Hard nope on the biological women part. Simple X-ray proves that falsehood
Idc that my current gf was born a man. In the months that I’ve known her, she has shown me more affection, loyalty, and desire than any other woman I’ve ever known. She gets me at a level most women would have made a video about asking if I was right for her, she proves that I deserve better and that I want to work myself over to be the person she thinks I am, you know, the love your grandparents had? She gives me that. And this post validated both our struggles to get where we are without diminishing anybody else in the process. Same love.
Ooooh, damn, this one made people maaaaaaaaaaad.
How’s this for some extra spice?
Trans men are men. Non-binary people are humans. Transphobes are scared of something they’ll never see.
Virtually every pro trans post here gets somebody being deliberately nasty. I basically have to read through all the comments with my finger poised over the ban button.
Ok so my issue with this post isn’t “trans women are women”, I agree with that, and it’s not really the argument anyway. It’s the words “biological” and “born”.
Nobody’s born a woman. You’re born with a sex, and sometimes that’s not even clear-cut. “Woman” is a grown-up category, not something you come out of the womb with.
Same with “biological sex.” It’s not one thing. Chromosomes, gametes, gonads, what organs you’ve got, what hormones are running through you, those don’t always point the same direction in the same person. That’s what the term covers, clinically.
This is important. Trans woman on estrogen? Higher clot risk. Still got a prostate? Still needs checking. Creatinine ranges, QT intervals, drug doses, how trauma patients clot, all split by sex in the scientific literature.
Trans women are women. But the medical chart should say organ inventory, hormones, and surgical history, not six silly lines of affirmation. That’s not a dig at anyone. It’s important to avoid missing something at 3am in an ED.
I would also leave out the biology part of the list. Because that is just going to cause problems.
You can be whatever you want to be and you should be respected as such. But what hardware are you operating on is kinda important in a medical sense.There is a reason why a doctor first question is: Are you pregnant? Is there a chance of pregnancy? This is an undeniable fact - they ask this question even if you went through a total removal of your insides. Biological parts do need different upkeep.
Given how vastly women have been underrepresented in medical literature, studies, drug trials and every other facet, i rather think they can stick it at this point. We’re all treated like cis males beyond an intial pregnancy test during triage. While various body parts do come into play as diagnoses progress, from the outset that info won’t be used save for lazy blaming and bigotry
I don’t necessarily have problems with the veracity of the claims you’re making, but I do have some questions: Are you a doctor with a trans patient? Are you a medical researcher with trans biology as a topic of interest? Are you on a board of peer reviewers that needs to determine the terminology for your journal’s style guide?
If not, why do you think this is important? What denotative need does a layperson have to refer to a trans woman a biological male, or to socially endorse doing so in clearly nonscientific contexts such as this?
I think the point isn’t that “trans women are biologically male” but that “biological sex isn’t binary, and isn’t determined by your gender”. And it’s important to be correct in lower-stakes situations so that you have a better understanding when you encounter a serious one.
I respectfully disagree and personal don’t think it’s useful to reference biological sex in reference to trans folks in lower-stakes situations if the speaker isn’t a doctor or scientist.
So we’re on to gatekeeping who can speak about what topic, now?
Hmmmm…
Being born a woman sounds inconvenient. I was born a baby, which I highly recommend.
Seems a lot more people have that Benjamin Button disease than I would have expected.
The fact it’s 2026 and people still care to argue is wild.
Yep! Why does it matter to anyone how someone defines their gender?
It’s about putting people in easily identifiable boxes and nothing else.
Latching on to this post to say that “biological sex” and “biological man” are and have been right wing dogwhistles carefully crafted for adoption by uninformed moderates
-
“Biological sex” provides no useful information about a trans person’s biological traits, ESPECIALLY when applied to those of us who are deep into our transition. After a certain point, our physical biology is overall significantly closer to those of cis women than cis men, and any necessary nuance (eg: periods) is a private medical discussion that can be handled professionally.
-
“Biological man” is almost exclusively used by bad actors who want to imply that trans women have the same violent sexual tendencies as cis men. These are often the same people who rush to defend cis men who actually commit violent sexual acts.
I will die on this hill.
The day the term trans-identified males (TIMs) went into the vernacular is the day I stopped being comfortable with non-doctors referring to trans women as biological males. Before that, I guess I didn’t perceive it as being that big of a deal.
I completely agree that 99% of the time, the term biological male or biological man is now used as a dogwhistle to get regular folks comfortable with thinking of and referring to trans women as men and males. It’s why conservatives keep pushing the sports debate.
and any necessary nuance (eg: periods) is a private medical discussion that can be handled professionally.
As a medical professional am I allowed to say “biological sex”? Or how should we talk about the factual persisting differences which often are medical relevant?
My doctor uses the term “natal sex” in general or “trans woman” to refer to a woman assigned male at birth, which I appreciate. People will have different opinions, but I think you as a medical professional have more leeway in this domain than the general public since you need to be able to treat us without risk of miscommunication and to communicate clearly in your records.
