The scan results were probably skewed by reflections off the leftover glitter.
But on a serious note, this and other similar studies suffer from a fatal flaw - failing to control for sexual orientation, which HAS been shown in twin studies to be somewhat influenced by innate genetic factors.
As the below-linked study shows, once you control for sexual orientation, the results show that trans have brain scans typical of their sex, not their "gender identity."
And the following study noted that trans people with dementia tend to forget they are trans and revert to their original identities. It's not proof, but if trans was innate, we wouldn't expect that to happen:
The thing is that bringing up DSDs as a red herring won't work here.
Sex is obvious and easily detectable. Otherwise even inbred worthless male trash like the Taliban wouldn't be able to identify females to keep out of school. Are they giving everyone cheek swab tests?
Genetic disorders are rare and they can be confirmed if people have physical problems.
We don't need to test everybody to know if they have Down Syndrome.
This isn't complicated. If we didn't know who all the males are and who the females are, then we wouldn't be forcing the "trans" lie in the first place.
Correct! For adult males, in particular, it's nothing but pure perversion (autogynephilia).
Mr. Illy at the Genspect Conference (an organization focused on young people) is the most recent example. Some (seemingly mostly men) were baffled when so many women were opposed to his presence. He's an open pervert schilling for his book--what a mystery.
Wow Kat, that is a master class in critical, logical and common sense thinking.
I'm restacking this and will share it with readers of PITT, as it would go a long way in arming them, when they meet these smoke & mirrors arguments, of the perverted ideologs.
Hey thanks! All anyone has to do in these situations is ask for simple definitions really or ask to explain something they take for granted--the whole thing usually falls apart because it is based on a lie.
Very true, but it helps to have it clearly and coherently delineated, ahead of time.
One of the problems I think our side has (forgive the presumptiveness) is that there's plenty of great information, lessons learned and experiences, but it is quite fragmented. We only make headway, when we can gather and order those tools and facts in a useful manner and format. It's one of the major benefits of Stacks like PITT.
What you put together here, fills that need as well, for a very big and rising aspect of this issue.
Originally, before the 1990s, trans-sexual referred exclusively to the very tiny group of people born with ambiguous genitals (for a variety of reasons), and those born with chromosomal abnormalities, such as having XXY-chromosomes. These of course often overlapped.
Back then, the surgeon on site at birth would have to make a judgement call, since adjusting deformed genitalia is easier at birth than after puberty, and well, to be blunt it is easier to snip away and cut to fit then add bits that wont work properly anyway. Hence, most born this way were "assigned female at birth" and the parents were instructed to raise the child as a girl (here, the parents weren't informed about why the child needed surgery, beyond "fixing the urethra", this in order to ease the socialisation of the child).
During the 1990s, feminists argued that this was abuse and [insert their usual screed-spiel here, I can't be arsed right now] and it must be stopped. Which it was.
Then, post 2005-ish, these very few individuals (fewer than 1/100 000 births) were weaponised by the modern pomo-feminist movement popularly called woke nowadays, as another frontline in their war on reality.
Which brings me to the end: despite your very good write-up of many of the logical problems of the whole trans-thing, none it doesn't matter to the believers, for the same reason you cannot use reason with a schizophrenic or psychotic having a fit/break - it does not apply to them or their situation.
Wwrite-ups such as yours are very good instruction for those who haven't delved into this, so I say well done you, for bothering with it.
"Transexual" did not refer to people with developmental sexual disorders at birth. This was never a major issue because they are statistically very small, and they were not the ones causing the problems. Klinefelters was not referred to as "transexual." It's an objectively identifiable genetic disorder. Feminists did not use the issue of developmental sexual disorders as an issue because it never was a major issue.
"Transexual" was used to refer to men who wanted to become women, largely due to their cross dressing fetish (autogynephilia). That's where the word TRANSexual comes from--they thought they could go from male to female. This is before "transgender" took off, from "gender identity," largely from John Money's work.
That's what the purpose of "sex change" operations was--trying to change a penis into a vagina (impossible, but that was the goal). These were largely men who were trying to force themselves into women's spaces (with or without surgery).
This WAS a major problem because men cause problems wherever they go. That's why Janice Raymond wrote "The Transexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male" in 1979. She wasn't writing about anyone with developmental sexual disorders that can be objectively identified with chromosome testing due to a genetic problem like Klinefelters. She was writing about cross dressing men who were forcing themselves into women's movements and spaces--that's what "transexual" referred to.
"Transexual" referred to men like George (Christine) Jorgensen and Richard Raskin (Renee Richards). These men didn't have genetic disorders. They got surgeries and wore make up/clothes to imitate women, while they were physically healthy, genetically healthy males.
Feminists aren't "weaponizing" developmental sexual disorders. The "trans" agenda is weaponizing this genetic disorder as an excuse to say that a man can become a woman or vice versa (which is impossible). This is why they'll frequently change the subject or claim that sex is a spectrum. It isn't. You clearly need to learn more. Read here: https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/33/2/in-humans-sex-is-binary-and-immutable
I wrote this to help people understand the lies behind the "trans" movement. If you want to know who is behind this corporate agenda, read Jennifer Bilek's work. You appear to be unaware of some very basic facts of its origin and purpose. Research John Money's work as well--I wrote on it in an earlier post of mine.
The differences are greater than the SLIGHT variations that light up in a trans brain. The studies may have been biased also. Tell a woman and a trans man to look at a man maybe the same areas light up. Now ask the trans man to look at a woman and they don't. Maybe they asked them both to look at a pretty dress. Who knows how these tests may have been rigged to falsely appear more similar. I looked at picture scans and did not think their brains looked like women's. Trans have a hodge podge brain, a trans brain.
