I haven’t said much publicly about transgender issues because those who are on my “side” politically (I’ve been cast as right-wing, you see) have been using it as a political football.
I just published a paper, "Transgender killers, the monsters that walk among us."
And one challenging aspect of trying to pull actual data on trans killers into focus is the fact that there is now, no medical discipline around the definition of what a transgender person is. Since the eradication of gender gate keepers, pro trans doctors accept any patient's own self diagnosis.
As a result I am assuming there is a wide range of people claiming to be trans, without any external validation of said. And thusly, the trans killers sub class, include a wide range of fruits, nuts, crazies, and run of the mill homicidal and serial killers.
But the numbers I was able to scratch together show 2x greater number of MTF transgender killers than in normal males in society.
15 seconds of Googling will demonstrate that cisgender men sexually assault women in women's bathrooms all the time; it may shock you to learn that a sign on a door does not in fact offer any protection against rape. Meanwhile, the constantly-expressed fear of seeing the genitals of a man in a woman's bathroom is truly bizarre. I have been in public men's bathrooms thousands of times and I have never once seen the genitals of another man. And men's rooms have urinals! Women's bathrooms have all stalls. So what is the scenario in which you would see the genitals of a trans woman in the bathroom? What goes on in the bathrooms where you're from?
And this speaks to a broader incoherence in right-wing anti-trans rhetoric. You're here purporting to offer a rational, evidence-based approach, but you haven't even theorized what your actual objection to trans women in bathrooms is. You know that in the rhetorical space in which you operate attacking trans people is the softest landing of all.
As a woman, I do NOT want any type of man in a women's restroom. There have been too many rapes in women's restrooms done by men who put on a dress and say they are a woman; these include men with beards. I've read way too many articles on trans MtoF who enter restrooms where there are little girls and those girls are ogled and are very uncomfortable to say nothing of the fact that in girl's gym changing rooms there are MtoF who take their clothes off and the little girls are forced to see a man's penis. No woman could protect themselves against a man who rapes them - men need to stay out of women's spaces. Period.
First, let me say that I'm a big fan of your work. Especially your writing on standardized tests.
As to your response, I'm curious whether you're AGP? It seems a bit emotionally argued, which is surprising. I believe I was clear that my objection to trans women in women's spaces is that their rates of sex offenses are similar to or greater than male rates. I never mentioned anything about seeing male genitals, so I'm not sure what you're responding to with that comment. While you're right that signs don't prevent sexual assault, that's a strawman. It isn't the sign that helps keep women safe, it's the social norm that men who enter women's spaces are creeps who should be stopped.
GREAT article, Diane, you make some great points. I spent many years as a therapist and I believe these gender disoriented people have mental health issues - and the rest of the world does NOT need to pay for their surgery or cater to their numerous neuroses IMO.
Great post, agree wholeheartedly with one caveat. Don't really see it being used as a football by the bigoted right, perhaps I'm on the wrong subs. Perhaps it's convenient to pitch against that strawman as a political stance in itself, eg 'I'm not like those deplorables over there, listen to me'. I hope it's effective.
While I appreciate you going into the topic, this definitely comes off as if you had avoided it for a long time.
I know you cite a lot on mtf, but try digging into the atomic bomb this has caused to girls and young women. Women and girls who have confusing (if not abusive) sexual relationships are told to carve up their bodies and chemically castrate themselves to solve it.
These points have been made for years. It has fallen on deaf ears to activists, lawmakers, and doctors alike. It doesn’t matter who says it either; there is no shortage of testimonials, clear data, or professional/academic organizations that give your points validity.
I’m really not certain how to overcome this. It seems like the only way out is through. And that means scarring an entire generation with this that we will likely never be forgiven for.
No, it's that cosmetic surgery results in an actual "sex change", of the sort that could only occur with a change between XX and XY chromosomes. There are some species of animal that have that mutability. No mammals, though.
