Scientific Evidence

[Flint]

scientific evidence that we're not all mental?

I Know there apparently is some, but is it backed up by anything? Or are we just all reading it and believing what we want to believe without looking at the whole picture?

Why do I ask? I'm not saying we're all mental, I don't think we are. I just wondered it'd be helpful to me if there was some scientific evidence and not just that but actually something that backs up the evidence.

Anyone help me out here?

[JJ]

Matty,

There is quite a bit of solid scientific evidence with more emerging all the time.

I kept some but not all of my links from my research on the subject. The first one has quite a few studies cited. The revevant info is lower on the page.

I believe RJ follows this and may have more good sources.

From what I have read the scientific community now considers that transgender is a physical birth condition. And it has been proven to exist in almost every mammal species.

Here are my links. And I think they also work when coming out, to prove this isn't a choice and can't be changed or denied.

http://www.tsroadmap...ism-causes.html

http://jcem.endojour.../full/85/5/2034

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20562024

http://www.sciencedirect.com-There are numerous articles here under transsexual and transgender but they don't save searches long & my links have expired

The section on "Sexual differentiation of the human brain" has several references cited on the findings that TS individuals have brains matching their gender identity rather than their physiological body. Some of the parts of this article lack references but this section is backed up-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

John

[Flint]

Thanks JJ. I'll look through those links and try to understand best i can.

[Remus]

I know just this past year France struck transgenderism/transsexuality off their dsm-iv (or its equivalent), officially declassifying transness as a mental illness in France. And, from memory, it was a unanimous vote to do so. Something from that, like initial inquiries or findings or something may have concrete scientific evidence.

[Flint]

Glad it's been taken seriously in some places.

[Guest Lily B]

That entirely depends what you mean by mental.

Since transgendered-ness is an unusual condition, there are definitely definitions of mental by which it could be truthfully stated that the tansgendered are mental.

However, that forces the inclusion of a large number of other unusual mental characteristics which most people would not consider a sign of being "mental". Moreover, if certain people die such that an unusual characteristic now becomes the norm, then that quality would cease being a sign of being "mental". Therefore, anything labeled mental by this definition is not necessarily wrong or problematic, although it could be.

On the other hand, if by "mental" it is meant that the brain is operating in a way that it is not supposed to, then you would have to demonstrate that transgenderedness is something which should not happen. And, although I would like the contrary to be the case, this is different from saying that it causes problems for the afflicted

[Flint]

When I say mental I guess I mean as in that we're deluded that we're not really the gender we say we are, that we actually have some form of mental condition that makes us unable to think properly and therefore we come up with a conclusion in our heads that we're someone else.

I don't believe this. But I know many people who do.

They should try telling my childhood self that I wasn't a boy. But they fail to see that even as a child I had my own feelings some of them unexpressed.

[Carolyn Marie]

Matt, I think John has a great set of sources there, and I don't have anything to add.

One thing that is troubling, though. I used the search term "transsexualism and delusion" just to see what I would come up with. There were

over ten hits, all citing that article on the British guy who changed genders twice. It appears that the conservative and Christian media

have picked up on it and are now using it as "proof" that we are, indeed, deluded. I hope that idiot rots in You Know Where.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Quinn]

Wow, I honestly didn't realize that even this many studies had been done - I thought it was still all hypothesis and "if only we had funding to do more research" and stuff. I mean, obviously more research would be lovely, I'm just saying I'm very happy to see these!

Honestly, I think it'll make coming out to everyone a tiny bit easier. I'll have to put the results in normal human speak, and hopefully they'll get it, but still. It's more than I had before.

[Guest Samurai_Kid]

I'm not quite understanding what you mean by "mental" but..

I remember seeing a documentary that had a part about this boy. It was an old experiment where they tried to see if you can change a child's gender. They raised one boy of a set of twin brothers as a girl, yet he still thought of himself as a boy. He committed suicide after he transitioned as an adult, I believe.