A study below of over 5000 peoples brains were done showing more differences between men and women.
-women tended to have significantly thicker cortices than men. Thicker cortices have been associated with higher scores on a variety of cognitive and general intelligence tests
-men had higher brain volumes than women in every subcortical region they looked at, including the hippocampus (which plays broad roles in memory and spatial awareness), the amygdala (emotions, memory, and decision-making), striatum (learning, inhibition, and reward-processing), and thalamus (processing and relaying sensory information to other parts of the brain).
When the researchers adjusted the numbers to look at the subcortical regions relative to overall brain size, the comparisons became much closer: There were only 14 regions where men had higher brain volume and 10 regions where women did.
Volumes and cortical thickness between men also tended to vary much more than they did between women
A previous study finds no average difference in intelligence, but males were more variable than females. It fits with a lot of other evidence that seems to point toward males being more variable physically and mentally.
We're the ones who will win this because we don't care about tiptoeing around male egos. All others ("there's a small percentage of REAL trannies!" or "adults can do whatever they want!") will fail. I think we all know this.
There’s a lot that is wrong and a lot that is right with this article. Starting with the title, it is needlessly stuffed with insults, which inform us that the author is angry, but gives us no reason to share her anger. On the other hand, it shows compelling examples of the incoherency of many of the arguments used by trans advocates. However, the fact that these arguments are often wrong and inconsistent does not prove that the author is right. None of those arguments demonstrates that brain scans are ineffective tools for studying transness. . I look at her arguments one at a time in this article https://open.substack.com/pub/teedrockwell/p/brain-scans-can-tell-us-important
I have every right to be angry, and men have earned insults. Men are lucky we don't do worse.
There's no such thing as "transness." It's something that simply does not exist, and I proved it.
The very fact that this agenda is wrong and inconsistent and cannot even defend their irrational arguments literally proves that their contention is wrong.
You people do not understand how basic logical statements work.
There is no such thing as "trans" and no male can have a female brain. Sex is in every cell of our body.
If men could have female brains, they wouldn't be so stupid and violent when they tried to cross-dress. Any brain in a male body is a male brain, even if he has scans that show tendencies.
Don't any of you have any shame at your dumb behavior?
You didn’t explain anything. You just stated your beliefs. Even if those beliefs are true, stating them doesn’t give reasons for believing them to be true.
you say “The very fact that this agenda is wrong and inconsistent and cannot even defend their irrational arguments literally proves that their contention is wrong, and that I am right.”
Galileo argued that we know the Earth rotates because the rotation causes the oceans to slosh back-and-forth, which in turn causes the tides. He was wrong about this. That doesn’t prove that the Earth doesn’t rotate.
The "trans" lie is so easy to disprove that it's crushed with those three sentences.
These are not my beliefs. I never once cited my personal beliefs or used "I" in the post. I don’t BELIEVE that females produce the large gamete and males produce the small gamete, and that sex is in every single one of our cells.
Those are facts. Every single fact is explained in this article. Just because you watched too much pornography to understand the points doesn't mean anything.
A male body is completely male in every cell—there are no female brain cells in his body that override his gamete production capabilities, just as a male cannot have female liver cells or female heart cells. That is illogical at its core, and nobody could prove these stupid contentions. That's why they're false.
These are true statements regardless of what I BELIEVE, and they would be true even if I were never born because belief has nothing to do with it.
Bruce Jenner, Dylan Mulvaney, William “Lia” Thomas can all take cheek swab tests to prove that their bodies are male. That’s not belief.
You people cannot argue your way out of a paper bag. This is how I know troons are doomed. The people defending this bullshit are complete morons. This is why this stupid grift is almost over.
You’re not smart enough to be at my substack. I allow only people with high enough intelligence and the ability to construct logical arguments to be here.
All you did was state YOUR beliefs. You think men in dresses are happy when they're wearing dresses. Nobody cares about your beliefs on that. Women are more important.
At least my intelligent readers will see what a troon defending moron looks like when he’s put in his place.
A true belief is still a belief. It only becomes an argument when you give reasons why the belief is true. those three sentences you quoted don’t give reasons. That’s why they are statements of belief, not arguments.
I already proved that these are not BELIEFS. I don't BELIEVE that "trans" does not exist. It does not exist, and that's true regardless of me and my beliefs. I don't BELIEVE males produce the small gamete. They do regardless of what I believe.
Schizophrenics believe that sometimes TVs are talking to them. That's called mental illness.
Wait, just for fun because I want to see your low IQ, troon-defending, arguing "skills" flail--what's trans? What defines if someone is "trans"?
Explain because I want to laugh before I block because you're not smart enough for this.
There's a simple way to test for innate gender: scan the brains of pre-verbal infants who have had limited exposure to socialisation, and reliably predict which will grow up transgender, sealing the prediction in a safe for 25 years without disclosing the diagnosis for each individual to anyone, lest it bias the results. If the effect is created in the womb as advocates of the hypothesis have stated, the prediction should be right 100% of the time.
I'd be happy to. I am not saying innate gender exists.
I am saying those who think gender, those behaviours assumed to be associated with the two sexes, is formed in the womb by endocrine processes, should be able to demonstrate this with an experiment like the one I have described. If they are unwilling to carry out an experiment with predictive power, their theory should be described as post-hoc speculation.
For example, brain scans of alcoholics show differences from average people. That proves nothing about alcoholism being an innate condition.
