![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
alienchangeling.livejournal.comSuppose that one day in the near future, someone discovers a brain pattern visible on MRI or a gene complex noticeable with a blood test or hormone levels during pregnancy or some other such externally recognizable signal that has a high correlation with transgenderism. Medical professionals everywhere breathe a sigh of relief as they no longer have to deal with the ambiguities of the subject; perhaps insurers even begin covering medical treatment and politicians relax the laws on gender markers on identification—providing the test checks out, of course.
What happens when a female-bodied person comes into a doctor's office and says, "I don't feel like a woman, I feel like a man, and I want to live as a man from now on," but when the test is done, their results come back negative? What's the appropriate response, on the part of the doctors, politicians, public at large, and other trans-identified people, to this situation? What do you think the real response would be?
Suppose, instead, that a century from now, people have looked and looked for a biological basis for transgenderism, but haven't found it. Initial promising results didn't pan out and now people are stuck: they know there's a physical connection somewhere, since, after all, there must be some representation in the brain of the belief, "I want to be a different gender than my genitals indicate," but it's buried in the architecture of the brain and no more observable than the neural qualities of a great artist. No one knows why transgenders exist or where they come from. This is not a disproof, because that's impossible in science, but it's strong evidence that there's no simple biological explanation for transgenderism.
What happens when a male-bodied person comes into a doctor's office and says, "I don't feel like a man, I feel like a woman, and I want to live as a woman from now on?" though there's no objective basis for affirming or challenging this belief? What's the appropriate response, on the part of the doctors, politicians, public at large, and other trans-identified people, to this situation? What do you think the real response would be?
( My interpretation )
What happens when a female-bodied person comes into a doctor's office and says, "I don't feel like a woman, I feel like a man, and I want to live as a man from now on," but when the test is done, their results come back negative? What's the appropriate response, on the part of the doctors, politicians, public at large, and other trans-identified people, to this situation? What do you think the real response would be?
Suppose, instead, that a century from now, people have looked and looked for a biological basis for transgenderism, but haven't found it. Initial promising results didn't pan out and now people are stuck: they know there's a physical connection somewhere, since, after all, there must be some representation in the brain of the belief, "I want to be a different gender than my genitals indicate," but it's buried in the architecture of the brain and no more observable than the neural qualities of a great artist. No one knows why transgenders exist or where they come from. This is not a disproof, because that's impossible in science, but it's strong evidence that there's no simple biological explanation for transgenderism.
What happens when a male-bodied person comes into a doctor's office and says, "I don't feel like a man, I feel like a woman, and I want to live as a woman from now on?" though there's no objective basis for affirming or challenging this belief? What's the appropriate response, on the part of the doctors, politicians, public at large, and other trans-identified people, to this situation? What do you think the real response would be?
( My interpretation )