1/ By the way, I read your paper with interest. Still, I am not entirely convinced. Personally, I never doubted that being trans can have a biological origin. But it is then strange to use biology in order to dismiss biology.
-
-
-
2/ I mean: the biology of the brain is not the only one that matters. You are not « a woman » simply because some characteristics of your brain are in-between those of men and women.
-
Well, that's what 'trans' means. You have aspects of biology which are not female but enough that are so that you feel that you are.
-
Then the rest of my thread. I have no doubt that Trans people « feel » that they are of the opposite sex. But « feeling » is not « being ».
-
I've really said all I have to say in that piece. If you still feel the need to counter and oppose trans identity, I defend your right to do so. I'm just going to leave people alone to do their own thing.
-
I don’t want to « oppose » anything actually. I just don’t want to be compelled to accept things either. Hence I raise the questions I have. Without success once more ...
-
I addressed that too. What more do you think I could address?
-
I'm trying to get past all these tedious arguments about the definition of 'woman' and what makes someone 'really' a woman. People can have their own positions on this. What is important is letting them do so.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.