I find it hard to believe that brain scans of transgender adults can rule out the differences they observe being caused by elective endocrine disruption, for example those adults taking synthetic oestrogen. We cannot assume all study subjects will be honest about their drug histories, especially if they are deluded about literally being the opposite sex, with no need of such interventions.
You're saying "gender" is behavior now? Wtf does hormones in the womb have to do with behavior of the SEXES?
What are the sexes? Which behavior is associated with each? Describe.
Nobody is feeling "dysphoria" from their behavior. "Behavior" dysphoria? And if gender is behavior, then just say behavior.
How does estrogen and testicle removal affirm behavior in "gender affirming" healthcare? That's not behavior affirming.
There are no "transgender" adults because "transgender" does not exist.
What are the criteria for a person to be "transgender"? A male who BEHAVES like a female?
You're going to have to define both, then explain how gender is different from sex because then you're using sex and gender interchangeably.
This whole thing is a load of bullshit. It's literally irrational. This is what your irrational word salads lead to.
LOL Bearing badly--"Doctor, I'm bearing badly--I need estrogen and testicle removal because I feel bad about my behavior! Then I need birth certificate changes and breast implants so I can play women's basketball."
I would agree that making feelings a basis for medication and surgeries was a really bad idea, and is pseudoscience. I have previously written about this being a social engineering attack on healthcare and insurance providers by people who simply desired these changes, for themselves or for others.
I put it to you that transgender people do exist, in the sense of people who behave according to their expectations of the opposite sex, in limited and specific ways that they determine. For example, changing name and clothes, but not asking for a 20% pay cut or altering their other behaviours. That doesn't mean a third or fourth type of sex exists in any material sense.
To me, the only 'true trans' we have evidence for so far is those people who have
"Transgender" DOES exist, and it's people who act according to the EXPECTATIONS of the opposite SEX! So that's not "transexual" though.
Expectations sound like stereotypes, so now "gender" is stereotypes, right? Not behavior.
This is going to be fun.
Define the sexes. How many are there?
Limited and specific ways that they determine? So they can pick their own expectations?
Chaning name and clothes? Clothing is not behavior. So why bring up clothes?
So when a say Bruce Jenner is a man in a dress, I'm right?
That's all it takes? A name change and a dress?
So what's the need for breast implants and hormones if it's only about behavior? How is that "gender affirming"?
Now, when a woman puts on pants is she "transgender"? If not, why not? You mentioned clothing. Or what behavior would she have to exhibit to be "transgender"? Be specific. How is that different from "transexual"? Explain.
Do you honestly not see that you prove me correct?
I would suggest that acting according to selected opposite sex stereotypes including opposite sex clothing norms is an example of transgender behaviour. This behaviour is observable, and distinct from transgender feelings or beliefs. There may be people who have the behaviour without the feelings and vice versa.
I didn't say there is a clinical need for procedures such as breast implants for men, simply the desire for them, a position which the gender industry has moved towards itself, precisely because of the lack of evidence that the benefits outweigh the harms to the individual and society.
The statements 'Bruce is just a man in a dress' and 'Bruce is an authentic transgender person' are not mutually exclusive until such time, if ever, that we discover a biological cause for transgender behaviour. (We cannot objectively measure feelings or beliefs of course, only record self-report, which is a behaviour).
I don't know of any such cause, but I accept the theoretical possibility that it could exist, in the same way people used to speculate about life on Mars before any space probe had been there. Epistemic humility requires us to accept that there may be real things we don't yet know.
I read, as you asked me to, and I still didn't change my mind. I don't think they are born in the wrong body either btw. Marcus Dib, Buck Angel and Blaire White don't believe that either. I don't know any transsexual that does, trans-trenders plenty but no transsexuals.
Trans activists that claim gender is entirely social are wrong and I don't adhere to self ID. I still disagree with you that transsexuals shouldn't live their lives as they wish as long as they don't get into jails, sports, or changing rooms.
If anyone reading this wishes to read more nuanced and balanced views then I'm always here for you!
You cited "hormone imbalance" as a reason some one can claim to be "trans." False.
There is no such thing as a "transexual." By definition, if you use that word, you are claiming someone is in a special state of being for refusing reality. You cannot make that distinction without causing everything you claim to be against.
There is no such thing as "living their lives as they wish" without everything you listed--jails, sports, changing rooms.
It is inevitable.
When this collapses, you're going to pretend that you never supported any of this.
And if you're going to claim that there's a tiny percentage of REAL trannies who are actually delusional, but shouldn't go in prisons, sports, or bathrooms, but should still get hormones and surgeries, but then can't change their legal documents--what's your test? You can't test for hormones, which you tried already.
How on earth would you be able to stop any of this?
You're as delusional as idiots like Robert Ryan "Blaire" White.
None of this makes sense because the whole thing is a lie.
Thanks for proving my point. This is why this fraud is doomed.
I blame Mary Wollstonecraft Shelly for this debacle, and Frankenstein. Yes, Frankenstein was the original “wrong brain wrong body” fiction. Your article is niceley written of course, but…
It’s persistent in horror and horror cinema - “The Brain That Wouldn’t Die” from 1962 is a classic schlock flick. It’s fairly easy for (in this case an actress) to poke their head through a hole and scream a bit. But that’s the year I was born. In “The Fiend Without a Face” (1958) a completely disembodied brain scuttles around like some sort of gigantic spermatozoan, spinal cord quite animated for not having muscles. Oh but wait! “Donovan’s Brain” (1953) predates it, a wealthy person whose brain is removed telepathically controls others. Kind of like a trans brain telepathically controlling the edifice of science.
And children’s books! How could we forget the awful sadistic telepathic disembodied brain in the delightful children’s story by Maldeline L’Engel “A Wrinkle In Time” - which of course became a children’s movie. Natch.
