7-year-old transgender child closes down Girl Scout troops

[Kathryn]

If someone is biological male but identifies as a female, would you be unwilling to use female pronouns or refer to the person as a female (or the other way around)?

Me personally? No. But if my 12 year old daughter was going to share a sleeping bag with someone with a penis I would probably have some concerns.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Me personally? No. But if my 12 year old daughter was going to share a sleeping bag with someone with a penis I would probably have some concerns.

In all my years in Scouting, I never shared a sleeping bag with anyone.

 

[Kathryn]

In all my years in Scouting, I never shared a sleeping bag with anyone.

Would you be ok with your twelve year old daughter sharing a pup tent with someone with a penis? Undressing in the same room? Sharing a bathroom?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Would you be ok with your twelve year old daughter sharing a pup tent with someone with a penis? Undressing in the same room? Sharing a bathroom?

I suppose I would be uncomfortable with my hypothetical twelve-year-old daughter doing any of those things with someone who would try to have sex with her, but a transgendered girl doesn't fit that bill any more than a cis-gendered girl would.

 

[Kathryn]

I suppose I would be uncomfortable with my hypothetical twelve-year-old daughter doing any of those things with someone who would try to have sex with her, but a transgendered girl doesn't fit that bill any more than a cis-gendered girl would.

My questions don't stem from any sort of phobias about transgender, gay, or lesbian identities. I am talking about things from a physiological perspective.

When Bobby grows up, can she be on the Women's Olympic Team while still sporting male genitalia?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm not very familiar with disorders involving gender. I do know that there are disorders in which there are sexual organs of one gender but chromosomes indicate that the other gender is the most prevalent, so that's what I was asking about.

I just wonder where one draws the line when it comes to organizations whose membership is determined by gender.

Someone with Gender Identity Disorder is born with one physical sex, but there brain develops as the opposite sex which causes the person to identify as the opposite sex. But even that is a very shallow definition because gender is such a massive spectrum that male, female, intersexed, and transsexual is barely touching it. Our society only views gender as male and female, which there is rarely any issue that is black in white. Many cultures have several terms for gender and the various ways people express it. Some identify as neither, both, and some people it just depends on there mood. Gender is such an in depth topic that there are psychologist and psychiatrist that specialize in it.

As for gender-based organizations, speaking as a transwoman it would be nice if more people and groups went by gender expression. We don't mean anyone any harm, but many women see as a potential threat. The differences may make the situation seem awkward, but in all honesty it's usually everyone else making it awkward over making a big deal over nothing. Many transwomen are even scared to use a public restroom because many people do not like that and it can be very awkward.

But frankly, I believe that if a person has a penis and testicles, and their DNA/genetic code is male, then they are male. Now - do they have the right to carry themselves or consider themselves as female? Sure they do. That doesn't make them female however.

It's very sad you think that. Odds are pretty good that you have encountered someone presenting as female and had no idea about it.

As for the Scouts, there is a group called Camp Fire USA that does much of the same things as the Scouts, only they are secular and do not have any many of the exclusions the Scouts have, such as gender.

My questions don't stem from any sort of phobias about transgender, gay, or lesbian identities. I am talking about things from a physiological perspective.

Psychologically there really is nothing to worry about. Sure there may be some questions that will be brought up, but depending on how the parent answers determines how the child will feel towards a transgendered person, or any person that has some perceived difference. Race is a good example of this. If a parent speaks negatively of someone who isn't Caucasian, the child will learn the same negative habits. But the child will learn tolerance if the parent speaks in a positive manner.
But really there is nothing to be worried about and quite often it's the people that think there is a problem that are the ones that make things difficult. We only ask that we be allowed to live as the person we really are.

 

[Drolefille]

See - it's never enough. That's why people get so ticked off. Bobby is NOT a female physically from what I can tell. So it's not enough to say "Call it Scouts and just leave gender out of it." No, everyone has to acknowledge a person with a penis and testicles as a girl.

No it's not, the GSA serves a purpose in that it helps girls. While I think that boys and girls should (obviously) have equal opportunities I don't think that means eliminating all single gender avenues.
And why are you so concerned about someone else's genitalia? I mean, you don't expect the GSA to check genitals at the door right?

