Lavern Cox is Not a Woman--Biological Fact?

[Guest DesiB]

Sadly, we have too many people within our own community who actually agree with this. They may prefer to say it in a kinder and gentler and qualified manner (by segregating sex and gender), but ultimately, this is what I have heard supported right here on Laura's:

"Regardless of the question of whether he has had his genitals amputated, Cox is not a woman, but an effigy of a woman. Sex is a biological reality, and it is not subordinate to subjective impressions, no matter how intense those impressions are, how sincerely they are held, or how painful they make facing the biological facts of life. No hormone injection or surgical mutilation is sufficient to change that."

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/379188/laverne-cox-not-woman-kevin-d-williamson

This kind of thinking will never change as long as we keep treating our brains as being separate from our bodies to say things like, "I was born into the wrong body." That makes us sound delusional. No, I was born mixed and now I'm fixed (I like that phrase.)--to the extent medically possible. Sure, we can argue about the dissatisfaction with how much we are capable of achieving medically. But we cannot deny that we were not born 100% one sex or the other.

Our brains are just as vital to our bodies, if not more so than any other part. So yes, it matters if our brains, from birth, do not match our genitalia. That is something that can be fixed, even if all the other systems (such as the reproductive system) cannot. It is typically a safe assumption for a delivery doctor to assume that when she or he sees certain genitals on a baby, the baby's sex can be accurately declared. But we know this is not always correct.

The truth is that birth sex assignments are just instant (normally accurate) assumptions and that in reality, sex is composed of several complex systems--both internal and external. We all wish it was simpler, but some of us are painfully aware that it is not. So let's just please think about which side of the debate we are aligning with in the big picture as we have our internal debates with each other and ourselves.

[Guest LizMarie]

Our sense of identity is in our brains, not elsewhere. This is why a male soldier whose genitals are blown off with an IED is still male. The determination is not in his genitals. And it is not in our genes.

One in 30,000 women at birth is XY. There have even been fertile XY females who have given birth.

One in 100,000 males at birth is XX. They've even fathered children, although all females.

Genetic variances include Klinefelter's babies (XXY) most of whom are male but not all. If genes determine sex why are they either male or female?

Then there are the XXXY and XXXX babies, and even more variations beyond that. It's far safer to say that nature loves diversity, not black and white binaries.

Nothing about biological sex is simple. BIologists have discovered that even being male is something that any mammal must continue to force on itself in order to maintain those biological systems. Every fetus at conception and for the first several weeks is female structurally. All of them. It's only the hormonal wash, beginning when the sex glands descend from the base of the brain to the pelvis during the 8th-16th weeks of pregnancy that anything male can even arise and because it's hormonally based, all sorts of variations can easily occur.

So don't fret, Desi. Statements like that are just ignorance trying to masquerade as "reasonableness" when they are nothing of the sort.

P.S. Kevin Williamson is a known bigot. I wouldn't pay him or National Review too much mind. They have it in for people of color, women generally, LGB folks, and now apparently trans folks as well.

[Guest Ky_Ki]

Honestly I do agree with the general sentiment. Although I hate how it is used against us. While I acknowledge that there are many complexities regarding biological sex - in general a biological woman is a person who's genes are xx, was born with a vagina,vulva,uterus, and such, has a completely female brain structure, and naturally produces high levels of estrogen etc and low levels testosterone etc. Obviously there are rare cases where individuals are born without some of these traits but transgender women are consistently born with none. When I wish to be female, those above things are what I wish for. It's untruthful to claim that transgender women are indeed sexually biologically women. Gender sure, absolutely. But not sex. We claim that in order to foster societal acceptance But there is absolutely no reason that society should treat them as anything but women if that's how they present. But that is most definitely woman/female in the gender sense of the word. With current medical technology you are not going to change your biological sex. I know that is frustrating, I hate that fact, but ignoring it just gives the hate groups ammunition by being able to claim we're deluded and ignoring reality. Much better I think to make the claim that transgender women have a true internal gender of female (which science has begun to back up) and the claim that we choose to live as such. Just because someone might never be biologically the sex they want to be, doesn't mean that society shouldn't embrace them when they try to get as close as they can. A real problem is that the gender and sex nouns are the same and therefore the statement "x is a woman" is both true and false depending on how it is interpreted and who is reading.