Spock’s Brain” is another classic, Star Trek original - there are so many episodes with brains and minds bouncing around in Star Trek, it’s hard to keep them straight. (Oh gosh, Freaky Friday! mom/daughter mind swaps).
Steve Martin (and Rob Reiner) made one (“The Man With Two Brains”, 1983) where Steve falls in love with a female brain… in a jar.
The entire “Matrix” franchise is built on a brain disconnected from the body trope also called “Brain in a Vat” among the cognoscenti. One day Susan Bilek will realize it’s not synthetic sex which is sought, it’s virtual reality brain connection by many, even Elon Musk. Is it just coincidence that the origin of “The Matrix” in the truck-driver-looking Wachowski brothers who were actually fairly rancid run-of-the-mill AGP’s - I don’t think so.
But even the beloved “Golden Girls” Series 7, episode 24, “Home Again Rose - Part 2” had a scene with disembodied brains, in the frozen but defrosted heads of Rose, Dorothy and Blanche.
There are dozens if not hundreds of shows and books with brains separated from bodies - fully, or in part - as though the two could be separated somehow and function in any way.
Realize that this conversation about female brains is based on the same logic that animated Herman Munster at 1313 Mockingbird lane.
… and with the same degree of “science”.
“We’re heads!” Shrieked Blanche… indeed.
Just think of Frankenstein, Steve Martin, Spock and Herman Munster next time you hear about a “female brain” in a “male body”. It’s a horror/comedy act, not a medical condition.
It is so sad to be so deeply insecure in one's own identity that your entire reason for a substack is to take other people, who are living their lives in way that has literally zero impact on you, down. It sounds like you are so afraid of your own womanhood (and likely some insecurities about how you present in the world) that instead of focusing on your own growth, you focus on harming others by invalidating their identities. I really hope you find a way forward that helps you stop harming yourself so, as I guarantee your words hurt you far more than they hurt trans people (like me, dancing in my beautiful life, with my beautiful job, beautiful family, being of genuine service to a community. WOW it is so great to be trans.)
We're reaching levels of projection I never thought possible. Listen up, lady. You're not going to hear this at your synagogue, your PhD program, or any other subversive institution you frequent. Btw, it's funny you call yourself a Jewess (clearly a word for a female) and then try to claim "they/them" in your name.
I want you to read every following point carefully:
1. You're the insecure one, not me. I'm not the one demanding idiotic, made-up terms for myself and then trying to force others to use them because I have no other way to obtain attention. That's you. That's nothing but pure projection, but nice try at gaslighting.
2. The "trans" lie has an impact on everyone, all women, and all of society. The only way this irrational, demonic lie can survive is if everyone agrees to tell lies in order to coddle idiots like you. You get called "they/them" because you demand that others play along with your delusions, and then play victim and threaten suicide if they don't. It's nothing but pure narcissism, foisted on all others around you.
In addition, women are impacted by men and their stupidity every day. Female inmates are being threatened, attacked, and raped by male criminals in female prisons, all because of this bullshit. Women are losing in women's sports to fucked up mentally ill men like William "Lia" Thomas because of this, being punched in the face in public because of this, losing jobs because of this. This has impact on everybody. Not to mention the young girls having breast tissue removed, their bodies ruined, and futures destroyed because of this disgusting lie, all for medical industry profit. It's repulsive.
Don't even try "We're just living our lives!!" You're not. You're ruining others, specifically women's.
3. There's nothing to invalidate with "trans." It simply doesn't exist. All I have to do is say it, which is why you are so bothered and I'm not. I live my life based in reality, unlike idiot "they/thems" and all other variety of trannies or mentally ill perverts out there.
I never harm myself. I love myself, without wrong sex hormones, plastic surgery, stupid outfits, dumb made up pronouns, in order to get attention. Go check the tranny suicide rate. That's real harm.
4. There's no such thing as "trans" people because there's no such thing as "trans" anything. It just doesn't exist, like I said. You provide lies, delusion, mutilation, violence, especially to women and girls.
You are a woman. You will never not be that, and there's nothing you can do about it.
I don't think anyone who suffers from gender dysphoria and has gone through the pains of transition would gladly say it's great to be trans! I'm not ashamed of being chronically ill or having mental health issues but I would never say it's great to be ill and it's amazing to be neurodivergent! Just a thought
There is no such thing as "gender dysphoria." If you claim "transexual" is a real thing and then use "gender" that way, you're confusing yourself with word games because you aren't smart enough to see what is going on.
There is no such thing as "trans." Sex is binary and immutable.
There is no such thing as "transition." It does not occur.
A male who "feels like" he's female is usually a heterosexual autogynephile (a pervert) or a failed homosexual male. He remains male and nothing changes with any amount of wigs, makeup, surgery, or anything else.
I'm not surprised you have mental health problems, and you also have intelligence problems.
Well said!
The scan results were probably skewed by reflections off the leftover glitter.
But on a serious note, this and other similar studies suffer from a fatal flaw - failing to control for sexual orientation, which HAS been shown in twin studies to be somewhat influenced by innate genetic factors.
As the below-linked study shows, once you control for sexual orientation, the results show that trans have brain scans typical of their sex, not their "gender identity."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17352-8
And the following study noted that trans people with dementia tend to forget they are trans and revert to their original identities. It's not proof, but if trans was innate, we wouldn't expect that to happen:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1363460719876835
One thing nobody can forget through dementia is their sex because nobody can forget their chromosomes!
Thing is most people don't know their chromosomes.
The thing is that bringing up DSDs as a red herring won't work here.