As an example, I have a friend who is XXY, raised female. He identifies somewhere between male and genderqueer but has no interest in surgery or transitioning. However his genitals are, and I quote, "something you wouldn't recognize if you weren't an gynecologist." He was born that way. Genitalia aren't the be-all of one's gender.

WHAT? Look, I don't have any girls in Girl Scouts, nor did I much care for Girl Scouts when I was a young girl. In other words, I don't have a vested interest in the group. I am merely expressing my opinion - which is what everyone on this forum does. You're doing the same thing.

Yeah which is why what you said came off weird. Your opinion is that an organization that you have nothing to do with should change because you don't recognize transgender women and girls as women or girls.

Right, and I'd consider that your opinion, not a directive, or some sort of unacknowledged urge you have to start up a country club.

My opinion is that it would be a good idea. Granting them my permission is stupid.
Hence why I wrote what I did. I rather knew that I'd get a 'just expressing my opinion' response.

Well, you're right about one thing - I'm not interested enough in this topic to even consider calling the GSA HQ.

Good, because they don't need to you telling them to exclude transgendered girls.

But frankly, I believe that if a person has a penis and testicles, and their DNA/genetic code is male, then they are male. Now - do they have the right to carry themselves or consider themselves as female? Sure they do. That doesn't make them female however.

It does in the eyes of physicians and psychologists and sociologists and you know, people who are experts in the area. Creating your own standard of who is or isn't female is setting yourself up for failure.

I'm not making a moral judgment on the issue - I'm simply stating that physically they are male, not female - so, IN AN EFFORT TO SQUELCH DISCRIMINATION BASED ON GENDER, I suggested simply calling the group Scouts.

No you're trying to discriminate based on gender by redefining it. I'm sure you feel like the transgender community is redefining it but you're pretty behind on that issue.
The Girl Scouts aren't just "the Scouts" they're for girls. As there are opportunities for both boys and girls there's not any discrimination and what you're proposing is discriminating based on one's trans/cis gendered status. Girl Scouts accepts people who identify and present as girls. That's what 'gender' means as opposed to 'sex' which you seem to be trying to go by.

And while you state you're not making a moral judgement, you've decided to make some kind of judgement that you get to decide who is female and who isn't. So what do you base that on?

I believe that the Scouts in general can do a good job of empowering ALL kids, including transgender kids. You don't have to focus on gender at all to empower individuals.

No, you don't. But the GSA and the BSA both do. I disagree with the BSA on their stances but as both are private organizations and there are opportunities for both boys and girls it's not a discriminatory situation. (By gender anyway, BSA is quite discriminatory.)

There's no reason there couldn't be a Scouts as well as a GSA and a BSA, of course. But there's not inherently a problem with the GSA either.

My questions don't stem from any sort of phobias about transgender, gay, or lesbian identities. I am talking about things from a physiological perspective.

There is physiological evidence including brain scans that indicate that no one is making up that they're transgendered for the fun of it. You're not really talking physiology you're talking about people's genitals.

You're saying you're not transphobic but the things you are saying hurt transgendered individuals.

[quotes]When Bobby grows up, can she be on the Women's Olympic Team while still sporting male genitalia?[/quote]

That's an oddly specific question, I have a feeling you looked it up:

The IOC advisory group recommended that individuals undergoing sex reassignment after puberty could compete, but only under certain conditions.
Surgical changes must have been completed, including external genitalia changes and removal of gonads.
Legal recognition of their assigned sex must have been conferred by appropriate official authorities.
Hormone therapy -- for the assigned sex -- must have been given for long enough to minimize any gender-related advantages in sport competitions, a period that must be at least two years after gonadectomy.

Trans groups criticize the requirement for surgical changes to be required. Hormone therapy makes sense, one's genitals don't convey any sort of advantages or disadvantages. Bobby may or may not decide to have genital surgery for a variety of reasons, although MTF surgery is much MUCH more effective than FTM genital surgery so if she chooses she's got a better shot.

Bobby will however be perfectly capable of using the women's bathrooms, changing rooms, locker rooms, playing women's sports, etc. as long as idiots don't try and tell her that she's really a boy and should go pee in the men's bathroom.