Also, I've heard of studies where a transsexual mind was more similar to their genders mind then their birth sex' mind.

[Guest N. Jane]

I remember seeing a documentary that had a part about this boy. It was an old experiment where they tried to see if you can change a child's gender. They raised one boy of a set of twin brothers as a girl, yet he still thought of himself as a boy. He committed suicide after he transitioned as an adult, I believe.

That was David Reimer - the case is well publicized.

[Guest Sally G.]

Another link:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060529201743/http://www.desexposed.org/aboutdes/dessons5yrstudy.html

and another:

http://www.gires.org.uk/Text_Assets/ATypical_Gender_Development.pdf

The top link is about a link between an estrogen prescribed for pregnant women who were at risk of miscarriage and the susbsequent risk of developing gender dyphoria. Basically the probability changes from 1:30,000 (ts prevalence as determined by the medical community) or 1:500 (ts prevalence as calculated by Lynn Conway) to 1:3 (ts prevalence in DES sons!!!).

The bottom link is available through the tsroadmap site John linked to above, but is the best summary I have found into the causes or etiology of ts.

[Guest N. Jane]

Although it does not address underlying "causes" I found "Why Gender Matters" (Leonard Sax, Broadway, 2006)helped me to understand my life to a degree I never did before. This book outlines the general developmental differences between boys and girls and helped me to understand WHY I had such a strong and persistent feeling (during childhood and adolescence) that I had been miss-gendered. The feelings/beliefs arose directly from the fact that my psycho/social development had been typically female.

[Guest Sally G.]

Another couple of links to powerpoint presentations:

http://oiiaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/ecker_brain_gender_identity_332.pdf

Warning file is 2MB. Seems to date from 2009 or 2010 (based on 2009 reference cited).

http://drdrantz-sciencesexuality.blogspot.com/2010/07/powerpoint-slideshow-disordered-or-just.html

If you click 'view on slideshare' and then in slideshare click 'full' a full-screen display will appear. This presentation was first given in July 2010 and I found to be a really good summary of the history of the science behind variations in sexual development and variations in gender development, including conflicts between incompatible ideas. Again a large file.

Aroha

Sally

[Guest Deena]

I just read the paper on sally's bottom link and TGism is very clearly stated to be physiologically based. Excellent read!

[Guest Sally G.]

After reading both the scientific literature around transgenderism and various posts on this board and writings from within the community it strikes me that there is some confusion around what the science is.

My take on it is that there are currently two streams of scientific thinking, broadly the behaviorists and the physiologists (could also be stated as nurture versus nature paradigms).

The strictly behaviourist approach began to falter in the 1980's as the Joan v. John story (ref. John Money) began to emerge (i.e. there was something innate about gender and it wasn't purely a product of nurture as had been contended in the late sixties, early seventies). Broadly speaking broad acceptance of the behaviourist approach has been in decline for several decades. The auto-gynephilia controversy is almost a last gasp by the behaviourist school to lay claim to 'knowing' what transexualism is.

The physiologists have made significant progress in recent years following on from the early work of Milton Diamond, with the seminal paper of Kruijver et al (2000) marking a major advance (the BSTc region in mtf brains is the same as for natal females while men and ftm have a different structure). More recent work is further solidifying the physiologists position. New research is slowly giving the physiologists the ascendancy in this battle of ideas.

Two things arise from this. The most prominent of the behaviourists (Zucker, Blanchard, Bailey, Lawrence) are all in the latter stages of their careers (50's and 60's probably). For these people to admit to the physiologists position would effectively relegate their life's work to the dustbin. Because of these people are in the latter stages of their career they occupy positions of influence (Zucker is chair of the DSM revision panel looking at gender issues) and are still able to promote their ideas and exclude the work of the physiologists (who by and large do not contribute to the DSM which is the province of psychiatry and psychology).

