Of course, everyone is buzzing on yet another bit of biological evidence related to the cause of classic transsexuality.  Here are some of the headlines, all emphasis mine:

Official Journal of the Society of Biological Psychiatry:

There is a likely genetic component to transsexualism, and genes involved in sex steroidogenesis are good candidates. We explored the specific hypothesis that male-to-female transsexualism is associated with gene variants responsible for undermasculinization and/or feminization…A significant association was identified between transsexualism and the AR allele, with transsexuals having longer AR repeat lengths than non-transsexual male controls (p=0.04).

 

Cosmos:

The first genetic link to male-to-female transsexualism provides new evidence of its biological nature, say Australian researchers…Early theories as to the cause of transsexuality suggested that it could stem from childhood trauma, but more recent research has pointed to family history and a possible genetic aspect. A study released earlier this year by researchers at the University of Vienna, Austria, hinted at a gene that may be involved in female-to-male transsexualism.

Sydney Morning Herald:

In the largest ever genetic study of transsexuals, Australian researchers have discovered a DNA variation linked to male-to-female transsexualism…The finding strengthens the view that there is a biological reason why some people feel they are living in the wrong body, in this case men who have an strong desire to live as a woman. 

Reuters

Scientists in Australia said they have identified a gene which may explain why some people are transsexuals…In the largest genetic study involving transsexuals to date, researchers in Australia said they found that transexuality may be linked to the androgen receptor (AR) gene — which is known to modify the effect of the male sex hormone testosterone. 

BBC:

Australian researchers have identified a significant link between a gene involved in testosterone action and male-to-female transsexualism…Increasingly, biological factors are being implicated in gender identity.

The Australian:

The nature versus nurture debate rages on but a new study of transsexuals has shown genetics plays a key role in determining our sense of gender…Researcher Trudy Kennedy, director of the Monash Gender Dysphoria Clinic, said the study supported other evidence that genetics and brain gender were important in transsexuality.

Telegraph:

Scientists have discovered that a longer version of the androgen receptor gene may cause weaker testosterone signals and this can “under-masculinise” the brain during its development in the womb…After comparing the DNA from the male to female transsexual participants with 258 controls, they found a significant link between a long version of the androgen receptor gene and transsexualism.

NetIndia:

Lead researcher, Associate Professor Vincent Harley, head of molecular genetics at Prince Henry’s Institute, said: “There is a social stigma that transsexualism is simply a lifestyle choice. However, our findings support a biological basis of how gender identity develops.”…He also revealed that the research team were preparing for another study, and hoped to double the sample size and examine other genes.

RedOrbit:

Terry Reed from the Gender Identity Research and Education Society said she was convinced of a biological basis to transsexualism… “This study appears to reinforce earlier studies which have indicated that, in some trans people, there may be a genetic trigger to the development of an atypical gender identity.”

New Scientist:

A gene linked to male-to-female transsexualism has been uncovered by Australian researchers. Following a similar finding for female-to-male transsexuals announced in July, the work strengthens the idea that transsexualism has a biological basis…The work “supports the notion that transsexualism has a biological basis rather than being due to psychosocial factors in early childhood,”

Now, this research is not the definitive key that will unlock the biological cause of classic transsexuality, but it is, as Zoe Brain said HERE, one more “part of the puzzle” and undeniably adds still more credence to the increasing body of evidence indicating that classic transsexuality is biological in nature.

So, is everybody happy?  Hardly, it seems.

As Cathryn Platine, Riding the Second Wave, in her excellently written take on the issue said HERE:

The ink isn’t even dry on this before the TG community has started trying to pick it apart…

And, what have the so called activist had to say about it?

Not much. 

Katrina Rose continues ranting about HRC.  Autumn Sandeen hasn’t posted anything.  Lisa Harney’s still questioning transphobia.  Marti Abernathy has disappeared into a calorie induced haze.  Mercedes Allen is silent.  Nexy is worried someone might be cured.  Donna Rose just waves the transgender flag higher.  Monica Roberts has an even opinion, though.  And if you really want to see some ridiculous post, check out the comments at Susan’s Place.

Studies like the one cited above really upset the transgender applecart…scares them.