 

[Kathryn]

[/COLOR]
Psychologically there really is nothing to worry about. Sure there may be some questions that will be brought up, but depending on how the parent answers determines how the child will feel towards a transgendered person, or any person that has some perceived difference. Race is a good example of this. If a parent speaks negatively of someone who isn't Caucasian, the child will learn the same negative habits. But the child will learn tolerance if the parent speaks in a positive manner.

I agree with this generally. I didn't say "psychological." I said "physiological." There are - ARE - physiological differences between males and females, regardless of what gender people identify with.

Odds are pretty good that you have encountered someone presenting as female and had no idea about it.

Shadow - it doesn't bother me if someone wants to express themselves as a different gender. That's not my point.

As for the Scouts, there is a group called Camp Fire USA that does much of the same things as the Scouts, only they are secular and do not have any many of the exclusions the Scouts have, such as gender.

Right, and more power to them.

But really there is nothing to be worried about and quite often it's the people that think there is a problem that are the ones that make things difficult. We only ask that we be allowed to live as the person we really are.

I agree. I never stated otherwise.

 

[dust1n]

What is interesting is that the troops in question that were disbanded were in an entirely different state from the one where the transgender girl is. Do they think being transgender is going to "spread" across state lines simply through the association of the term "Girl Scout"? What is really the sad part in all this are that there were girls who lost out on their troops because of the bigotry and fear of their troop leaders. Now they must find different troops and be separated from the friends they made in their former troops. If the leaders of the troops, all from the same Christian school, had some weird moral issue with "Girl Scouts" as an organization then they could have done the mature thing and put in notice and tried to get replacement leaders for the girls who wanted to remain in their troops instead of just disbanding and abandoning them. The women who did this just come off as ignorant, bigoted, and uncaring. They probably shouldn't have been troop leaders in the first place if they couldn't care enough about the girls to see what they wanted before they threw their temper-tantrums and walked out.


And honestly, the title of this thread is quite misleading and outright false. It's not Bobby's fault those troops were disbanded, it's the fault of 3 women, obviously friends, who threw a tissy and walked out on their troops.

I'm out of frubals, but this is a great post, and I agree.

What a surprise three women in America are so terrified by a transgender that even the slightest association with one isn't properly illustrated as sheer bigotry and pretty much as any prophet or near reasonable human has ever described as pretty much the opposite of good.... I think I said that right...

 

[dust1n]

You're absolutely right. I have a tendency to "tabloidize" my titles so as to draw in readers. In this case it was erroneous, and I apologize for misleading anyone. In the future I'll make sure that my titles at least reflect the truth of the topic.

I didn't really regard it is misleading, other than in a very strictly empathic sense, which headlines are never written in anyway.

It is true, that a "7-year-old transgender child closed down Girl Scout troops."

[The controversy based on the existence of a] 7-year-old transgender child [within, the Girl Scout troops] closed down [a troop of Girl Scouts].

Oh wow, look at that. Over-cynicism of news headlines is often a waste of time, because to accurately critize one would would require a pretty firm understanding of why news headlines are written the way they are; Succinct, complete in thought, only ever eluding to the nutgraf, restricted to literal printing sizes to insure that papers and magazines fit text correctly with pictures and what not.

Don't beat yourself up over it.

 

[Kathryn]

No it's not, the GSA serves a purpose in that it helps girls. While I think that boys and girls should (obviously) have equal opportunities I don't think that means eliminating all single gender avenues.

I'm assuming you have some definition in your head of the terms "boys" and "girls." How do YOU define those two words?

And why are you so concerned about someone else's genitalia? I mean, you don't expect the GSA to check genitals at the door right?

You bring up an interesting point. The child in the video - Bobby - looks like a girl (and so did my boys when they were young, if I dressed them in girls' clothing). How did the GSA even know that Bobby has a penis?

As an example, I have a friend who is XXY, raised female. He identifies somewhere between male and genderqueer but has no interest in surgery or transitioning. However his genitals are, and I quote, "something you wouldn't recognize if you weren't an gynecologist." He was born that way. Genitalia aren't the be-all of one's gender.

I have already pointed out that there are some physical anomalies when it comes to genitalia and chromosomes. I was told that in Bobby's case, this isn't part of the equation. In fact, I even asked specifically if Bobby had any anomalies and was told (perhaps by you, I can't remember) that this didn't matter at all. So while your friend's story is interesting, it doesn't really play a part in this particular case.