Gender really is more of a mental/psychic spectrum- and also one related to culture and society. The most dramatic examples, like the hjira of India, seem to have emerged during the Mogul era, in association with the phenomenon of court eunuchs. Eunuchs- castrated males- have emerged as a "deputized class" of social stratified civilizations from ancient Egypt to dynastic Imperial China and the Ottoman Empire, and elsewhere. But there have also been gender-fluid individuals, and cultures that accept them and allow them roles that are socially legitimate, all over the world, with no need for body modifications. It's a common enough phenomenon to show up in societies all over the planet. There are historic examples in the recent history of American culture, as researchers into gender fluidity have documented. A fact that trans advocates are happy to note. Social circles are local, and the intimacy of social circles is often known to make allowances, even within a wider social milieu of intolerance or taboo. The attempts at reification through medical interventions and the norming of castrated eunuchs and deputized social roles for "trans identities" are not really part of the European culture complex in the era following the advent of Christian cultural prominence, however.
The confluence of "gender fluidity" with modern medical technology is of course a very recent phenomenon. But being gelded is a much older bodily intervention, and one that's always been well-known to result in dramatic changes- anatomically, physically, temperamentally. Considered simply in terms of secondary sexual characteristics, changes can be induced both hormonally and through cosmetic surgery. But these are profound decisions with lifelong consequences, including some changes that are irreversible once they've been made. There's no such thing as "partial reversibility"; there's only retro-correction, surgery upon surgery, hormone shift upon hormone shift. The memories related to transition are not undone by re-transitioning. I don't think that the advocates for trans medical interventions are being entirely candid and accurate with their rhetoric. I don't think trans surgery for adults is any more or less legitimate than plastic surgery, per se; I accept that it's an individual right. But I haven't heard much discussion about the historic phenomenon of eunuchs, few of whom "transitioned" as a result of their own adult free will. Considering the centrality of "power concerns" to the modern discourse on this phenomenon, one would think that its scholarly researchers would give the historic social class and cultural aspects of eunuchism more attention.
(update) found the first source link, by trying different characters for the vertical bar (looked like lower-case L, the numeral 1 (one) and even capital i.)
The 2nd link points to what looks like 2021 data. Is that a typo in the article that says it's based on 2023 data?
The real issue is one of values. What do you value? If you value family continuity, you are against the trans thing. If you do not, it is no big deal.
Look, this is crazy. Look, humans are complex, and variance on gender rolls is more than acceptable. But altering children’s bodies is crazy. The real argument is that trans people will kill themselves if we don’t as a society help them mutilate themselves. That, however, is little different from a person holding a gun to their head and saying they will shoot if we do not all call them the King of Australia.
While I personally wouldn’t have a problem with crazy people removing themselves from the genepool, either through sterilizing themselves, or suicide, the issue, as you point out, is that they wish to basically trans kids at the earliest possible time.
So to me you have to use hammers, not scalpels. We can agree that what people do (like playing with lego machine guns, or dolls) is basically okay. But as a society, we have to let people know that if they wish to take their fetishes further than the bedroom and out into society, there are consequences. Stay away from kids, we will not be doing surgeries period, no matter who funds it, and in general we will be trying to treat gender dysphoria by getting the sufferers to accept what their chromosomes say. Outside of a few edge cases (like Kleinfelters for instance) this will be easy. Any Doctor who plays into this loses their license, possibly does jail time, and if they mess with kids, they get the rope.
When gay marriage was seen by most as a fair and reasonable thing for gay people to ask for, and receive, I was in the 'No' camp. People would look at you funny if you stated such opinions out loud and/or you would be labelled homophobic. To set the record straight I've happily worked with gay people and even slept with a lesbian in my youth, so no I don't hate the gay, being flirted with by a male or female is still a compliment. The fact that I'm trying to get at here is normal biological sex works for a reason, while gay sex doesn't end in more gay boys and girls. This social forcing of gender spectrum, of gender being on a spectrum, will inevitably result in rapid population decline within a few generations. Is this the real agenda, destroy the family unit while sterilising their kids? It sounds crazy, but look around you and see what else "they" are doing that reduces population. These people are cult members of an organise gang, so anything goes to achieve their goal. Third world war anyone?
I just published a paper, "Transgender killers, the monsters that walk among us."
And one challenging aspect of trying to pull actual data on trans killers into focus is the fact that there is now, no medical discipline around the definition of what a transgender person is. Since the eradication of gender gate keepers, pro trans doctors accept any patient's own self diagnosis.
As a result I am assuming there is a wide range of people claiming to be trans, without any external validation of said. And thusly, the trans killers sub class, include a wide range of fruits, nuts, crazies, and run of the mill homicidal and serial killers.