40 Comments

  1. Oh, there’s been a lot of conversation about this in many places. You just need to look a little deeper.

    On my blog, “look a little deeper” means “check out the most recent post.”

    Also, “Transgender?” You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

  2. Oh, I don’t know…I successfully transitioned ten years ago after two prior relatively long term attempts, post op, Professional Engineer (IE) , Biology and Physics minors…I think I’ve got the meaning of transgender down pat. Indeed, there has been a lot of conversation about it.

    At Susan’s Place you say:

    “I believe that this study (and the recent parallel study that identified similar genetic stuff about trans men) are ethically problematic for a host of reasons.”

    I would be interested in hearing your reasons for thinking research into the causes of classic transsexuality is “ethically problematic”.

    I do agree with the next sentence you write in that post:

    “I also think that having a genetic basis won’t get us any more acceptance from anyone…”

    Of course it won’t, nor will ENDA, nor all of the anti discrimination laws written or ever to be written. Acceptance is a one-on-one proposition…if someone is not able or capable of convincing society of their legitimacy post transition, looking to legislation to acquire it will be doubly disappointing to them. This is something the transgender just do not get. All the belly aching and whining done over the issue is for nothing.

  3. I think Lisa is a bit cisphobic if you ask me

  4. A little cisphobic?
    My comment on the reaction “Give TGs a goose that lays golden eggs and they’ll cook it for dinner”

    In diverse places in the past 48 hours I’ve been compared to a racist, declared an autogynophile, yet again had my own womanhood called into question. Funny thing, most of the people seem incapable of reading with more than 5% comprehension. One of the markers for classic transsexuality is high intelligence, these folks are proving they aren’t transsexual :)

  5. I’ve added a postscript to my blog entry. The next one I write will examine in detail the opposition to transsexual civil rights by trans-activists who are now taking the next step from simply undermining transsexual civil rights in the past to open attack on them.

  6. hey, I did what no one considered possible, I talked Bil Browning into an HBS positive guest blog.
    http://www.bilerico.com/2008/10/new_study_links_genetics_to_transsexuali.php#comments
    The haters are already out in force on it……

  7. Good Job Cathryn.
    I do see up on bilerico that Helms did pass her (SA-ET 10-29-08) usual transvestic gas.

  8. This is long overdue. Something to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    Now lets watch the transgenderists run around screaming the sky is falling.

  9. um, since transgenderists are typically followers of virginia P, wouldn’t they be more like “eh? Wth cares?”, since they exclude themsevles from the transgender movement, transsexuals, drag queens, and anyone who seeks to change themselves or only live part time?

    just asking…

  10. Dyssonance, let’s face it, if you aren’t a classic transsexual you are a crossdresser (transvestite) full time or part matters not.

  11. The Non-Ops seem to be the ones, making silly remarks and crying the sky is falling.

    It would be irrational for a CD to be upset by this news, it really doesn’t have any impact on their self image or their day to day life.

    The people this hurts most are those who hijacked the term transsexual to validate their lifestyle choice, people like Helms, from her (SA-ET 10-29-08) comments she (SA-ET 10-29-08) feels really threatened.

    S

  12. I’ve just put up a new blog entry at radicalbitch debunking the objections to ADA coverage. It seems there is actually an opinion letter from the Attorney General’s Civil Rights office to John Kerry that flatly states that those with GID from a neurolgical basis are, in fact, covered under the ADA…..no court action needed.

  13. WEll … seems everyone is in a party mood!

    one slight problem … this is a STUDY.. ya’ll are acting like its been handed down from the supreme court. Heck it’s not even a conclusive study and to start saying it puts classic transsexuals under the ADA umbrella is wishful thinking at best.

    What this study does is give attorneys something to point too in legal proceedings, but until that happens all we have is another study that may or may not help us in our struggle to divorce ourself from the transgender/glb shotgun wedding, and even then we come back to the prove-abilty problem of who is and who isn’t transsexual.

    Untangling the web of lies and deceit bought about by the homosexuals who would like nothing better than to claim transsexualism as a queer bed partner for their “transgender” membership, will take a lot more than a study. It will take an act of god.