Your opinion is that an organization that you have nothing to do with should change because you don't recognize transgender women and girls as women or girls.

It was a SUGGESTION - not a cause or a directive. But you know this -you're just continuing to harp on this non-point as if it is actually important or some sort of crux of an argument.

My opinion is that it would be a good idea. Granting them my permission is stupid.

So is this "argument." As a person with no children involved in the Scouts, how do I even have the power to "grant them my permission" to do anything?

Hence why I wrote what I did. I rather knew that I'd get a 'just expressing my opinion' response.

Well, maybe this is evidence that you do have some reasoning capabilities, since I actually AM "just expressing my opinion."

The funny thing is, you're saying the same thing. "I'm just expressing my opinion!" Sheeze, the irony...

Good, because they don't need to you telling them to exclude transgendered girls.

I agree.

Creating your own standard of who is or isn't female is setting yourself up for failure.

Now I'm "setting my own standard?" Hmmm, let's see - when I had ultrasounds before I had children, my doctors were able to tell me whether the baby was a boy or a girl. What on EARTH did they base this on?

I don't have to define male and female "by my own standard." Others before me have already done so.

Definition of FEMALE

1
a (1) : of, relating to, or being the sex that bears young or produces eggs (2) : pistillate
Female - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

fe·male (fml)
adj.
Of, relating to, or denoting the sex that produces ova or bears young.
n.
1. A member of the sex that produces ova or bears young.
2. A woman or girl.
female - definition of female in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

fe·male   [fee-meyl] Show IPA
noun
1.
a person bearing two X chromosomes in the cell nuclei and normally having a vagina, a uterus and ovaries, and developing at puberty a relatively rounded body and enlarged breasts, and retaining a beardless face; a girl or woman.
Female | Define Female at Dictionary.com

Meanwhile, it is the term "transgender" which has yet to be clearly defined.

"Transgender is the state of one's "gender identity" (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) not matching one's "assigned sex" (identification by others as male, female or intersex based on physical/genetic sex).[1] "Transgender" does not imply any specific form of sexual orientation; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, polysexual, or asexual; some may consider conventional sexual orientation labels inadequate or inapplicable to them. The precise definition for transgender remains in flux, but includes:
"Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these."[2]
"People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves."[3]
"Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth."[4]
A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as "other", "agender", "Genderqueer", or "third gender". Transgender people may also identify as bigender, or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum, or the more encompassing continuums which have been developed in response to the significantly more detailed studies done in recent years."
Transgender - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Girl Scouts accepts people who identify and present as girls. That's what 'gender' means as opposed to 'sex' which you seem to be trying to go by.

And while you state you're not making a moral judgement, you've decided to make some kind of judgement that you get to decide who is female and who isn't. So what do you base that on?

Now it's ME "getting to decide who is female and who isn't." Isn't that what you're doing as well? Isn't that what the Olympic committee does when they allow or disallow someone to compete as a woman? Isn't that what the Census Bureau does? Isn't that what a medical facility does when they ask you to fill out just about any form for their records? Don't lay that discrimination and judgmental crap on me.

You're saying you're not transphobic but the things you are saying hurt transgendered individuals.

That's not my intention at all. I feel genuinely sympathetic for anyone struggling with issues involving sexual identity. And for those who aren't struggling, but have sorted out their gender issues and are living happily in whatever state, good for them.

I'm sure life as a transgendered person must be difficult sometimes.

But to pretend that I have no grounds to determine that someone with a penis is male and someone with a vagina is female is not only ridiculous, but indicative of some sort of state of denial. That's my opinion, anyway. (Just wanted to make that "opinion thing" clear.)

"When Bobby grows up, can she be on the Women's Olympic Team while still sporting male genitalia?"

That's an oddly specific question, I have a feeling you looked it up:

No, I didn't "look it up" (though if I had, why would that be odd?).

Bobby will however be perfectly capable of using the women's bathrooms, changing rooms, locker rooms, playing women's sports, etc. as long as idiots don't try and tell her that she's really a boy and should go pee in the men's bathroom.

