This is the best explanation I have found. Trans are the new cash cow for a medical industry that is designed to make people ill, to treat them for life.
Bravo, that alone was worth $50+/year. I urge you to tighten up the references a bit, and submit your analysis to a peer-reviewed journal...this is not my field, but there must be some still practicing science.
Another strikingly odd fit between the historical science laid out here is all about Behavior and today's activists have pulled it into the Physical world which in turn flies in the face of many of the arguments that they are "born this way". You're unable to change who you're attracted to e.g. strait/gay, but able to change your physical form to match a cultural stereo type of Man or Woman based on the feeling that you're in the wrong body?
One of the best articles I’ve read on the transgender explosion, and what a great observation (that GNC kids have been told they are transgender), backed by studies over decades. Wow!
This is excellent, Colin! Additionally, all of the studies you cite are from Western attitudes and conventions, behavioral expectations for females vs. males. I can't imagine how variances of "gender conformity" were measured. First, there is no such thing as meta-data in these studies. The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Also, there is no discussion of the pharma combinations being prescribed. Often Finasteride, a very dangerous drug (look up Post-Finasteride Syndrome Foundation) is given to females taking testosterone, to "prevent male pattern baldness." Then there's abilify, wellbutrin, lorazapam, etc.
As the ex-wife of a man who THINKS he is a woman, who, with the help of Dr. Christine Wheeler, deceived me and abandoned our family life for many weekends/evenings for 26 months, I can tell you there is no science. I can write this practitioner's name publicly, regarding her practices, because she wrote it all in a sworn affidavit, with dates and theories, and conjectured about what I felt and thought without ever having met me or spoken to me. It is all there, in her own words, signed and delivered to the judge in the custody case. I paid my attorney plenty to just calm down and respond.
My former husband "thought" that I was "rather masculine" for a woman, (because I'm physically active and like to carry my own suitcase?) and this even fit into his insane mindset that he must have a "feminine brain." Interesting, he's now married to a woman, as the fantasies to have a male lover didn't pan out.
For God's sake, I was nursing our baby and taking care of our three year old by myself while this outrageous charade they call "the true life test" was going on in bars in Greenwich Village. I don't know why he was scouting heterosexual men there, but that's what he wrote about.
Bravo to you Colin Wright, for exposing the researcher bias, financial conflicts of interest and utter non-science of this "speciality" in psychology. It was all politics in 1992, when I found the diaries, and it's all politics now, 30 years later. This made my day, man~
Ute Heggen, author, In the Curated Woods, True Tales from a Grass Widow (iuniverse, 2022)
Brilliant article. I have tweeted a line from one of the paragraphs. We need more sensible scientists to keep writing sense and logic. We do live in a post-truth World but eventually things will prevail. @Mark_Kasozi
Aug 31, 2022·edited Aug 31, 2022Liked by Colin Wright
For puberty blockers the Wpath soc7 only requires gender nonconformity, not gender dysphoria (page 19). Insane. [correction--need long lasting and intense gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria.
then *also* need gender dysphoria to emerge or worsen with puberty--sorry to get that wrong!]
Ok, this was an excellent, highly analytical, data filled article. A related vein to excavate on this has to do with the evolution of feminism, and of humanity's confusion and prejudices about the very difficult multiverse women live in (giving birth, being a mother, being a spouse, being a head of household, being a worker or breadwinner, having a career). Phetasy wrote a heartfelt column about a recent book on this topic with a provocative title about regretting sleeping around. Humanity let's males off the hook, but not females. None of this negates anything in your article, but I'm plenty confused as a grown heterosexual male who's never been troubled in my confused state with additional overlays of confusion about my gender, related gender roles or how society feels about my performance of same (about which IDGAF, which is easier for a male, at least this one, to say). If I had all of that going on at the same time my head would pop off. It's hard enough just clocking in and paying my damn taxes. Humanity gives women a harder time, and more ways to be considered (wrongly) dysfunctional, than it does men. People are great, humanity not so much. Did any of that make sense? Talk amongst yourselves.
"[I]t has been long observed that the sexes differ in the extent to which they display sex-typical behaviors; when there is significant between-sex variation, it is almost always the case that girls are more likely to engage in masculine behaviors than boys are likely to engage in feminine behaviors."
"This is an odd fact given that for most traits males tend to exhibit higher variation than females..."
This is not an odd fact, because femininity and masculinity do not take equal effort. Let's say a bunch of girls and a bunch of boys are lazy and/or can't manage to care about their appearance or clothes. The girls who do that will be deemed masculine. The boys who do that will be deemed masculine. Likewise, when people don't shave anything, it's masculine. When they don't shop or fuss with fashion, it's masculine. People, male or female, roll out of bed looking masculine. They have to go put something on to look feminine.
Let it be noted that these are society's typical opinions on what's feminine and masculine, not mine.
“one of the most striking findings in the present study is the comparatively greater preference that boys show for the masculine role than girls show for the feminine role, a difference that is large and significant.”