[Guest DesiB]

Thank you, LizMarie, for reinforcing all those reasons I do not even appreciate being distinguished from a "GG" or a "genetic woman."

I realize that I am not like all other women or even most other women and that is the terminology I use--simply, "other women." But all women are not just alike in the first place.

Ky Ki, when you say, "It's untruthful to claim that transgender women are indeed sexually biologically women. Gender sure, absolutely. But not sex." you are the one giving ammunition to claims that we are deluded. Are you denying that the brain has sex differences or are you denying that the brain is biological?

My brain is the most vital part of my biological functioning and I know it is female--at least it is far over on the female end of the sex spectrum.

If they want to start using more than just two biological sexes for identification, then many of us might fit into other categories. But with the current binary options, I'm not deluding myself by considering the most important part of my body as the decisive factor in determining my sex--especially now that I have taken measures to align the rest of my body as I possibly can. Total strangers recognize me as female on a daily basis where ever I go and I do not think that ought to make me feel deceptive in any way.

[Guest Ky_Ki]

On the contrary I am claiming that the brain has distinct physical differences (visual cortex, sexual response, areas devoted to spatial awareness, and more) based on biological sex. While I can not speak for you personally, large studies of trans people have been done and shown that the physical brain structures of trans people mirror those of their birth sec - NOT that of the gender they're transitioning towards. This is with the exception of one smsll individual structure in the brain that did differ from cis-men and was more similar to cis-women. This is why I say that science might support the idea of gender being different from birth sex (assuming from the evidence that this one structure has something to do with gender identity) but that the idea that trans women are biologically women has few legs to stand on. I don't like it any more than you do, but the fact is, at least as far as modern science has shown and assuming you're a relatively average trans person, you and I have nearly entirely physically male brains. We may or may not think or act in a male fashion but the physical structures are nonetheless.

I don't think this gives ammunition to the haters, because as I said before I think the battle needs to be about societal acceptance of people who act different from the norm and the freedom to be acknowledged as whatever they'd like to be. To me, denying science simply because it makes us uncomfortable gives haters more leverage than they could ever hope for and a way to completely forestall arguing by simply dismissing our arguments as the words of lunatics who won't listen to reason. I don't see how it helps.

I'm not arguing that being trans isn't real or isn't biological and I'm certainly not arguing that society shouldn't treat those who present female as female (or male for that matter) and give everyone the respect they deserve. I'm simply saying trans women (or at least most trans women) are indeed not (yet) biologically female in any really meaningful way. The sooner we get that boogeyman out of the closet and out into the light the better. So what if the sex isn't female? The gender is and we actively modify our bodies and try as hard as possible to live as such. Society should treat us as such and respect our wishes if that is what we ask of them. That's the more important argument that is much more difficult for us to lose.

[Guest LizMarie]

Ky, I've seen studies on nearly a dozen important brain regions that are thought to interact with an individual's sense of gender identity and in almost all cases, the transgender person does have several brain structures like the biological sex with which they associate, not their birth sex.

Here's just one of many.

Here are some more:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21195418 (MTF)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20562024 (FTM)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18980961 (MTF)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18761592 (MTF)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18056697 (MTF)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23224294 (MTF)

The major area where MTF brains are similar to biological males is in grey matter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19341803

I think it is incorrect to say that our brains do not reflect female structures because the science says that we do, in many cases. But we don't have perfectly feminine brains either, and that may not even be necessary since the areas that are differentiated from our birth sex may be the only ones needed to "feminize" our brains sufficiently.

I think it's more accurate to say that we have important brain structures that are feminine but that our overall brain structures (and neural responses) are unique and we should be respected as not simply male or not simply female rather than being pigeon holed into a particular gender binary slot.