I never said Bobby wouldn't be CAPABLE. However, as a person with male physical characteristics (and therefore, for example, physical advantages when it comes to many sports) - is it fair and right for Bobby to compete on a women's sports team? That's just one example - one based in those apparently uncomfortable realities of clearly defined physical differences between the sexes.

Men and women are physically, biologically, genetically different. It's reality. I'm sorry if reality offends you.

 

[Penumbra]

A person's sex, generally, is easy to define unless there is a biological problem. At that point, it becomes more difficult to define. Medical forms which were referenced in an earlier post, for example, almost always ask for a person's sex, not a person's gender.

As far as gender goes, I don't even have a definition. Gender is something I observe to exist, but cannot define. But gender is rather important, since sources I've seen have stated the suicide rate of people with gender identity disorder to be between 20% and 30% or higher, which is extremely high compared to the general population. I think many of us take for granted that it usually works out nicely and gender identity matches physical sex. Since I don't have a definition to offer; I'll just refer to people however they want to be referred as, and how they express themselves. If a person identifies as having a female identity, they are female to me. If they have a male identity, they are male to me. If they don't want to be associated with a gender, that's a bit trickier because my mind will probably associate them with whatever gender they seem closer to, but I'll use whatever pronouns they wish and honor their self-expression.

It's rather rarely where biology should come into it at all. I don't really care if a transwoman uses a woman's restroom; she's female as far as I'm concerned since that's how she identifies and expresses herself. Chances are, I wouldn't even know if she was biologically male. Same with girl scouts; if she identifies and expresses as a girl, she's a girl. I'm not going to tell her otherwise. I wouldn't have known the girl in the video was actually a biological male unless someone told me. If it was a boy dressing up as a girl for fun one day, that's different.

If we're talking the Olympics, I'd not particularly want a person who is biologically male to compete in the female division regardless of how they express themselves. The sex division occurs because male bodies are generally superior than female ones in terms of athletics. Maybe if the person transitioned early, never experienced puberty as the their biological sex, it could be ok, but even then I'd be cautious about that too, since at that high level of competition, every little edge matters. Generally, I think that for female divisions, the participants should be biologically female, and for male divisions, it should be ok for basically anyone to participate, since that's the higher level of play. For example, in martial arts tournaments I have participated in, males are not allowed to fight in female divisions, but females can fight in male divisions (although it's rare). But if we're not talking Olympics or professional sports (and therefore are talking about basically 99% of people), I think it's reasonable to let male-to-female people play in female leagues as long as their physical abilities fit in. Especially if they transitioned early. It's a judgment call, imo.

 

[Father Heathen]

This stuff just makes me crazy. Who gives a crap what the child has between their legs? Let the kid be a kid and enjoy their life without all this ignorance.

Well, that's religion for you, Rick.

 

[Drolefille]

I'm assuming you have some definition in your head of the terms "boys" and "girls." How do YOU define those two words?

Based on one's gender identity not one's genitals.

How did the GSA even know that Bobby has a penis?

Since mom is struggling to use correct pronouns, my guess is that Bobby is new to presenting as a female. Odds are the GSA doesn't know whether Bobby has a penis. I hate that as soon as someone is transgendered the status of their genitals becomes appropriate and ~necessary~ as a topic of conversation.

So while your friend's story is interesting, it doesn't really play a part in this particular case.

So stop being concerned about whether a girl scout has a penis or a clitoris or something in between. It's not about genitals.

It was a SUGGESTION - not a cause or a directive. But you know this -you're just continuing to harp on this non-point as if it is actually important or some sort of crux of an argument.

So is this "argument." As a person with no children involved in the Scouts, how do I even have the power to "grant them my permission" to do anything?

That was how you phrased your argument, and that's what I responded to. I'm so sorry I continue to harp on it by writing two more sentences on the matter in this post. Oh wait make that three.

Well, maybe this is evidence that you do have some reasoning capabilities, since I actually AM "just expressing my opinion."

The funny thing is, you're saying the same thing. "I'm just expressing my opinion!" Sheeze, the irony...

You swerved into the personal comments lane for that weak snark?

Now I'm "setting my own standard?" Hmmm, let's see - when I had ultrasounds before I had children, my doctors were able to tell me whether the baby was a boy or a girl. What on EARTH did they base this on?