But the numbers I was able to scratch together show 2x greater number of MTF transgender killers than in normal males in society.
Rene Jax
Very interesting data. Thanks Ms. Yap for taking time an energy to pull all this together.
15 seconds of Googling will demonstrate that cisgender men sexually assault women in women's bathrooms all the time; it may shock you to learn that a sign on a door does not in fact offer any protection against rape. Meanwhile, the constantly-expressed fear of seeing the genitals of a man in a woman's bathroom is truly bizarre. I have been in public men's bathrooms thousands of times and I have never once seen the genitals of another man. And men's rooms have urinals! Women's bathrooms have all stalls. So what is the scenario in which you would see the genitals of a trans woman in the bathroom? What goes on in the bathrooms where you're from?
And this speaks to a broader incoherence in right-wing anti-trans rhetoric. You're here purporting to offer a rational, evidence-based approach, but you haven't even theorized what your actual objection to trans women in bathrooms is. You know that in the rhetorical space in which you operate attacking trans people is the softest landing of all.
As a woman, I do NOT want any type of man in a women's restroom. There have been too many rapes in women's restrooms done by men who put on a dress and say they are a woman; these include men with beards. I've read way too many articles on trans MtoF who enter restrooms where there are little girls and those girls are ogled and are very uncomfortable to say nothing of the fact that in girl's gym changing rooms there are MtoF who take their clothes off and the little girls are forced to see a man's penis. No woman could protect themselves against a man who rapes them - men need to stay out of women's spaces. Period.
First, let me say that I'm a big fan of your work. Especially your writing on standardized tests.
As to your response, I'm curious whether you're AGP? It seems a bit emotionally argued, which is surprising. I believe I was clear that my objection to trans women in women's spaces is that their rates of sex offenses are similar to or greater than male rates. I never mentioned anything about seeing male genitals, so I'm not sure what you're responding to with that comment. While you're right that signs don't prevent sexual assault, that's a strawman. It isn't the sign that helps keep women safe, it's the social norm that men who enter women's spaces are creeps who should be stopped.
GREAT article, Diane, you make some great points. I spent many years as a therapist and I believe these gender disoriented people have mental health issues - and the rest of the world does NOT need to pay for their surgery or cater to their numerous neuroses IMO.
Great post, agree wholeheartedly with one caveat. Don't really see it being used as a football by the bigoted right, perhaps I'm on the wrong subs. Perhaps it's convenient to pitch against that strawman as a political stance in itself, eg 'I'm not like those deplorables over there, listen to me'. I hope it's effective.
While I appreciate you going into the topic, this definitely comes off as if you had avoided it for a long time.
I know you cite a lot on mtf, but try digging into the atomic bomb this has caused to girls and young women. Women and girls who have confusing (if not abusive) sexual relationships are told to carve up their bodies and chemically castrate themselves to solve it.
These points have been made for years. It has fallen on deaf ears to activists, lawmakers, and doctors alike. It doesn’t matter who says it either; there is no shortage of testimonials, clear data, or professional/academic organizations that give your points validity.
I’m really not certain how to overcome this. It seems like the only way out is through. And that means scarring an entire generation with this that we will likely never be forgiven for.
The central lie is that with medical intervention, you can actually change your gender.
No, it's that cosmetic surgery results in an actual "sex change", of the sort that could only occur with a change between XX and XY chromosomes. There are some species of animal that have that mutability. No mammals, though.
Gender really is more of a mental/psychic spectrum- and also one related to culture and society. The most dramatic examples, like the hjira of India, seem to have emerged during the Mogul era, in association with the phenomenon of court eunuchs. Eunuchs- castrated males- have emerged as a "deputized class" of social stratified civilizations from ancient Egypt to dynastic Imperial China and the Ottoman Empire, and elsewhere. But there have also been gender-fluid individuals, and cultures that accept them and allow them roles that are socially legitimate, all over the world, with no need for body modifications. It's a common enough phenomenon to show up in societies all over the planet. There are historic examples in the recent history of American culture, as researchers into gender fluidity have documented. A fact that trans advocates are happy to note. Social circles are local, and the intimacy of social circles is often known to make allowances, even within a wider social milieu of intolerance or taboo. The attempts at reification through medical interventions and the norming of castrated eunuchs and deputized social roles for "trans identities" are not really part of the European culture complex in the era following the advent of Christian cultural prominence, however.
