know this much because of research and the existence of both trans people, and intersex people. Research into the brain, human in utero development and multiple studies be they anthropological sociological or otherwise. Plus simply just talking to people.

Let's take something else that seemed odd. If the first premise can only be proven to a level of "may be true" then what of the second ascertain?  Since it uses the word "because", one has to believe the second premise in order to believe the first as they are written: 

"Because trans women are women and trans men are men and your opinion on the matter does not change that fact". 

The meme further digs a hole here by stating that trans women are woman and trans men are men as "fact" Yet "a fact" by is it very definition is something which we "believe" to be true, usually due to evidence or what we call proof. For example how many known facts have we humans proven to be false over our history? Specifically in the realms of scientific discovery? It was once a known fact that the sun revolved around the earth for example. 

Thus a "fact" is a movable feast. It is merely the commonly shared belief that something is true to the best of our knowledge at the time in question. In other words a "best guess" given the available evidence. 

Indeed it was "a fact" that females genetically had XX and males XY until very recently. Similarly this fact is now being disproven. Thus to hang an entire argument on the validity of what one believes to be "a fact" may see that argument fail when/if the "fact" is disproven. 

So, given that I am in the pro trans camp how do we pitch this whole premise onto more solid tera firma?

By recognising that the evidence suggests that there may be biological arguments that back up a widening of the sex categories. By recognising that the social categories of man and woman may need redefining to indclude those previously excluded on the basis of old out dated "facts". Therefore engaging in debate on how this should best be achieved. 

And crucially: By refusing to cite "facts" as a reason to shut down discussion of the issue and thus label any detractors to the concept as "wrong" bigoted" "outdated" etc. 

I'd rewrite this as: 

"Saying that some some females have a penis and some males a vulva is biologically correct".  Therefore trans people are valid, and they deserve to be treated as such. "

My biggest gripe with this meme is that it speaks of inclusion whilst shutting down discussion. It speaks of, or alludes to the rights of the trans population with out inviting discussion as to why. And finally it leads those who have for years based notions of gender on genitalia and xx/xy which was after all a known "fact" to disengage from the debate since they believe our "facts"  to be based in fallacy, and that our unwillingness to discuss them is evidence of a lack of evidentiary backing. 

These are the very people we need speak with and to. To educate, and not simply shut the door on. 

If we shut the door, some people may see that as taking a stance against detractors and the nay sayers.  But if we shut that door, discussion and knowledge cannot progress. Decisions as to what role the trans and intersex concepts play in human society cannot be made. 

In short. Trans cannot grow behind a door shut to the possibility of discussion and debate. 

Those who oppose the validity of trans concept will always debate. Therefore so must we. 

Sarah