Again, this might not be so striking, if, for example, femininity demands deference, takes more effort to perform, restricts the pursuit of interesting activities, etc., as feminists have forever argued.
Gender ideology is such a quintessential example of magical thinking that it's difficult to believe these organizations can sign on to it. I'm all for people acting and dressing any way that pleases them, but there's an element of make-believe to this stuff that I can no longer stomach.
Also, I feel terrible for gay boys and lesbian girls, who may be told that same-sex attraction and gender non-conforming behavior means that are straight trans women or men. Back in the 80s and 90s, liberals like me were all like, "I am who I am...don't put me in a box!" These days it's "Put me in that box! Label me! Categorize me!"
Is there anything much we all do agree on these days? Impressive how opinions reflect such utter polarities. Seems to reflect which sort of media people consume. But the gulf Is enormous.
By these new definitions all the women in my law school class would have been "transgender", especially those of us who chose to become litigators. As it is, we are all happily married to men and have a bunch of kids.
All this "trans care for minors" is both obscene and ridiculously tragic -- as well as criminal.
From the 16th to the 19th century the Catholic Church castrated boys to sing in church choirs and in popular operas. I have a recording from the "Last Castrato," that I bought at a subway station cd store ages ago.
By the end of the 19th century all involved agreed that castrating boys was horrific and banned the practice.
It may be that, since all is accelerated in our current society, we will again reach this consensus in another 20 years instead of two centuries.
By then there will be an epidemic of adults who cannot reach orgasm, cannot have children, their bones breaking easily -- and, they will all look like old freaks while sitting in their wheelchairs. Yet another sad chapter in human social evolution.
But, in another 20 years untold numbers of doctors and pharmaceutical shareholders will be greatly enriched as they make billions on this latest version of neutering.
Interesting theory, and thoughtful article. If I follow you, the data shows that girls are more gender variant on average than men, and the data has consistently shown this for decades, so I assume you attribute the uptick in female referrals to gender clinics to the expanding definition of transgenderism to include gender nonconformity, which was a more recent development? Otherwise, it's hard to account for the new patient population since 2015. I guess I'm curious about when the definition of transgenderism began to include gender non-conformity, which is a point I feel like isn't typically granted too much attention, but is important for the reasons you outlined.
https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/trans-messaging-is-too-sophisticated
This is the best explanation I have found. Trans are the new cash cow for a medical industry that is designed to make people ill, to treat them for life.
Bravo, that alone was worth $50+/year. I urge you to tighten up the references a bit, and submit your analysis to a peer-reviewed journal...this is not my field, but there must be some still practicing science.
Another strikingly odd fit between the historical science laid out here is all about Behavior and today's activists have pulled it into the Physical world which in turn flies in the face of many of the arguments that they are "born this way". You're unable to change who you're attracted to e.g. strait/gay, but able to change your physical form to match a cultural stereo type of Man or Woman based on the feeling that you're in the wrong body?
One of the best articles I’ve read on the transgender explosion, and what a great observation (that GNC kids have been told they are transgender), backed by studies over decades. Wow!
This is excellent, Colin! Additionally, all of the studies you cite are from Western attitudes and conventions, behavioral expectations for females vs. males. I can't imagine how variances of "gender conformity" were measured. First, there is no such thing as meta-data in these studies. The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Also, there is no discussion of the pharma combinations being prescribed. Often Finasteride, a very dangerous drug (look up Post-Finasteride Syndrome Foundation) is given to females taking testosterone, to "prevent male pattern baldness." Then there's abilify, wellbutrin, lorazapam, etc.
As the ex-wife of a man who THINKS he is a woman, who, with the help of Dr. Christine Wheeler, deceived me and abandoned our family life for many weekends/evenings for 26 months, I can tell you there is no science. I can write this practitioner's name publicly, regarding her practices, because she wrote it all in a sworn affidavit, with dates and theories, and conjectured about what I felt and thought without ever having met me or spoken to me. It is all there, in her own words, signed and delivered to the judge in the custody case. I paid my attorney plenty to just calm down and respond.
My former husband "thought" that I was "rather masculine" for a woman, (because I'm physically active and like to carry my own suitcase?) and this even fit into his insane mindset that he must have a "feminine brain." Interesting, he's now married to a woman, as the fantasies to have a male lover didn't pan out.
For God's sake, I was nursing our baby and taking care of our three year old by myself while this outrageous charade they call "the true life test" was going on in bars in Greenwich Village. I don't know why he was scouting heterosexual men there, but that's what he wrote about.
Bravo to you Colin Wright, for exposing the researcher bias, financial conflicts of interest and utter non-science of this "speciality" in psychology. It was all politics in 1992, when I found the diaries, and it's all politics now, 30 years later. This made my day, man~
Ute Heggen, author, In the Curated Woods, True Tales from a Grass Widow (iuniverse, 2022)
uteheggengrasswidow.wordpress.com
BTW, this article is not too long, not too pedantic and is only the start of the revelation of a medical scandal to rival thalidomide.