[Guest Ender]

As a scientist, I agree strongly with DesiB and Liz Marie. As someone who is both transgender and in love with a woman who is transgender, I consider this pretty much gospel. A transwoman was never fully male and can never be fully male - her brain is structurally intersex. The same in reverse is true for transmen. The sentiment reported by DesiB expresses that much of society is ignorant and even bigoted toward transgender people. I would argue against that sentiment by saying that a transperson is intersex prior to transition and that no medical intervention can "make" someone's gender different (a woman is a woman, for God's sake!). What SRS can do is take someone from being physiologically intersex to being male or female. If SRS is performed, a transman is fully male and a woman is fully female. Not all people are fertile so, fertility is not an indicator of sex. A biologically female person has a female brain and female sexual anatomy. SRS can provide this if desired so, viewing transgender people as other than the sex whose aforementioned brain-body criteria with which they match is bad science, bad policy, and hurtful.

[Guest LizMarie]

Very well stated, Ender.

[Guest LizMarie]

Desi, here's another article that may assist you in that discussion. It makes the very salient point that focusing only on chromosomes is fundamentally limiting and incorrect.

http://skepchick.org/2011/12/bilaterally-gynandromorphic-chickens-and-why-im-not-scientifically-male/

[Guest Fiona]

This kind of thinking will never change as long as we keep treating our brains as being separate from our bodies to say things like, "I was born into the wrong body." That makes us sound delusional. No, I was born mixed and now I'm fixed (I like that phrase.)--to the extent medically possible. Sure, we can argue about the dissatisfaction with how much we are capable of achieving medically. But we cannot deny that we were not born 100% one sex or the other.

NOw I understand what you meant in the other thread. And I agree. That doesn't mean I'm just as confused about terminology.

[Guest DesiB]

Desi, here's another article that may assist you in that discussion. It makes the very salient point that focusing only on chromosomes is fundamentally limiting and incorrect.

http://skepchick.org/2011/12/bilaterally-gynandromorphic-chickens-and-why-im-not-scientifically-male/

Thanks for the excellent article with many great points, including the very limited role of the Y or the second X chromosome in humans who are all made of the same fundamental cells.

Getting further away from human examples, we can see in certain reptiles and birds that sex can be changed (even long after birth) without changing genes at all. So even though it is popular to say that men are from Mars and women are from Venus--all men and women have the same biological/physiological heritage--we only seem so different in appearance (except in one tiny little area), after we've gone through puberty.

[Guest Jennifer T]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

[Guest Ky_Ki]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

That's exactly the opposite of what the majority of posters here are arguing.

[Guest Melissa~]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

Oh heavens no. With both genetic manipulation and more sophisticated reproductive surgeries happening as a matter of course in the future. The argument that women with a TS past aren't women will simply be altered as needed to fit a modified discrimination paradigm. This is an ongoing thing.

[Guest Jennifer T]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

That's exactly the opposite of what the majority of posters here are arguing.

I know. I was actually addressing your posts. Honestly, for myself, society doesn't need to tell me this. I've been doing so to myself most of my life and am far harder on myself than others are. Your comments seemed to pare it all down for me.

Peace.

[Guest Ky_Ki]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

That's exactly the opposite of what the majority of posters here are arguing.

I know. I was actually addressing your posts. Honestly, for myself, society doesn't need to tell me this. I've been doing so to myself most of my life and am far harder on myself than others are. Your comments seemed to pare it all down for me.

Peace.

Oh well in that case, then sort of yes. Though my argument encompassed more than just genetics. As far as I'm concerned there is no way for me to truly become physically female and there might never be. Even if medicine takes dramatic steps forward and we can implant genitals grown from stem cells and change our DNA. It's not the same thing as having a natal female body. At best I'd be slightly less intersexed (though I do like the interpretation of transgender people as intersexed rather than male/female at birth.)

[Guest Jennifer T]

So then, to summarize, my genetic biology makes me a man. And no matter what I do to change that physically, until such a time as gene therapy becomes something that allows me to change my chromosomes I will always remain a man. That it?

That's exactly the opposite of what the majority of posters here are arguing.

I know. I was actually addressing your posts. Honestly, for myself, society doesn't need to tell me this. I've been doing so to myself most of my life and am far harder on myself than others are. Your comments seemed to pare it all down for me.

Peace.