They told you the sex of your child, to the best of their ability and primarily based on whether or not they saw a penis at any given moment. There are plenty of surprise boys born because they were "shy" and your doctor probably cannot tell you whether a child is intersexed based on an ultrasound. They definitely can't tell you if your child is cis or trans.

I don't have to define male and female "by my own standard." Others before me have already done so.

I'm skipping your dictionary definitions as (modern) dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive for the most part. They don't attempt to limit people to their definitions, just describe the current usage of the word.

If you limit your education to Mirriam-Websters you're missing out on decades of knowledge.

It is nonetheless amusing that you didn't pull the MW definition of transgender which is far clearer than the wikipedia article. However there's nothing that really disagrees with anything anyone is saying about transgender individuals in that article.

But here's where you should have been looking, not at male and female which are about one's biological sex - including pretty much any species that has male and female sexes, but at man and woman:

Biological factors are not sufficient determinants of whether a person considers herself a woman or is considered a woman. Intersex individuals, who have mixed physical and/or genetic features, may use other criteria in making a clear determination. There are also transgender or transsexual women, who were born or physically assigned as male at birth, but identify as women; there are varying social, legal and individual definitions with regard to these issues. (See trans woman.)

Biological factors are not sufficient determinants of whether a person considers themselves a man or is considered a man. Intersex individuals, who have physical and/or genetic features considered to be mixed or atypical for one sex or the other, may use other criteria in making a clear determination. There are also transgender or transsexual men, who were born or physically assigned as female at birth, but identify as men; there are varying social, legal and individual definitions with regard to these issues. (See transman.)

And this is why crossing your sources can reveal a bias either intentional or subliminal.

Now it's ME "getting to decide who is female and who isn't." Isn't that what you're doing as well? Isn't that what the Olympic committee does when they allow or disallow someone to compete as a woman? Isn't that what the Census Bureau does? Isn't that what a medical facility does when they ask you to fill out just about any form for their records? Don't lay that discrimination and judgmental crap on me.

Sorry, you're the one telling someone they're not really a female because they have, you assume, a penis.
The Olympic committee gets crap for their discriminatory and judgmental opinion as well, so you're not special. The Census Bureau lets you check a box and doesn't go around checking in your underwear to find out if you match. Medical facilities generally are the same way, you check the box, you explain to your doctor that yes you're a woman but you still need a prostate exam and you move on. The medical community standard - which not every practitioner lives up to - is that gender and sex are not the same.

That's not my intention at all. I feel genuinely sympathetic for anyone struggling with issues involving sexual identity. And for those who aren't struggling, but have sorted out their gender issues and are living happily in whatever state, good for them.

If you know what you say is hurtful, is saying "I didn't mean to hurt anyone but I'm right" actually better? I mean this in the most general sense. Intent isn't magical. (NSFW)

I'm sure life as a transgendered person must be difficult sometimes.

But to pretend that I have no grounds to determine that someone with a penis is male and someone with a vagina is female is not only ridiculous, but indicative of some sort of state of denial. That's my opinion, anyway. (Just wanted to make that "opinion thing" clear.)

Are you a doctor? A psychologist? A sociologist? An expert in gender studies? Why do you think your opinion is somehow superior to the majority consensus in the fields listed above? You're entitled to it, but that doesn't make you right.

Do I think you're willfully transphobic? No. Do I think you're saying a lot of transphobic things and are pretty unaware of your privilege? Yes. I hope you make an attempt to learn more about this issue so that you don't unknowingly hurt people around you. I suspect you'll not take this in the sincere sense that it is meant, but I'm not snarking or being facetious.

No, I didn't "look it up" (though if I had, why would that be odd?).

Because it would be asking a question you knew the answer to.

I never said Bobby wouldn't be CAPABLE....(cut for length) That's just one example - one based in those apparently uncomfortable realities of clearly defined physical differences between the sexes.

So besides sports - something Bobby may or may not have an interest in AND something that hormone therapy addresses as far as advantages go, what are these other many many examples of uncomfortable realities? I mean besides the reality that Bobby's a girl.

Men and women are physically, biologically, genetically different. It's reality. I'm sorry if reality offends you.

Males and females are physically biologically and genetically different (usually). Men and women are also different, but in an entirely different way.

