The Scientific Case for Trans Acceptance is Simple and Necessary

And it's time we fight to put it back on the table

One thing I have been concerned about for several years now is the de-emphasis of the medical scientific case for trans acceptance, and the damage this is doing. Certain activists have attempted to silence the case for trans acceptance based on the medical scientific understanding of gender dysphoria, doing everything from discouraging people from discussing this in the trans community, to de-platforming those suspected of being 'transmedicalist', whatever that is supposed to mean. This has led to the medical scientific case for trans acceptance not being heard much in the trans discourse. In contrast, anti-trans forces often use their limited understanding of science in their arguments. While their use of science is flawed, it often goes unchallenged because the other side is unwilling to talk in scientific terms at all. All this has ultimately led to the appearance that anti-trans ideology is scientific and objective, and that clinical treatment for gender dysphoria is no more than a lifestyle choice, which ultimately leads to policies like withdrawing Medicaid funding for such treatments. This is clearly a problem we need to address, if only for the sake of preserving access to medically necessary treatments for gender dysphoria.

The medical scientific case for trans acceptance is simple. In clinical medicine, conditions are often diagnosed based on repeated observation of the same pattern in different patients, at different times and in different places. The validity of gender dysphoria as a medical condition is thus established because of it being repeated observed in thousands and thousands (or perhaps millions) of patients, across at least the past 100 years, and all over the world. This is actually a reliable method of establishing the validity of a condition, because things don't present in the same way randomly.

Moreover, the establishment of gender dysphoria as a diagnosis means that doctors can attempt to treat it. The goal of treatment in medicine is to alleviate pain and improve the quality of life. Ideological considerations like whether a certain kind of treatment conforms to social expectations are not relevant here, because they would distract from putting the patient first, which is what a doctor should be doing. (It is this point that I'm worried people like Jordan Peterson might not fully understand.) Instead, a doctor simply practices medicine in an evidence-based way, and the evidence shows that medical transition is the only treatment that is effective for relieving gender dysphoria that meets the established diagnostic criteria. While there is indeed a minority of cases of transition regret, many more patients end up benefitting from the treatment, which is why it is medically justified. To withhold the treatment from the patients who would benefit from it would be unethical indeed.

Those arguing that we can't prove the validity of trans identity and gender dysphoria because we don't know enough about the biomolecular pathways (e.g. DNA, genes, proteins) that lead to gender dysphoria simply don't know how medicine works. Doctors never start out knowing the biomolecular basis of a condition, and they certainly can't wait until the biomolecular basis is known before they start treating patients. If medicine functioned in this way, then doctors would need to refuse to treat a large number of conditions, because we still don't fully understand their biomolecular basis even today. However, to do so would be unethical, because to withhold treatment from patients who would benefit from it, while the treatment is available and established to be effective, would be unethical. Furthermore, the fact that we (meaning humankind) don't know the biomolecular basis yet is the fault of our understanding of the science not being advanced enough, and not the fault of the patients needing treatment. Society certainly should not punish the patients for our own lack of knowledge! Gender dysphoria is no different from the other conditions that fall into this category here.

The activists calling for the 'de-medicalization' of trans identity aren't helping either. They have encouraged several common misconceptions, like how 'de-medicalization' is needed for the acceptance of non-binary identities, or how those opposed to 'de-medicalization' only accept trans people on the condition that they have certain surgeries. However, what these misconceptions share is the idea that it is the surgical treatment that makes trans identity 'medical'. This, in itself, is perhaps the biggest misconception. As previously discussed, the medical validity of gender dysphoria is based on repeated clinical observation and diagnosis. The establishment of gender dysphoria as a condition is established prior to any treatment, and it is not in the option to undergo treatment that medical validity is established. Therefore, we actually do not need 'de-medicalization' in order to accept non-binary people etc. Recent trans rights reform proposals that recognizes these identities are also not dependent on the idea of 'de-medicalization' at all.