Sex is obvious and easily detectable. Otherwise even inbred worthless male trash like the Taliban wouldn't be able to identify females to keep out of school. Are they giving everyone cheek swab tests?
Genetic disorders are rare and they can be confirmed if people have physical problems.
We don't need to test everybody to know if they have Down Syndrome.
This isn't complicated. If we didn't know who all the males are and who the females are, then we wouldn't be forcing the "trans" lie in the first place.
That's not going to work, and everybody knows it.
Proof it's all preference and perversion with heaps of appropriation, denigration, manipulation and shitfuckery.
Correct! For adult males, in particular, it's nothing but pure perversion (autogynephilia).
Mr. Illy at the Genspect Conference (an organization focused on young people) is the most recent example. Some (seemingly mostly men) were baffled when so many women were opposed to his presence. He's an open pervert schilling for his book--what a mystery.
Wow Kat, that is a master class in critical, logical and common sense thinking.
I'm restacking this and will share it with readers of PITT, as it would go a long way in arming them, when they meet these smoke & mirrors arguments, of the perverted ideologs.
Thank you and very well done!!
Hey thanks! All anyone has to do in these situations is ask for simple definitions really or ask to explain something they take for granted--the whole thing usually falls apart because it is based on a lie.
Very true, but it helps to have it clearly and coherently delineated, ahead of time.
One of the problems I think our side has (forgive the presumptiveness) is that there's plenty of great information, lessons learned and experiences, but it is quite fragmented. We only make headway, when we can gather and order those tools and facts in a useful manner and format. It's one of the major benefits of Stacks like PITT.
What you put together here, fills that need as well, for a very big and rising aspect of this issue.
It's much appreciated!
Originally, before the 1990s, trans-sexual referred exclusively to the very tiny group of people born with ambiguous genitals (for a variety of reasons), and those born with chromosomal abnormalities, such as having XXY-chromosomes. These of course often overlapped.
Back then, the surgeon on site at birth would have to make a judgement call, since adjusting deformed genitalia is easier at birth than after puberty, and well, to be blunt it is easier to snip away and cut to fit then add bits that wont work properly anyway. Hence, most born this way were "assigned female at birth" and the parents were instructed to raise the child as a girl (here, the parents weren't informed about why the child needed surgery, beyond "fixing the urethra", this in order to ease the socialisation of the child).
During the 1990s, feminists argued that this was abuse and [insert their usual screed-spiel here, I can't be arsed right now] and it must be stopped. Which it was.
Then, post 2005-ish, these very few individuals (fewer than 1/100 000 births) were weaponised by the modern pomo-feminist movement popularly called woke nowadays, as another frontline in their war on reality.
Which brings me to the end: despite your very good write-up of many of the logical problems of the whole trans-thing, none it doesn't matter to the believers, for the same reason you cannot use reason with a schizophrenic or psychotic having a fit/break - it does not apply to them or their situation.
Wwrite-ups such as yours are very good instruction for those who haven't delved into this, so I say well done you, for bothering with it.
You have made some very critical errors here.
"Transexual" did not refer to people with developmental sexual disorders at birth. This was never a major issue because they are statistically very small, and they were not the ones causing the problems. Klinefelters was not referred to as "transexual." It's an objectively identifiable genetic disorder. Feminists did not use the issue of developmental sexual disorders as an issue because it never was a major issue.
"Transexual" was used to refer to men who wanted to become women, largely due to their cross dressing fetish (autogynephilia). That's where the word TRANSexual comes from--they thought they could go from male to female. This is before "transgender" took off, from "gender identity," largely from John Money's work.
That's what the purpose of "sex change" operations was--trying to change a penis into a vagina (impossible, but that was the goal). These were largely men who were trying to force themselves into women's spaces (with or without surgery).
This WAS a major problem because men cause problems wherever they go. That's why Janice Raymond wrote "The Transexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male" in 1979. She wasn't writing about anyone with developmental sexual disorders that can be objectively identified with chromosome testing due to a genetic problem like Klinefelters. She was writing about cross dressing men who were forcing themselves into women's movements and spaces--that's what "transexual" referred to.
"Transexual" referred to men like George (Christine) Jorgensen and Richard Raskin (Renee Richards). These men didn't have genetic disorders. They got surgeries and wore make up/clothes to imitate women, while they were physically healthy, genetically healthy males.
Feminists aren't "weaponizing" developmental sexual disorders. The "trans" agenda is weaponizing this genetic disorder as an excuse to say that a man can become a woman or vice versa (which is impossible). This is why they'll frequently change the subject or claim that sex is a spectrum. It isn't. You clearly need to learn more. Read here: https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/33/2/in-humans-sex-is-binary-and-immutable
I wrote this to help people understand the lies behind the "trans" movement. If you want to know who is behind this corporate agenda, read Jennifer Bilek's work. You appear to be unaware of some very basic facts of its origin and purpose. Research John Money's work as well--I wrote on it in an earlier post of mine.
<3
The differences are greater than the SLIGHT variations that light up in a trans brain. The studies may have been biased also. Tell a woman and a trans man to look at a man maybe the same areas light up. Now ask the trans man to look at a woman and they don't. Maybe they asked them both to look at a pretty dress. Who knows how these tests may have been rigged to falsely appear more similar. I looked at picture scans and did not think their brains looked like women's. Trans have a hodge podge brain, a trans brain.
A study below of over 5000 peoples brains were done showing more differences between men and women.