Scans show difference in transgender brains - PinkNews.co.uk
Studies show that FTM trans individuals have masculine brains PRIOR to hormonal treatment. This isn't a fiction. It's the reality you claim to be the expert in.

It's rather rarely where biology should come into it at all. I don't really care if a Same with girl scouts; if she identifies and expresses as a girl, she's a girl. I'm not going to tell her otherwise.

Frubal'd

If we're talking the Olympics, I'd not particularly want a person who is biologically male to compete in the female division regardless of how they express themselves...(Snipped for post length) I think it's reasonable to let male-to-female people play in female leagues as long as their physical abilities fit in. Especially if they transitioned early. It's a judgment call, imo.

I believe that studies have shown that it is about 2 years of testosterone blocking hormones that essentially removes all physical benefits of being male on MTF athletes. After that time a trans woman is within the same range of abilities as a cis woman. (Obviously some women are always better than others, but it's a range.)

That's why the trans community has less of a problem with the hormone requirements for athletes than it does the surgical requirement. FTM transitions in particular are incredibly expensive if you want to get the genital surgery done.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I agree. I never stated otherwise.

So I did misread physiological as psychological, but I'm not totally blind.

But frankly, I believe that if a person has a penis and testicles, and their DNA/genetic code is male, then they are male. Now - do they have the right to carry themselves or consider themselves as female? Sure they do. That doesn't make them female however.

You DID say we aren't the gender we are presenting and living as. Many transsexuals do not ever have genital surgery for a number of reasons. Cost is the main one for a male-to-female patient ($12,000 to upwards of $20,000), and very few female-to-male patients have it done because the the more affordable procedure will produce a neo-penis that will almost always be very small and look very deformed.

Isn't that what the Olympic committee does when they allow or disallow someone to compete as a woman?

I'm not sure about the Olympics, but there are sport organizations that do.

But to pretend that I have no grounds to determine that someone with a penis is male and someone with a vagina is female is not only ridiculous, but indicative of some sort of state of denial. That's my opinion, anyway. (Just wanted to make that "opinion thing" clear.)

That's not really the case though. Some people are born with genitals that are so ambiguous that doctors often surgically assign the child to male or female. And as far as a penis and vagina go, what of women that do not have a cervix or uterus, and instead of ovaries have undescended testicles? And then there are a handful of medical reasons why a male would need to undergo a full penectomy and/or castration. And some men willingly do away with their penis and testicles for personal reasons, but still continue living as a male.

But to clarify to simply the debate, the phrase "transgender" is an umbrella term that encompasses just about any gender variant other than that of our societies shallow view of male and female. It's not that the term isn't clearly defined, it's just a very broad term. It's really no different than saying someone is a Christian. They may be Christian, but what sort of Christian? Bobby is what is called "transsexual:" a person who was born as one sex but identifies as the other. Gender Identity Dysphoria is the word used to describe the diagnosis of this condition.

But gender is so fluid and has so much variety why stop at male and female?

 

[Skwim]

I didn't really regard it is misleading, other than in a very strictly empathic sense, which headlines are never written in anyway.

It is true, that a "7-year-old transgender child closed down Girl Scout troops."

[The controversy based on the existence of a] 7-year-old transgender child [within, the Girl Scout troops] closed down [a troop of Girl Scouts].

Oh wow, look at that. Over-cynicism of news headlines is often a waste of time, because to accurately critize one would would require a pretty firm understanding of why news headlines are written the way they are; Succinct, complete in thought, only ever eluding to the nutgraf, restricted to literal printing sizes to insure that papers and magazines fit text correctly with pictures and what not.

Don't beat yourself up over it.

For some, evidently it's disturbing when the literal implication of a thread's title isn't corroborated in full by what follows. Draka was looking for an immediate 1:1 relationship, and I let her down. I think for some it's hard to wrap one's head around a series of causes and effects . To say,"X was killed by a gunman" would be improper when what really killed X was cardiac failure. That this was caused by significant blood loss, which was caused by the hole in X's chest, which was caused by a speeding bullet, which was caused by the ignition of the gun powder in the bullet, which was caused by a gun's hammer striking the bullet, which was caused by the a pull on the gun's trigger, which was caused by the intent of the gun man, is all too much to condense.

However, I do appreciate your defense and encouraging words.

Thank you.

