Transgender defense (yes, including serving military!)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/06/27/feature/seeking-a-scientific-explanation-for-trans-identity-could-do-more-harm-than-good/
Having known some lovely people who are transgender, I have more than average interest in the subject -- and was therefore more than a bit intrigued by this piece in the Post this morning. (Also, I'd previously read an article in the July-August "Atlantic" on diagnostic difficulties regarding so-called "gender disphoria" -- but I can't seem to lay hands on it now.)
This Post piece is worthwhile, in any case -- it focusses on the science involved in knowing a person's gender identity. More concretely, WHETHER it's desirable to look for "physical" markers to confirm or deny that he/she is concretely one or the other gender. (Or neither, or a bit one way or the other...)
It's the "born that way" argument revisited. Does one have a choice when it comes to gender? (Which, indeed, could take the issue BEYOND trans and into the notion of gay/straight "choice" so beloved of crazed right-wing politicos.)
In any case, the "doing more harm" question is prety clearly discussed -- and one could wish scientists would take the evident risks to heart.
They probably won't -- meaning whether any of us are gay could wind up under public discussion. Bad, to be sure, but likely worse for those who are trans. Who could WANT a simple-minded genetic test to sort out the genders -- or the"real" Indians like Elizabeth Warren, according to the asshole in the White House??
And then there's Trumpsky trying to get patriotic trans soldiers back OUT of uniforms. We do live in a fucked-up historical moment, folks.
Having known some lovely people who are transgender, I have more than average interest in the subject -- and was therefore more than a bit intrigued by this piece in the Post this morning. (Also, I'd previously read an article in the July-August "Atlantic" on diagnostic difficulties regarding so-called "gender disphoria" -- but I can't seem to lay hands on it now.)
This Post piece is worthwhile, in any case -- it focusses on the science involved in knowing a person's gender identity. More concretely, WHETHER it's desirable to look for "physical" markers to confirm or deny that he/she is concretely one or the other gender. (Or neither, or a bit one way or the other...)
It's the "born that way" argument revisited. Does one have a choice when it comes to gender? (Which, indeed, could take the issue BEYOND trans and into the notion of gay/straight "choice" so beloved of crazed right-wing politicos.)
In any case, the "doing more harm" question is prety clearly discussed -- and one could wish scientists would take the evident risks to heart.
They probably won't -- meaning whether any of us are gay could wind up under public discussion. Bad, to be sure, but likely worse for those who are trans. Who could WANT a simple-minded genetic test to sort out the genders -- or the"real" Indians like Elizabeth Warren, according to the asshole in the White House??
And then there's Trumpsky trying to get patriotic trans soldiers back OUT of uniforms. We do live in a fucked-up historical moment, folks.