I believe the calls for 'de-medicalization' actually have less to do with non-binary acceptance and more to do with postmodern philosophy, particularly Foucauldian philosophy, which forms the foundation for what is called Queer Theory. Foucault was anti-medicine and arguably anti-objectivity, and these attitudes have carried over to Queer Theory. However, this model is highly unsuitable for arguing trans acceptance and trans rights. A decent society would certainly do their best to accommodate people with special needs. The medically established validity of gender dysphoria means that trans people should qualify as having special needs needing accommodation. However, Foucauldian philosophy, Queer Theory and activism based on these ideas actively deny the medical scientific case for trans acceptance, and instead places trans rights within  a framework of critical anarchism, where it doesn't belong at all. This serves to confuse the whole argument for trans acceptance and accommodation, and gives room for reactionary right-wing culture warriors to cast doubt upon the validity of trans identity, and ultimately take away trans rights. Therefore, at least in the current moment, I believe that Foucauldian philosophy and Queer Theory are enemies of trans acceptance, and I will be fighting against these ideas very hard at least until the scientific case is heard loudly again.

Why LGBT People are Skeptical of Organized Politics | TaraElla Clips

This is an excerpt from an article by TaraElla.

I'm old enough to remember how organized conservatism created a moral panic over gay marriage, to distract from the fact that the 2003 Iraq War was unjustified, costly, and simply immoral.

If we allow organized conservatism to continue to link otherwise good values with discriminatory policies, traditional values like modesty, decency, family values and so on will suffer, because they will be associated by young people with homophobia and bigotry. In other words, organized conservatism is giving traditional values a bad name, by associating them with discriminatory policy. Anyone who wants to preserve traditional values should push back against this.

Why Trans People Aren't Reinforcing Gender Stereotypes | Trans Sandwiched

We need to dissect and debunk this myth, once and for all.

Today, I want to talk about the idea that trans people are 'reinforcing gender stereotypes'. This talking point is popular among certain feminists, and it is increasingly being heard outside the feminist context too. Therefore, I think it is important that we debunk this myth.

Are trans people reinforcing gender stereotypes in reality? I think the objective evidence actually suggests the opposite. Many trans women are not feminine, and many trans men are not masculine, at least in the traditional sense. Some trans women are indeed very feminine, and it should be their right to express their personality in whatever way they want to. However, it is still clear that, overall, trans people are less likely than non-trans people to conform to gender stereotypes, or feel a need to do so.

I guess some people think that trans people transition because they feel a need to fit into gender norms. However, the aforementioned evidence suggests otherwise. Trans people transition because of gender dysphoria, and this dysphoria is mostly physical for many trans people. Even trans women who dress in a stereotypically feminine way might be doing this because it makes them less dysphoric about their body. It is a well known phenomenon that some trans women start out presenting very feminine at first, but later dress in a more casual way, after the physical changes from hormone therapy lessen their physical dysphoria over time. The reason why trans women can't just be 'feminine men' is because the dysphoria is a physical thing, not a social norms thing.

Therefore, if your goal is to put an end to the restrictive and discriminatory gender stereotypes, trans people are not the ones standing in your way. Instead, there are reactionary forces out there which you should be fighting. These forces are often anti-trans too, motivated by religious reasons that they might not highlight in public. Indeed, some gender critical feminists have aligned with such reactionary forces, just because they are anti-trans. They are actually forming an alliance with the kind of people who represent everything they hate, because they can't see that trans people are not their actual enemy. Well funded reactionary propaganda also plays a role in maintaining this misguided alliance, and I think we need to talk about this more often.

In conclusion, trans people don't 'reinforcing gender stereotypes' any more than non-trans people. Trans people transition because of gender dysphoria, which is mostly a physical thing, rather than a social norms thing. Therefore, they are not the enemy when it comes to ending gender stereotypes. We need to be able to talk about this clearly, and work against reactionary propaganda that is promoting outdated misunderstandings in order to build an anti-trans political alliance.

The Problems with Trans / LGBT Culture Right Now | TaraElla Clips

This is an excerpt from LGBT People Shouldn’t Push the Rest of the World Away by TaraElla.

I have three main problems with LGBT culture as it stands. Firstly, it limits the life potential of LGBT people. Secondly, it encourages a hostile worldview about the rest of the world. And finally, it leads to an inability to rationally communicate our needs to the wider world, resulting in unnecessary conflict. As I will explain, a lot of these features can be explained by historical political influences, influences that I strongly believe we should shake off as soon as possible.