Within the broader tg community both these streams of thinking will be joined together as 'the science'. Much of the older (pre-2000) writing within the community is working solely within the behaviourist framework. When reading some of these older writings with the physiologists framework in mind flaws become apparent especially around the certainty of definitions. Also the science is advancing not only around gender, but also sexual orietation, inter-sex and the influence of the sex-hormones on the brain itself (i.e. some sex differences in the brain are induced by hormones and some are innate and this is the realm of the nuero-scientists).

The science (body of knowledge) around gender, gender identity and its origins has been and is rapidly changing (1980-2010). This means some of the older ideas around the science of gender (1950-1980) are no longer seen as valid (although they remain in the literature). From my reading of the literature this is most clearly seen in the gradual dismantling of the behaviourists position and the ongoing development and understanding of the physiological basis of transgenderism.

I find it useful to keep this framework of the changing science in mind when reading anything related to tg.

Aroha

Sally

[Flint]

I don't want to offend anyone, actually my motivation for saying this is because I hope someone will sway me off this direction. But I've recently come to the conclusion that it's all a psychological illness. It is in fact our brains that tells our bodies to produce eggs for female bodies and sperm for male bodies. Now going off the fact we all say it's a difference in the brain, how can this be when yet many of us still fully function body wise as female or male in this area? I'm probably going to cause a lot of anger with this, this is not my intention. I've been truthful that I hope to god someone will sway me in a different direction but it no longer makes any sense to me. I'm losing faith in this, but refuse to see myself as girl still.

[Guest JaniceW]

Matthias,

I can certainly hear what you are saying. I see it a bit differently though. Let me write out how I see this so we can discuss the differences in the two perspectives.

The term "illness" has two connotations one is medical and the other is philosophical. Medically it refers to a situation where there is a physical problem that is preventing the condition known as homeostasis (where the body's processes are balanced). Philosophically it menas ther is something that is not in balance with the "norm" adn therefore is considered wrong. Having been trained in the paramedical field I don;t agree with the philosophical implication of wrongness at all, so the word "illness" doesn't bother me. Whether this is an illness or not, it is something I have to do something about because it is interfering with my ability to be happy and content.

That said, I see myself as having two major parts; the somatic and the spiritual. The somatic part is the biophysiology that is my body and the spiritual is the essence that is me, the sentient being that I am. The spiritual part is NOT my brain, my brian is part of the somatic body. The spiritual part is, I guess I could say, inside the somatic part but there might not even be any spacial aspect to that.

The body has a biology to it. That biology has evolved over time from conception to now. At different times certain things were developing physically and those things were affected by the chemistry that was present when they developed. At one point testes or ovaries developed and which one was impacted by the presense of either testosterone or estrogen, once developed the testes make sperm and testosterone and the ovaries make eggs and estrogen.

The spiritual part also has developed over time and part of that is gender. Gender is not as black and white as sex is (but even sex can be fluid when one considers the intersexed). If the gender of the spiritual part is not "in sych" with the sex of the somatic part we have the transgender.

Once I have the insight to realize this part of me I can accept my situation. But that does not trun my testes into ovaries so the biochenistry remains as the somatic part dictates regardless as to what the spiritual part is trying to do. I have to take external action to force the somatic part to be comfortable for my spiritual part.

The comfort that I feel right now is simply knowing that given time my external actions will eventually make me more at peace with my life in general. I do wish that there was magic pill I could take that would make it all OK in 15 minutes, but that is just dreaming, it will take time.

[Flint]

I just can't really get my head around that I'm afraid. As to me spirituality is not scientific. 'spirituality' is a man made idea, belief and therefore is not something of substance to me. However the brain is physical, the body is physical. Our psychology is influenced by environment and stimuli in the brain.