  14. Leigh;
    There is a lot more then that, the trannys have been put on notice we are Not Like Them.

    It’s about time they dropped the use of the word Transsexual and found another way to attain the validation they think they need.

    S

  15. Sue,

    Yes they have … but they already knew that! So whats new ?

  16. ROFL

    “They” don’t determine the new word.

    The Scientific community does. ANd, right now, regardless of how you feel about it or think about it or how I feel about it or think about, that word is transsexual.

    I can find zero “classic transsexual” dx’s — anyone got a pointer to med lit?

    What I do find is true and plain old, and both of those groups include folks you tend to call transvestites.

    Change the Dx, I’ll buy it, but right now that’s a pipe dream.

    So, right now, you are like them.

    And, according to some, that makes all ya’ll gay men in denial.

  17. In the end none of this really makes any real difference, those of us who can live normal lives as members of the female half of society will continue to do so.

    The transgender community will continue to have a long road ahead of them working to convince society their lifestyle is valid and they should be allowed to break down the barriers between the sexes and invade our spaces.

    They will never understand that all the research in the world won’t effect our lives as long as there are people who continue to see the differences between Us and Then.

    S

  18. dyssonance

    Your nit picking over words and terms is truly annoying.

    You’re one of those people that search the internet looking for misspellings arn’t you ?

    Instead of writing something useful you merely nit pick over words. Classic Transsexual as you well know, is not you. Your a Classic Queer …. Now go search for that term !

    Freaking ponderous!

  19. LMAO you know the ultimate irony in all this? One day some of them will want to use the ADA protections I uncovered for a lawsuit and a quick google of their name will turn up all the posts about how they aren’t us…….and the opposing council wins automatically.

    These transvestites really are their own worst enemy…and yes “dyssonance” I include you in that group.

  20. hypocrisy, Catkisser, is your lot.

    I meet the definition *you* supplied of your classic.

    And yet, you call me other.

    Leigh, yes, I am queer. I’ve been queer forever.

    Too bad you haven’t done that research yourself.

    Oh, and no — I do not look for misspellings. Hell, I make more than enough of them myself (still mistype because constantly)

    I will note that no one had that pointer, though. No one.

    You know why? Because its a falsehood you’ve created for yourselves.

    Wallow in your prejudices.

    I’ll see ya later :D

  21. NOTE:

    My stance with regard to the difference between transsexual and transgender should be obvious…and, I invite all of those who have posted comments here to continue to do so.

    I also realize that perhaps singularly, along with Riding the Second Wave (and with the possible exception of TS-SI…I say possible for TS-SI does NOT support THE PETITION), there is no other blog I know of (if there are others please let me know) that expresses the opinions I express here, nor that gives the readers of Enough Non-Sense a forum to speak out without having their position slammed by the hoards of TGs but are subsequently silenced from response by the moderators who are themselves transgender.

    However, it serves no other purpose but to incite when someone…ANYONE…who obviously identifies in a gender other than their natal, is referred to with incorrect pronouns. I am sorry, but that won’t be allowed and when I catch it, I will edit it out and make a note…in hundreds and hundreds of comments here I have only wielded that authority on a couple of occasions. Debate the issues and defend your positions, but insults for no other reason than to insult, regardless of where one stands, says way more about the INSULTER than it does about the INSULTEE. Quite honestly, the position that is held here is impregnable in my opinion – that is what so infuriates the transgender – making such tact unnecessary.

  22. I can understand your position;
    The trannys however have a problem when they refer to people like me as being men because we were borne with the wrong genitals.

    I respect your right to edit, it is after all your venue. Historically Those People have the been the ones to cast the first stone.

    Respectfully;
    Sue

  23. Sue, I did not say you were — I said according to some people you are. That does not include me, by default.

    The f-tard Bailey or his cronies Zucker, Blanchard, Lawrence, Dreger, LeVay, et al — to be more specific.

    The very people who are doing the research so happily announced.

    I wouldn’t (and haven’t) ever said such, despite some making that effective statement about me. On my own blog, no less, lol.

  24. dyssonance;
    I see you need to Re Read my last post.