Oh well in that case, then sort of yes. Though my argument encompassed more than just genetics. As far as I'm concerned there is no way for me to truly become physically female and there might never be. Even if medicine takes dramatic steps forward and we can implant genitals grown from stem cells and change our DNA. It's not the same thing as having a natal female body. At best I'd be slightly less intersexed (though I do like the interpretation of transgender people as intersexed rather than male/female at birth.)

There will come a time when I am truly female. And there will be no doubt.

[Guest LizMarie]

As the article I posted notes, once a transwoman transitions and if she has SRS, how can you tell?

The brain has been found to be structurally similar to female brains.

The biochemistry matches female biochemistry and you can't tell the difference from a blood test.

The only differentiating factor are the chromosomes, but we also know there are XY females (AIS babies) and they've even found XY females who are fertile and have given birth. One such XY female gave birth to an XY female daughter, who is also fertile. Is she female or not? How can you argue that she's not female? She's even given birth.

So the critical thing is not your genes. It's not your genitalia. It's your self-identity, in your brain. And while MTF brains are not "normal" female brains, they fit within the overall patterns for female brains, just at some of the extremes. And they do not fit in male patterns for male brains except in the gray matter region and even that is dubious because there are rare females (XX females) who have such gray matter complexes.

I would suggest that trying to find hard and fast markers that say male or female is falling into the trap of assuming gender is binary.

Nature loves diversity. Nature tends towards variety, not strict black and white definitions. There's XX, XY, XXY, XXXX, XXXY, and a few more even.

So I think applying simplistic perspectives about genetics to a topic that scientists themselves admit is extremely complex just places unnecessary limits and burdens upon ourselves.

[Guest DesiB]

As the article I posted notes, once a transwoman transitions and if she has SRS, how can you tell?

The brain has been found to be structurally similar to female brains.

The biochemistry matches female biochemistry and you can't tell the difference from a blood test.

The only differentiating factor are the chromosomes, but we also know there are XY females (AIS babies) and they've even found XY females who are fertile and have given birth. One such XY female gave birth to an XY female daughter, who is also fertile. Is she female or not? How can you argue that she's not female? She's even given birth.

So the critical thing is not your genes. It's not your genitalia. It's your self-identity, in your brain. And while MTF brains are not "normal" female brains, they fit within the overall patterns for female brains, just at some of the extremes. And they do not fit in male patterns for male brains except in the gray matter region and even that is dubious because there are rare females (XX females) who have such gray matter complexes.

I would suggest that trying to find hard and fast markers that say male or female is falling into the trap of assuming gender is binary.

Nature loves diversity. Nature tends towards variety, not strict black and white definitions. There's XX, XY, XXY, XXXX, XXXY, and a few more even.

So I think applying simplistic perspectives about genetics to a topic that scientists themselves admit is extremely complex just places unnecessary limits and burdens upon ourselves.

Very well-stated!

[Guest Jennifer T]

I just read the studies that Liz provided links to. It seems to me that biologically speaking the best any of us (trans) can claim with scientific authority is that we are, well, trans.

But science falls short when it comes to the areas of humanity that often define our being; those of heart, soul and spirit.

Peace

[Cyndee]

The argument that women with a TS past aren't women will simply be altered as needed to fit a modified discrimination paradigm. This is an ongoing thing.

Totally agree, it never ends, they'll just pick on something else, since this person Lavern Cox is visable at the moment (I think she is a very attractive woman).

Besides your personal Dr and/or health care providers, honestly nobody cares or sees your XX / XY / XYZ in daily life, so what !?.

[Guest ChrisHughes]

If i may post?

The thing about biology is that it changes over time. There was a test many years ago that found most of the female olympians had male chromosomes. Odd isnt it? because of this, they began looking for other means to determine. chromosomes is no longer used to determine this sort of thing. The reason many still use it is because it nearly became a crutch to satisfy the need for their opinion/argument on this bases. scientific studies continue to prove the complete existence within gender/sex that is beyond the physical frame. At one time it was just a look between the legs and this was how it was determined but that is nearly no longer the case. We also can not forget many other births that need to be added into this argument as well. Those with both,none or all spectrums, who are born.

If a human was born with only a brain, how would gender/sex be determined? and if it was,how would you picture this taking place?