So how can we shake it off? I guess just to be aware of this influence, and why it’s ultimately bad for LGBT people, is the first step.

Trans People Need to Think of Ourselves as Normal Members of Society | Trans Realist

Fight against those who want to harm us, but don't overreact all the time

Today, I want to address a criticism of my work regularly raised by some trans people: that I am supposedly too tolerant of anti-trans bigotry, and fail to recognize that there are people out there who want to hurt us. Let me start with this: I certainly don't have an appeasement policy towards anti-trans forces. I have called out the dangerous agenda of truly anti-trans people many times just within this year, and I have also argued that we need legal recognition to protect us from anti-trans forces. I have also called out those who seek to downplay the suffering of gender dysphoria in particular.

However, it is also true that some parts of the trans community have repeatedly overreacted to what people are saying. A good example of this is last year's Dave Chappelle controversy. Chappelle's work has always been controversial. It's part of his brand. In last year's Netflix special, he made controversial jokes about many groups. However, trans people were the only ones who overreacted. Somehow, trans people seem to be the only ones to think that Chappelle being Chappelle was a major threat to them. This led to headline after headline highlighting the trans-related content in the special, as if he had made a whole special dedicated to trans issues. In reality, the trans stuff was only a small part of the program.

So how can we balance the need to call out and push back against those who really want to harm us, and the need to not overreact to every insignificant thing people say? I think the answer is just to 'act normal'. What I mean by this is we should think and act like we are normal members of society. What we need to do, is to stop thinking of ourselves as oppressed victims all the time. If we do this, we would stop overreacting to things that almost nobody else thinks is important. We would also stop pushing the rest of the world away by getting combative over minor things all the time. This way, it wouldn't feel exhausting for others to deal with trans people and trans issues.

On the other hand, we must still recognize that there are people out there who are vehemently anti-trans, who would even support things that would actively make trans people suffer. In the past year, some anti-trans activists have stated that they would want to make it more difficult for people to transition. A few have even said that, in their ideal world, they would like medical transition, the medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria, to be banned. Given that no normal person would appease those who want them to suffer, it would just be very normal for trans people to call these people out and condemn their cruel positions. Indeed, if we left the Dave Chappelles of the world alone and save our rage for those who really want to harm us, I think we would gain a lot more credibility and support in mainstream society.

In conclusion, acting 'normal' towards the rest of the world is ultimately good for us, and to do that, we need to adopt a 'normal' mindset, i.e. stop thinking of ourselves as oppressed victims all the time. This would be the key to stop overreacting all the time. We still have to fight against anti-trans forces that really want to harm us, and that is also a natural part of a 'normal' mindset. After all, nobody would just allow others to harm them without fighting back, right?

Please Don't Be A Fake Trans Ally | TaraElla Clips

This is an excerpt from How to Make the Trans Community Respected Again by TaraElla.

My point is, if you don’t really want to help with the practical improvement of trans lives, please don’t pretend to be an ally and use us for your political program. To all you people using trans lives to promote your talking points of deconstruction, Foucauldian postmodernism, the Macusean Great Refusal, the 1960s style revolution and so on. As a trans person suffering the consequences, I’ve really had enough of it!

Classical Liberals Should Make Common Cause with the LGBT Community | TaraElla Clips

This is an excerpt from the article We Need to Call Out the Biased Coverage of Trans Issues by TaraElla.

To effectively make the case for the classical liberal social contract, we must make it work properly in practice. This includes making an effort to correct things that are not working well. At the very least, we need to call out the aforementioned unfair coverage of trans people and trans issues. If nothing else, free speech liberals taking a firm stance on this issue would at least stop the critical anarchists from painting all of us as hypocrites driven by a 'right-wing' agenda. This will save the reputation of classical liberalism in the long run, long after the current culture wars end up discrediting the ideologues on both sides. Moreover, by trying our best to call out bad practices, we might even end up changing them, at least to some extent. If we can use classical liberal means to fight the 'anti-woke' culture war reactionaries, and limit the damage that they can do, we will gain credibility among the LGBT community and its allies, and young people more generally. This will be a win-win situation, for both the LGBT community and classical liberal values like free speech.