If this scientific research is true then why isn't it more mainstream? as much as transsexualism is often hidden from the media, it's still HUGE news if a science should prove that it is actually a physical thing with the brain. So with that in mind that it's such huge mind, whether the media like it or not it's something that they would surely be reporting? I believe the evidence I have so far read sounds like a great thing for a transsexual to believe, merely because of the fact it brings hope that we're not psychologically ill after all. I'd love to believe it, but for me evidence shows that transsexualism is not a birth defect and is in fact a mental health issue. How it arises I can not say. For some it may be environmental. But clearly not for all. For some it may be a subconscious thing, a hidden memory that triggers it to be too painful to be truthful to oneself that they are in fact the sex they refuse to be.

[Guest JaniceW]

My therapist talked to me about some research that showed that there is, in fact, differences in brain anatomy between male and female. She said that research showed that in MTF transsexuals the brain was anatomically female in many ways while the body was anatomically male. She didn't specifically say so but I assumed that the same was trues for the FTM but reversed. I will ask her for references to the research.

[Flint]

I think what I need to do is try and find so image, physical proof of it. I'm a very visual person and find it very hard to grasp concepts, facts without an image to back it up. (Apparently common in people with dyscalcia) although on the other hand it's also supposed to be a male thing too, that they're visual creatures, hence the theory men use porn to help....because of being such visual creatures. But that is a whole other subject. I guess I'm just trying to find answers that I can feel confident with, because I come from a rather...dare i say it in case someone cares to take a peep at what I speak about on here in my family...a repressed family. I feel like I need some definite proof to prove it to them, and now it's broken down so that now even I seem to need the proof too.

I hope everyone can forgive me

[Flint]

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~bemorton/Hemisphericity/11HemisityRev_files/image004.gif

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~bemorton/Hemisphericity/11HemisityRev_files/image003.gif

On the second picture R-bom means Right brain orientated male L-bom Left brain orientated male. R-bof - right brain orientated female L-bof R- Left brain orientated female.

But with one question still in mind, how come if our brains are physically different we still get periods if we're FTM's or still produce sperm if MTF? To me this doesn't make sense.

[Guest JaniceW]

But with one question still in mind, how come if our brains are physically different we still get periods if we're FTM's or still produce sperm if MTF? To me this doesn't make sense.

Because those things are not controlled by the brain, they are controlled by the hormone levels and the anatomy of the body. The hormone levels are controlled by the gonads (ovaries or testes) and how they react to the brain secreting controlling hormones. So the brain says to the body, "OK, let's up the sex hormones" and if the body has testes then testosterone goes up and if the body has ovaries the estrogen or progesterone goes up. If the estrogen and progesterone balance changes then a period will occur, if there is a uterus then one bleeds but if there is no uterus then only the other physiologic aspects of a period occur (bloating, mood swings, etc.).

[JJ]

Matty

Both the AMA and the American Psychological Association have changed their classification of transgender based on these studies and no longer classify it as a psychological but a physical disorder. I have long subscribed to scientific news and there are frequently amazing discoveries that don't get wide media attention in many fields.

It just isn't news that most people want to hear in the mainstream media's opinion so it wasn't big news. But these are scientific studies - some are listed on government web sites and some on scientific sites not trans support sites. Those sites just don't print panaceas for transsexuals

And then there is the fact that there are transsexual mammals in almost every species. How did they get psychologically ill? Particularly when it has been proven that DES for instance causes transsexualism in some of the offspring in mammals who are exposed to it. I am a DES baby. I have a host of other medical conditions associated with it. And I believe it was a major factor in my being transgender. In fact I suspect that transgender is an sort of intersex condition with chromosomal abnormalities in the majority of cases. There simply has not been enough research due to the expense of the tests and how recently it was accepted that this is a physical rather than a mental condition. Just my personal opinion of course but there is quite a bit of evidence that many, many of us have hormonal imbalances. I suspect it will also eventually be labeled a medical syndrome with a wide spectrum of expressions.

[Flint]

I apologise. I guess my confidence has just been bashed in the last few years and I'm questioning everything I once learnt.