-women tended to have significantly thicker cortices than men. Thicker cortices have been associated with higher scores on a variety of cognitive and general intelligence tests
-men had higher brain volumes than women in every subcortical region they looked at, including the hippocampus (which plays broad roles in memory and spatial awareness), the amygdala (emotions, memory, and decision-making), striatum (learning, inhibition, and reward-processing), and thalamus (processing and relaying sensory information to other parts of the brain).
When the researchers adjusted the numbers to look at the subcortical regions relative to overall brain size, the comparisons became much closer: There were only 14 regions where men had higher brain volume and 10 regions where women did.
Volumes and cortical thickness between men also tended to vary much more than they did between women
A previous study finds no average difference in intelligence, but males were more variable than females. It fits with a lot of other evidence that seems to point toward males being more variable physically and mentally.
https://www.science.org/content/article/study-finds-some-significant-differences-brains-men-and-women
What's "trans" though? What makes someone "trans"? What are the testable criteria? What's the difference between a woman and a "trans"man?
They have to be born a woman. Anything else is a fantasy.
Brilliant! I am in love with my new terfy discovery! <3 <3 <3
LOL!
We're the ones who will win this because we don't care about tiptoeing around male egos. All others ("there's a small percentage of REAL trannies!" or "adults can do whatever they want!") will fail. I think we all know this.
There’s a lot that is wrong and a lot that is right with this article. Starting with the title, it is needlessly stuffed with insults, which inform us that the author is angry, but gives us no reason to share her anger. On the other hand, it shows compelling examples of the incoherency of many of the arguments used by trans advocates. However, the fact that these arguments are often wrong and inconsistent does not prove that the author is right. None of those arguments demonstrates that brain scans are ineffective tools for studying transness. . I look at her arguments one at a time in this article https://open.substack.com/pub/teedrockwell/p/brain-scans-can-tell-us-important
I have every right to be angry, and men have earned insults. Men are lucky we don't do worse.
There's no such thing as "transness." It's something that simply does not exist, and I proved it.
The very fact that this agenda is wrong and inconsistent and cannot even defend their irrational arguments literally proves that their contention is wrong.
You people do not understand how basic logical statements work.
There is no such thing as "trans" and no male can have a female brain. Sex is in every cell of our body.
If men could have female brains, they wouldn't be so stupid and violent when they tried to cross-dress. Any brain in a male body is a male brain, even if he has scans that show tendencies.
Don't any of you have any shame at your dumb behavior?
did you read the linked article or just the comment?
There’s no such thing as “trans.”
Nobody is born in the wrong body and nobody can feel like another body.
Males cannot have a female brain, heart, liver, or kidney.
There’s nothing you can do about it and if you could defend it you would explain it in basically three sentences like I just did.
You’re wasting your life. This is a fraud and only idiots defend it, so when this ends it’s going to be worse than lobotomies. Get a life.
You didn’t explain anything. You just stated your beliefs. Even if those beliefs are true, stating them doesn’t give reasons for believing them to be true.
you say “The very fact that this agenda is wrong and inconsistent and cannot even defend their irrational arguments literally proves that their contention is wrong, and that I am right.”
Galileo argued that we know the Earth rotates because the rotation causes the oceans to slosh back-and-forth, which in turn causes the tides. He was wrong about this. That doesn’t prove that the Earth doesn’t rotate.
The "trans" lie is so easy to disprove that it's crushed with those three sentences.
These are not my beliefs. I never once cited my personal beliefs or used "I" in the post. I don’t BELIEVE that females produce the large gamete and males produce the small gamete, and that sex is in every single one of our cells.
Those are facts. Every single fact is explained in this article. Just because you watched too much pornography to understand the points doesn't mean anything.
A male body is completely male in every cell—there are no female brain cells in his body that override his gamete production capabilities, just as a male cannot have female liver cells or female heart cells. That is illogical at its core, and nobody could prove these stupid contentions. That's why they're false.
These are true statements regardless of what I BELIEVE, and they would be true even if I were never born because belief has nothing to do with it.
Bruce Jenner, Dylan Mulvaney, William “Lia” Thomas can all take cheek swab tests to prove that their bodies are male. That’s not belief.
You people cannot argue your way out of a paper bag. This is how I know troons are doomed. The people defending this bullshit are complete morons. This is why this stupid grift is almost over.
You’re not smart enough to be at my substack. I allow only people with high enough intelligence and the ability to construct logical arguments to be here.
All you did was state YOUR beliefs. You think men in dresses are happy when they're wearing dresses. Nobody cares about your beliefs on that. Women are more important.
At least my intelligent readers will see what a troon defending moron looks like when he’s put in his place.
A true belief is still a belief. It only becomes an argument when you give reasons why the belief is true. those three sentences you quoted don’t give reasons. That’s why they are statements of belief, not arguments.
I already proved that these are not BELIEFS. I don't BELIEVE that "trans" does not exist. It does not exist, and that's true regardless of me and my beliefs. I don't BELIEVE males produce the small gamete. They do regardless of what I believe.
Schizophrenics believe that sometimes TVs are talking to them. That's called mental illness.
Wait, just for fun because I want to see your low IQ, troon-defending, arguing "skills" flail--what's trans? What defines if someone is "trans"?
Explain because I want to laugh before I block because you're not smart enough for this.
There's a simple way to test for innate gender: scan the brains of pre-verbal infants who have had limited exposure to socialisation, and reliably predict which will grow up transgender, sealing the prediction in a safe for 25 years without disclosing the diagnosis for each individual to anyone, lest it bias the results. If the effect is created in the womb as advocates of the hypothesis have stated, the prediction should be right 100% of the time.
WHAT IS GENDER? Any reputable study has to define terms.
What are you scanning for? You used the term "innate gender"? Wtf does that even mean?