    I wasn’t speaking of the pseudo intellectual types who have a sex driven agenda. Most of what they put out is so much like grant driven avant-guard crap that passes for music in the colleges and universities.

    Thank you, have a nice day.

    S

  25. Heads up. The drunk indian fetishist at Bilerico just used the gene thing to attack feminism. And this is supposed to help win acceptance for real transsexuals?

  26. Heads up. The drunk indian fetishist at Bilerico just used the gene thing to attack feminism. And this is supposed to help win acceptance for real transsexuals?

  27. Leigh, I’ve observed over and over the mysogyny of the transgenders…..this came as a surprise because?

  28. Catkisser ..

    I am not sure what answer you are looking for here .. the answer to why your surprised or a reason for the misogyny

  29. Leigh;
    They are so caught up in their egocentric queerness, it is impossible to expect anything different. The backlash their obnoxious behavior has caused is already in progress, it’s time to drop out and let them reap what they sew. I am so finished with those queer folk.
    Sue

  30. Oh sorry … I didn’t notice we had another Leigh in the house :)

  31. It looks like Gay and Trans Activism was deal the blow they deserved for their forcing their agenda on the mainstream public.
    Looks like all the same sex marriage bans passed.

    The people of the US have spoken,

  32. For anyone who’s interested I wrote an oppinion piece for my blog on the ethics of researchers conflating ’sex’ with ‘gender’. The article is also up on TS-Si. org.

    I’ll be bookmarking this blog. Its a gret effort.
    hugs
    Jo.

  33. Er, great :(
    Jo.

  34. Good article Joanne.

  35. Hugs, Sue.
    The next one in the series has just been posted: enjoy!

    On the TG misogyny. You only need watch the almost grossly over-done performaces of drag queens to see it.

    But its not only there. TG’s of the ilk of Charles (Virginia) Prince and Anne Lawrence perform gender: They are not trying to be women, they’re trying to be LIKE women, and they nearly always overdo it.

    Not surprising really: if they were what they claim to be, they wouldn’t HAVE to try.

  36. For anybody who is interested, OII (Organisation Intersex International) has a petition to try and stop so-called ‘Gender Assignments’. I doubt the petition will be listened to by those who continue the practice. But signing it is an expression of solidarity and would, I know, be appreciated.

    The petition site is:

    http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/solidarity-with-the-intersex-community.html

    Hugs
    Jo.

  37. Strangely enough Johanne, I agree with a good half of your article over at TS-SI. Namely that people conflate sex and gender issues, by conflating gender identity for sex identity. I think Milton Diamond’s works is a model for therapists to follow with regards to using the terms.

    GID doesn’t exist, it’s SI differentiation (not disorder). Though I don’t think that leaves non-TS TGs in the cold either. It just doesn’t concern them in that way.

    Having to repeat over and over that it’s not about being feminine, gets tiring.

  38. Thank’s, Schala
    I put another article up (on my blog) a couple of days ago. This one looks at the history of GID and the ethics of using an essentialy fossilised discourse to explain modern research results.

    It’s getting a lot of hits from academic sites. Maybe something will sink in.

    Cheers
    Jo.

  39. I agree with pretty much all that article, well this one “Misinterpreting Research Results: A Question of Ethics?”. Though I think it be the fault more of the scientifico-medical community than either transgender people who are not transsexual or 2nd wave feminism (though they didn’t help much there).

    I also think that cross-dressers and people who alter their dress and/or behavior temporarily or for entertainment should not be marginalized, judged as anomalies (in as much as its considered negative), or treated with contempt. For example, cross-dressing off the job should not be a motive for being fired.

    The same for gays and lesbians I guess. Private life should remain private in as much as the employer has no right to know unless it’s illegal.

    Sara

  40. I’m with you 100% Sara. Like others, I get fed up with most TG demands for legitimacy by association. But I think the entire discourse needs restructuring, because they’re being mislead as much as we are.

    Professor Harley’s email speaks volumes really. The researchers need to get the message. Stop conflating sex and gender. Its obvious enough. People change gender, often with little or modification to their anatomical sex. And people change sex without making significant modifications in gender role behaviour, then they are different things!

    So treat them differently.

    Jo


Post a Comment

*
*