Using myself as an example: knowing my back ground,what i was taught,how i felt,who i knew i was,even down to how i sat- was because of my body or my brain? and does one void the other?

Yes it is very easy to continue to follow a well known guideline but if you are not willing to adjust to science then you get lost in it.

Unless SHE proves biological fact that she is indeed not a woman, then i feel the rest is void. I feel personally that this is a form of (sorry but i must be honest) hate speech and harassment. Once one has transitioned fully, you then do such against their gender/sex, even if it is one you disagree with. it is as if you did this before their transition and the same would apply then as well. do you recall this debate ever coming up for a cis born? of course not. there is no need to disprove their existence (transition). But yet most do not even know they may have male chromosomes or female. they go their life being what they work to disprove. Biological fact is only within foundation. it shapes, it turns, bodies mold, and in which,every *fact* then becomes non fact and constantly needs researched. So in theory,there is no such thing as fact. We do know the basics of the human body and how men and woman differ but this is ALL we know as fact. do we know if men can be born with everything female but yet a male body? No. this is still being researched and as someone posted,much of that has gone into brain development. Which has proven mind you, that it is possible to be born with the brain chemistry of one gender and the physical as another. This is a good place to get a jist of what this means. http://www.majickalproductions.biz/bekasite/resouces/In-Womb%20Development.htm

[Guest LizMarie]

Human identity is in our brain. Period.

Our genitals are incidental to that. Otherwise a male soldier whose genitals were blown off by an IED would be female. Yet he's not. He is recognized as male because he identifies as male.

Men who have surgery due to cancers and lose either the testicles, or rarely, the testicles and most of the penis are still men, because they identify as men.

Women born without vaginas are not questioned when they have surgery to build a new vagina. They are women. Because they identify as women. The XY women, some of whom have even given birth, are never told they are men. They are raised as females and identify as females.

The XX males who are born as males and some of whom have even fathered children never are told they are females. They are males, because they identify as males.

Klinefelter's babies (XXY) can be male or female. The genes didn't decide that. They simply laid groundwork and the fetus chose one path or another based on additional factors (usually hormonal) during development.

Given this rich background about sex and gender, why is it so hard for some to come to grips with the notion that someone can be born with an essentially female brain in a male body or vice-versa?

[Guest Sarah Faith]

Given this rich background about sex and gender, why is it so hard for some to come to grips with the notion that someone can be born with an essentially female brain in a male body or vice-versa?

Cultural and community based perspective. Really I could go far beyond those two influences on perspective as the answer to your question is pretty complex. Really what it comes down to is that our entire society does not consist of Left-Leaning activist minded individuals, most people simply do not care about the situation in the same way trans people do. The research is all still pretty preliminary, because again society as of yet just doesn't care enough to invest the money to prove anything one way or the other, so that is one thing that can easily lead people to ignore the things you mentioned. The other is that even if all of the science was in and everything was proved to near certainty you would still have people who are set in their beliefs and would ignore the science.

So ultimately the answer to your question is that... your experiences and life leads you to see things the way you do, and theirs leads them to see things completely differently. Can people be communicated with, and reasoned with? Yes I have seen it done but usually only with patience and kindness. Usually when one is pushy or aggressive about pushing our point of view though people tend to get defensive and stick to their own beliefs even more so. Even then, its important to understand and accept that some peoples minds will never be changed and it is unlikely there will ever be a world where every person on the earth will accept that point of view. Even if our gender identity does become widely accepted there will be those who cling to their own perspective just to spite mainstream culture.

[Guest Jennifer T]

Human identity is in our brain. Period.

?

Really? And with such certainty?

Sorry, I cannot agree with that comment. Far too simplistic and overreaching in scope.

We are all very complex. And our brains are organs that take process information delivered to it from the senses and every other organ in the body. And it calculates everything it believes based on many many factors. Yes, I believe some things are intrinsic. I also believe others are not.

But to illustrate a simple problem with your ideology, if you get a pet or procure livestock or even simply classify animals in the wild, how do you determine if they are make or female?

In humans, we deal with self actualization. I get this. But I think identity is not simply a brain thing.