Define.
I'd be happy to. I am not saying innate gender exists.
I am saying those who think gender, those behaviours assumed to be associated with the two sexes, is formed in the womb by endocrine processes, should be able to demonstrate this with an experiment like the one I have described. If they are unwilling to carry out an experiment with predictive power, their theory should be described as post-hoc speculation.
For example, brain scans of alcoholics show differences from average people. That proves nothing about alcoholism being an innate condition.
I find it hard to believe that brain scans of transgender adults can rule out the differences they observe being caused by elective endocrine disruption, for example those adults taking synthetic oestrogen. We cannot assume all study subjects will be honest about their drug histories, especially if they are deluded about literally being the opposite sex, with no need of such interventions.
None of this makes any sense whatsoever.
You're saying "gender" is behavior now? Wtf does hormones in the womb have to do with behavior of the SEXES?
What are the sexes? Which behavior is associated with each? Describe.
Nobody is feeling "dysphoria" from their behavior. "Behavior" dysphoria? And if gender is behavior, then just say behavior.
How does estrogen and testicle removal affirm behavior in "gender affirming" healthcare? That's not behavior affirming.
There are no "transgender" adults because "transgender" does not exist.
What are the criteria for a person to be "transgender"? A male who BEHAVES like a female?
You're going to have to define both, then explain how gender is different from sex because then you're using sex and gender interchangeably.
This whole thing is a load of bullshit. It's literally irrational. This is what your irrational word salads lead to.
LOL Bearing badly--"Doctor, I'm bearing badly--I need estrogen and testicle removal because I feel bad about my behavior! Then I need birth certificate changes and breast implants so I can play women's basketball."
Complete horseshit.
I would agree that making feelings a basis for medication and surgeries was a really bad idea, and is pseudoscience. I have previously written about this being a social engineering attack on healthcare and insurance providers by people who simply desired these changes, for themselves or for others.
I put it to you that transgender people do exist, in the sense of people who behave according to their expectations of the opposite sex, in limited and specific ways that they determine. For example, changing name and clothes, but not asking for a 20% pay cut or altering their other behaviours. That doesn't mean a third or fourth type of sex exists in any material sense.
To me, the only 'true trans' we have evidence for so far is those people who have
I see!
"Transgender" DOES exist, and it's people who act according to the EXPECTATIONS of the opposite SEX! So that's not "transexual" though.
Expectations sound like stereotypes, so now "gender" is stereotypes, right? Not behavior.
This is going to be fun.
Define the sexes. How many are there?
Limited and specific ways that they determine? So they can pick their own expectations?
Chaning name and clothes? Clothing is not behavior. So why bring up clothes?
So when a say Bruce Jenner is a man in a dress, I'm right?
That's all it takes? A name change and a dress?
So what's the need for breast implants and hormones if it's only about behavior? How is that "gender affirming"?
Now, when a woman puts on pants is she "transgender"? If not, why not? You mentioned clothing. Or what behavior would she have to exhibit to be "transgender"? Be specific. How is that different from "transexual"? Explain.
Do you honestly not see that you prove me correct?
I would suggest that acting according to selected opposite sex stereotypes including opposite sex clothing norms is an example of transgender behaviour. This behaviour is observable, and distinct from transgender feelings or beliefs. There may be people who have the behaviour without the feelings and vice versa.
I didn't say there is a clinical need for procedures such as breast implants for men, simply the desire for them, a position which the gender industry has moved towards itself, precisely because of the lack of evidence that the benefits outweigh the harms to the individual and society.
The statements 'Bruce is just a man in a dress' and 'Bruce is an authentic transgender person' are not mutually exclusive until such time, if ever, that we discover a biological cause for transgender behaviour. (We cannot objectively measure feelings or beliefs of course, only record self-report, which is a behaviour).
I don't know of any such cause, but I accept the theoretical possibility that it could exist, in the same way people used to speculate about life on Mars before any space probe had been there. Epistemic humility requires us to accept that there may be real things we don't yet know.
I read, as you asked me to, and I still didn't change my mind. I don't think they are born in the wrong body either btw. Marcus Dib, Buck Angel and Blaire White don't believe that either. I don't know any transsexual that does, trans-trenders plenty but no transsexuals.
Trans activists that claim gender is entirely social are wrong and I don't adhere to self ID. I still disagree with you that transsexuals shouldn't live their lives as they wish as long as they don't get into jails, sports, or changing rooms.
If anyone reading this wishes to read more nuanced and balanced views then I'm always here for you!
You cited "hormone imbalance" as a reason some one can claim to be "trans." False.
There is no such thing as a "transexual." By definition, if you use that word, you are claiming someone is in a special state of being for refusing reality. You cannot make that distinction without causing everything you claim to be against.
There is no such thing as "living their lives as they wish" without everything you listed--jails, sports, changing rooms.
It is inevitable.
When this collapses, you're going to pretend that you never supported any of this.
And if you're going to claim that there's a tiny percentage of REAL trannies who are actually delusional, but shouldn't go in prisons, sports, or bathrooms, but should still get hormones and surgeries, but then can't change their legal documents--what's your test? You can't test for hormones, which you tried already.
How on earth would you be able to stop any of this?
You're as delusional as idiots like Robert Ryan "Blaire" White.
None of this makes sense because the whole thing is a lie.
Thanks for proving my point. This is why this fraud is doomed.