This is a very well done, insightful analysis, Colin. I sincerely appreciate all the efforts put into this piece. Sincerely, Frederick
Brilliant article. I have tweeted a line from one of the paragraphs. We need more sensible scientists to keep writing sense and logic. We do live in a post-truth World but eventually things will prevail. @Mark_Kasozi
For puberty blockers the Wpath soc7 only requires gender nonconformity, not gender dysphoria (page 19). Insane. [correction--need long lasting and intense gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria.
then *also* need gender dysphoria to emerge or worsen with puberty--sorry to get that wrong!]
Great job with your interview with BB. Your work is a touchstone.
Ok, this was an excellent, highly analytical, data filled article. A related vein to excavate on this has to do with the evolution of feminism, and of humanity's confusion and prejudices about the very difficult multiverse women live in (giving birth, being a mother, being a spouse, being a head of household, being a worker or breadwinner, having a career). Phetasy wrote a heartfelt column about a recent book on this topic with a provocative title about regretting sleeping around. Humanity let's males off the hook, but not females. None of this negates anything in your article, but I'm plenty confused as a grown heterosexual male who's never been troubled in my confused state with additional overlays of confusion about my gender, related gender roles or how society feels about my performance of same (about which IDGAF, which is easier for a male, at least this one, to say). If I had all of that going on at the same time my head would pop off. It's hard enough just clocking in and paying my damn taxes. Humanity gives women a harder time, and more ways to be considered (wrongly) dysfunctional, than it does men. People are great, humanity not so much. Did any of that make sense? Talk amongst yourselves.
"[I]t has been long observed that the sexes differ in the extent to which they display sex-typical behaviors; when there is significant between-sex variation, it is almost always the case that girls are more likely to engage in masculine behaviors than boys are likely to engage in feminine behaviors."
"This is an odd fact given that for most traits males tend to exhibit higher variation than females..."
This is not an odd fact, because femininity and masculinity do not take equal effort. Let's say a bunch of girls and a bunch of boys are lazy and/or can't manage to care about their appearance or clothes. The girls who do that will be deemed masculine. The boys who do that will be deemed masculine. Likewise, when people don't shave anything, it's masculine. When they don't shop or fuss with fashion, it's masculine. People, male or female, roll out of bed looking masculine. They have to go put something on to look feminine.
Let it be noted that these are society's typical opinions on what's feminine and masculine, not mine.
“one of the most striking findings in the present study is the comparatively greater preference that boys show for the masculine role than girls show for the feminine role, a difference that is large and significant.”
Again, this might not be so striking, if, for example, femininity demands deference, takes more effort to perform, restricts the pursuit of interesting activities, etc., as feminists have forever argued.
Horrible thought. The female average is going to shift left as genderism snips off the outliers to the right.
Thanks for this.
Gender ideology is such a quintessential example of magical thinking that it's difficult to believe these organizations can sign on to it. I'm all for people acting and dressing any way that pleases them, but there's an element of make-believe to this stuff that I can no longer stomach.
Also, I feel terrible for gay boys and lesbian girls, who may be told that same-sex attraction and gender non-conforming behavior means that are straight trans women or men. Back in the 80s and 90s, liberals like me were all like, "I am who I am...don't put me in a box!" These days it's "Put me in that box! Label me! Categorize me!"
Is there anything much we all do agree on these days? Impressive how opinions reflect such utter polarities. Seems to reflect which sort of media people consume. But the gulf Is enormous.
By these new definitions all the women in my law school class would have been "transgender", especially those of us who chose to become litigators. As it is, we are all happily married to men and have a bunch of kids.
All this "trans care for minors" is both obscene and ridiculously tragic -- as well as criminal.
From the 16th to the 19th century the Catholic Church castrated boys to sing in church choirs and in popular operas. I have a recording from the "Last Castrato," that I bought at a subway station cd store ages ago.
By the end of the 19th century all involved agreed that castrating boys was horrific and banned the practice.
It may be that, since all is accelerated in our current society, we will again reach this consensus in another 20 years instead of two centuries.
By then there will be an epidemic of adults who cannot reach orgasm, cannot have children, their bones breaking easily -- and, they will all look like old freaks while sitting in their wheelchairs. Yet another sad chapter in human social evolution.
But, in another 20 years untold numbers of doctors and pharmaceutical shareholders will be greatly enriched as they make billions on this latest version of neutering.
Once again: caveat emptor.
Interesting theory, and thoughtful article. If I follow you, the data shows that girls are more gender variant on average than men, and the data has consistently shown this for decades, so I assume you attribute the uptick in female referrals to gender clinics to the expanding definition of transgenderism to include gender nonconformity, which was a more recent development? Otherwise, it's hard to account for the new patient population since 2015. I guess I'm curious about when the definition of transgenderism began to include gender non-conformity, which is a point I feel like isn't typically granted too much attention, but is important for the reasons you outlined.