 

[Drolefille]

For some, evidently it's disturbing when the literal implication of a thread's title isn't corroborated in full by what follows. Draka was looking for an immediate 1:1 relationship, and I let her down. I think for some it's hard to wrap one's head around a series of causes and effects . To say,"X was killed by a gunman" would be improper when what really killed X was cardiac failure. That this was caused by significant blood loss, which was caused by the hole in X's chest, which was caused by a speeding bullet, which was caused by the ignition of the gun powder in the bullet, which was caused by a gun's hammer striking the bullet, which was caused by the a pull on the gun's trigger, which was caused by the intent of the gun man, is all too much to condense.

However, I do appreciate your defense and encouraging words.

Thank you.

I do actually understand Draka's point here in that nothing the 7 year old did actually shut anything else down. A gunman actively caused the gun to fire the bullet to hit and the heart to stop. The 7 year old was just apparently living her life, and it was the actions of other troop leaders in another state that caused it to shut down.

I'd argue the gunman has responsibility for the death of the victim, but that there's no responsibility on Bobby for the shutdown of the other troop. Even a "Controversy over transgendered 7 year old..." would make a bit more sense there.

It's not always worth arguing over, but I don't think that Draka, or anyone else here, is incapable of understanding cause and effect. It's just that there's a point at which to stop it. Otherwise all headlines would go "Big Bang causes car accident."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My questions don't stem from any sort of phobias about transgender, gay, or lesbian identities. I am talking about things from a physiological perspective.

When Bobby grows up, can she be on the Women's Olympic Team while still sporting male genitalia?

I'm not sure why that matters. I'm on 3 different steroids right now; in the state I'm in, I couldn't be on any Olympic team. Does this mean I should go off my meds?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm assuming you have some definition in your head of the terms "boys" and "girls." How do YOU define those two words?

I'm curious Kathryn, how would you define the terms? It seems from what you have posted your definitions are based primarily on genitalia and chromosomes, while outward appearance, behavior, and self-identity are not even secondary.
To me a boy is someone who identifies as and presents as male. He may play with cars or barbies or both, may be interested in doing things in the garage or in the home or both, he may act like a typical boy, he may act androgynous, he may act girly. I know a few guys (heterosexual and cisgendered) that were in ballet and are not shy to admit it. A female is someone who identifies as and presents as female. She may play with cars or barbies or both, may be interested in doing things in the garage or in the home or both, she may act like a typical girl, she may act androgynous, she may act boyish. My best friend has worked construction, roofing, and other "manly" jobs but she is still feminine and is the mother of two children.
The definitions based upon a female giving birth and a male providing sperm is actually a terrible definition because there are a number of reasons that will render someone sterile, sometimes even before the person is born. Such as a woman who will NEVER be able to bear children because she was born without a cervix and uterus, and cannot produce eggs anyways because she has testicles and XY chromosomes to go with them. Genetically she would be considered male, but if you were to examine her psychologically and her external body the last thing you would think is she is a man. Or what of a male that develops cancer and must have his penis and testicles fully removed to survive? His physical strength will inevitably decline, but he isn't any less of a man just because he lost his genitals.

 

[Kathryn]

I'm not sure why that matters. I'm on 3 different steroids right now; in the state I'm in, I couldn't be on any Olympic team. Does this mean I should go off my meds?

'

I'm sorry - I have no idea how this ties into anything that I'm saying.

You know - (and this is a general statement - not directed at just you, Penguin), I relate to and am very interested in Native Americans. I could change my name, begin practicing NA religions, integrate into NA society, adapt traditional dress, hairstyles, etc, and call myself a Native American. I may even be so sincere and convincing that other people think I AM Native American. Heck, I could become a NA activist and speak in front of Congress about their ("our") rights and benefits. But when push came to shove, and I tried to collect benefits, I'd be turned down. Why? Because genetically I am not Native American (well, actually, I'm 1/32nd NA but that doesn't qualify for benefits).

Would that make me a "fake?" Would it make me insincere? Would that impede my integration into NA society? Maybe, maybe not.

But the bottom line is, I may want to be a native American - but I'm not. Is that fair? Is it unfair? Does it hurt my feelings and make my life difficult? It is what it is. I can choose to live my dream, my reality, if I want to, but my options will always be somewhat limited.