I blame Mary Wollstonecraft Shelly for this debacle, and Frankenstein. Yes, Frankenstein was the original “wrong brain wrong body” fiction. Your article is niceley written of course, but…
It’s persistent in horror and horror cinema - “The Brain That Wouldn’t Die” from 1962 is a classic schlock flick. It’s fairly easy for (in this case an actress) to poke their head through a hole and scream a bit. But that’s the year I was born. In “The Fiend Without a Face” (1958) a completely disembodied brain scuttles around like some sort of gigantic spermatozoan, spinal cord quite animated for not having muscles. Oh but wait! “Donovan’s Brain” (1953) predates it, a wealthy person whose brain is removed telepathically controls others. Kind of like a trans brain telepathically controlling the edifice of science.
And children’s books! How could we forget the awful sadistic telepathic disembodied brain in the delightful children’s story by Maldeline L’Engel “A Wrinkle In Time” - which of course became a children’s movie. Natch.
Spock’s Brain” is another classic, Star Trek original - there are so many episodes with brains and minds bouncing around in Star Trek, it’s hard to keep them straight. (Oh gosh, Freaky Friday! mom/daughter mind swaps).
Steve Martin (and Rob Reiner) made one (“The Man With Two Brains”, 1983) where Steve falls in love with a female brain… in a jar.
The entire “Matrix” franchise is built on a brain disconnected from the body trope also called “Brain in a Vat” among the cognoscenti. One day Susan Bilek will realize it’s not synthetic sex which is sought, it’s virtual reality brain connection by many, even Elon Musk. Is it just coincidence that the origin of “The Matrix” in the truck-driver-looking Wachowski brothers who were actually fairly rancid run-of-the-mill AGP’s - I don’t think so.
But even the beloved “Golden Girls” Series 7, episode 24, “Home Again Rose - Part 2” had a scene with disembodied brains, in the frozen but defrosted heads of Rose, Dorothy and Blanche.
There are dozens if not hundreds of shows and books with brains separated from bodies - fully, or in part - as though the two could be separated somehow and function in any way.
Realize that this conversation about female brains is based on the same logic that animated Herman Munster at 1313 Mockingbird lane.
… and with the same degree of “science”.
“We’re heads!” Shrieked Blanche… indeed.
Just think of Frankenstein, Steve Martin, Spock and Herman Munster next time you hear about a “female brain” in a “male body”. It’s a horror/comedy act, not a medical condition.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrainInAJar
I collect bizarre ideas. But non so bizarre as trans. LARP BIV
It is so sad to be so deeply insecure in one's own identity that your entire reason for a substack is to take other people, who are living their lives in way that has literally zero impact on you, down. It sounds like you are so afraid of your own womanhood (and likely some insecurities about how you present in the world) that instead of focusing on your own growth, you focus on harming others by invalidating their identities. I really hope you find a way forward that helps you stop harming yourself so, as I guarantee your words hurt you far more than they hurt trans people (like me, dancing in my beautiful life, with my beautiful job, beautiful family, being of genuine service to a community. WOW it is so great to be trans.)
We're reaching levels of projection I never thought possible. Listen up, lady. You're not going to hear this at your synagogue, your PhD program, or any other subversive institution you frequent. Btw, it's funny you call yourself a Jewess (clearly a word for a female) and then try to claim "they/them" in your name.
I want you to read every following point carefully:
1. You're the insecure one, not me. I'm not the one demanding idiotic, made-up terms for myself and then trying to force others to use them because I have no other way to obtain attention. That's you. That's nothing but pure projection, but nice try at gaslighting.
2. The "trans" lie has an impact on everyone, all women, and all of society. The only way this irrational, demonic lie can survive is if everyone agrees to tell lies in order to coddle idiots like you. You get called "they/them" because you demand that others play along with your delusions, and then play victim and threaten suicide if they don't. It's nothing but pure narcissism, foisted on all others around you.
In addition, women are impacted by men and their stupidity every day. Female inmates are being threatened, attacked, and raped by male criminals in female prisons, all because of this bullshit. Women are losing in women's sports to fucked up mentally ill men like William "Lia" Thomas because of this, being punched in the face in public because of this, losing jobs because of this. This has impact on everybody. Not to mention the young girls having breast tissue removed, their bodies ruined, and futures destroyed because of this disgusting lie, all for medical industry profit. It's repulsive.
Don't even try "We're just living our lives!!" You're not. You're ruining others, specifically women's.
3. There's nothing to invalidate with "trans." It simply doesn't exist. All I have to do is say it, which is why you are so bothered and I'm not. I live my life based in reality, unlike idiot "they/thems" and all other variety of trannies or mentally ill perverts out there.
I never harm myself. I love myself, without wrong sex hormones, plastic surgery, stupid outfits, dumb made up pronouns, in order to get attention. Go check the tranny suicide rate. That's real harm.
4. There's no such thing as "trans" people because there's no such thing as "trans" anything. It just doesn't exist, like I said. You provide lies, delusion, mutilation, violence, especially to women and girls.
You are a woman. You will never not be that, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Now I'm done.
I don't think anyone who suffers from gender dysphoria and has gone through the pains of transition would gladly say it's great to be trans! I'm not ashamed of being chronically ill or having mental health issues but I would never say it's great to be ill and it's amazing to be neurodivergent! Just a thought
There is no such thing as "gender dysphoria." If you claim "transexual" is a real thing and then use "gender" that way, you're confusing yourself with word games because you aren't smart enough to see what is going on.
There is no such thing as "trans." Sex is binary and immutable.
There is no such thing as "transition." It does not occur.
A male who "feels like" he's female is usually a heterosexual autogynephile (a pervert) or a failed homosexual male. He remains male and nothing changes with any amount of wigs, makeup, surgery, or anything else.
I'm not surprised you have mental health problems, and you also have intelligence problems.