The confluence of "gender fluidity" with modern medical technology is of course a very recent phenomenon. But being gelded is a much older bodily intervention, and one that's always been well-known to result in dramatic changes- anatomically, physically, temperamentally. Considered simply in terms of secondary sexual characteristics, changes can be induced both hormonally and through cosmetic surgery. But these are profound decisions with lifelong consequences, including some changes that are irreversible once they've been made. There's no such thing as "partial reversibility"; there's only retro-correction, surgery upon surgery, hormone shift upon hormone shift. The memories related to transition are not undone by re-transitioning. I don't think that the advocates for trans medical interventions are being entirely candid and accurate with their rhetoric. I don't think trans surgery for adults is any more or less legitimate than plastic surgery, per se; I accept that it's an individual right. But I haven't heard much discussion about the historic phenomenon of eunuchs, few of whom "transitioned" as a result of their own adult free will. Considering the centrality of "power concerns" to the modern discourse on this phenomenon, one would think that its scholarly researchers would give the historic social class and cultural aspects of eunuchism more attention.
Trans is chemical poisoning. Plastics have estrogen, and even infants in utero -- all of them, in America, I'm sure -- are exposed to those estrogens.
The rest of the problem is social contagion. It's hard to say which is worse but both are problems that need to be solved, and not ignored.
Cheers
👎👎👎
(update) found the first source link, by trying different characters for the vertical bar (looked like lower-case L, the numeral 1 (one) and even capital i.)
The 2nd link points to what looks like 2021 data. Is that a typo in the article that says it's based on 2023 data?
Here is the link from the figure: https://archive.is/5bIVF
It doesn't contain ANY data on gender identity, so I'm not sure where they got the 92 number from...
I believe the 48,000 number comes from here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/genderidentity/bulletins/genderidentityenglandandwales/census2021
Heard you on Lou Perez's podcast today. Enjoyed your conversation and your writing.
The real issue is one of values. What do you value? If you value family continuity, you are against the trans thing. If you do not, it is no big deal.
Look, this is crazy. Look, humans are complex, and variance on gender rolls is more than acceptable. But altering children’s bodies is crazy. The real argument is that trans people will kill themselves if we don’t as a society help them mutilate themselves. That, however, is little different from a person holding a gun to their head and saying they will shoot if we do not all call them the King of Australia.
While I personally wouldn’t have a problem with crazy people removing themselves from the genepool, either through sterilizing themselves, or suicide, the issue, as you point out, is that they wish to basically trans kids at the earliest possible time.
So to me you have to use hammers, not scalpels. We can agree that what people do (like playing with lego machine guns, or dolls) is basically okay. But as a society, we have to let people know that if they wish to take their fetishes further than the bedroom and out into society, there are consequences. Stay away from kids, we will not be doing surgeries period, no matter who funds it, and in general we will be trying to treat gender dysphoria by getting the sufferers to accept what their chromosomes say. Outside of a few edge cases (like Kleinfelters for instance) this will be easy. Any Doctor who plays into this loses their license, possibly does jail time, and if they mess with kids, they get the rope.
I don’t think that is unreasonable
It's called a slippery slop for a reason.
When gay marriage was seen by most as a fair and reasonable thing for gay people to ask for, and receive, I was in the 'No' camp. People would look at you funny if you stated such opinions out loud and/or you would be labelled homophobic. To set the record straight I've happily worked with gay people and even slept with a lesbian in my youth, so no I don't hate the gay, being flirted with by a male or female is still a compliment. The fact that I'm trying to get at here is normal biological sex works for a reason, while gay sex doesn't end in more gay boys and girls. This social forcing of gender spectrum, of gender being on a spectrum, will inevitably result in rapid population decline within a few generations. Is this the real agenda, destroy the family unit while sterilising their kids? It sounds crazy, but look around you and see what else "they" are doing that reduces population. These people are cult members of an organise gang, so anything goes to achieve their goal. Third world war anyone?
Diane, this was amazing and revealing and interesting. I really appreciated this post. You’re a national treasure.