For cis men and women, nothing changes. But when dealing with a trans patient you need nuance. Are we talking reproductive system, endocrinology, fat distribution, psychology, etc. The real answer here would be to have a more nuanced intake form or proper discussion with the patient since reducing our biology to what we were assigned at birth can mask all sorts of issues. ESPECIALLY for those of us who have been transitioning for a lifetime.
To give a personal example, I know for a fact that my blood levels are closest to those of a cis woman. I know this because my old endo used to send my bloodwork in with a M marker against my wishes. Unsurprisingly, my labs came back with more red flags than a UN meeting. The moment I got a better endo to send it in with F, the red flags went away.
As yet another example, it’s commonly known that cis men and cis women experience heart attacks differently, but there’s been virtually no research on how trans people experience it. Hormones affect virtually every part of our body, so who’s to say heart attacks present as our sex at birth? If an EMT were to see M on a form, they might overlook the female symptoms
I’d go with no. It’s too tied up with terf rhetoric that many would be uncomfortable at the least, and honestly inaccurate.
I’m curious which things you’re thinking of as persisting differences that you feel the need to try referring to our AGAB as biological.
Please note my hand is hovering over two buttons- one makes sea lion noises and the other is asking if you’re following the rules of the community.
Please note my hand is hovering over two buttons- one makes sea lion noises and the other is asking if you’re following the rules of the community.
Unrelated to the discussion at hand directly, but I have a strong urge to post a mocking redditor wojak right now
an interesting thing that people dont talk about much is all the feminine neurological traits that we show before we even know we’re trans. for example neurodivergent trans women will often have a presentation/profile more typical of cis women. i have a pretty stereotypical feminine neurodivergence myself, being mostly inattentive type and developing masking behaviors early, but being treated as and told i was a boy meant that was directed towards fitting in with other boys.
I’m well aware this is just the party the line at this point but as someone that grew up through 00’s it’s just wild as FUCK to me that “biological sex” could ever be considered ‘right wing dog whistles’.
Again, language is fluid and I’m not really saying you’re wrong. What I am saying, is this is new. 15 years ago there was no “right wing dog whistle” on this topic. Because the whole sex != gender thing wasn’t even a commonly known topic. The ‘dogwhistles’ at the time were more about finding interesting ways to say you hate gay people, the idea that they were winking at transmen being “biologically female -> actually female” is just a very stupid, incorrect, joke. They were not thinking that. They were not hinting at that. They didn’t know that position existed for them to try to hate it.
It was considered very progressive, at the time, to use terms like “biologically male” because that implied an acceptance of their identity outside of what biology dictated.
As you said language changes.
Firstly, the right fabricated the recent-ish trans outrage as a wedge issue to divide Dems and radicalize Repubs. That’s the only reason there’s been so much talk about it recently. We’re being thrown into the spotlight and forced to defend ourselves
Secondly, despite a steep uphill battle, we’ve made scientific progress that helps us better understand the nuance in sex and gender topics
Though those terms may not have had the same connotations in the past (but people still called us slurs), we have existed since antiquity. To put it into perspective, I came out in 2014 and my therapist at the time had come out some 20 years before me.
Firstly, the right fabricated the recent-ish trans outrage as a wedge issue to divide Dems and radicalize Repubs. That’s the only reason there’s been so much talk about it recently. We’re being thrown into the spotlight and forced to defend ourselves
I don’t think its recent. My husband had an uncle that transitioned in the mid-90’s and auntie would visit from her new digs in Florida with plenty of horror stories about how she was discriminated against.
It’s always been there, it’s that Trump is using the outrage to gin up support from the low-wattage element of the electorate. This is an end-game for political control using an issue that has been around at the general public level for decades but was mostly a social non issue as it hadn’t been taken up as a political cudgel like it is now.
Yeap anytime someone says “biological something” it triggers me
I just call people who say “biological gender” biological arseholes.
Earnestly asking.
In your eyes, terms like “cis woman” “trans woman” are ok, but “bio woman” is a dog whistle? Doesn’t cis ~= bio in that context?
Sometimes it feels like the bar for “hateful rhetoric” is too low. When it could easily just be explained by well meaning ignorance or even just a disagreement on terminology (but agreement on intent and broader philosophy)
No, they are not the same. What does biology mean? It means how your body functions. How does it know how to develop? Hormones. If you have the hormones that make your biology function as male/female then you are male/female. It has nothing to do with birth. It has a little to do with chromosomes, in so far as your chromosomes tell your body what hormones to produce, but when we take control of that process then it isn’t related anymore.
“Biological sex” is almost always attached to the idea of “basic biology.” Any time “basic [whatever]” is used, you should question it. What someone learns in high school is not the end of knowledge. I don’t care about someone’s opinion on differential equations if they have only learned basic math, as an example. Biology is complex, and chromosomes are an incredibly basic point to start at. It doesn’t even touch on intersex people. So no, the “basic biology” level of knowledge is fundamentally flawed, and “biological sex”, if you want to use the term reasonably, is not as basic as chromosomes, or what genitals you possessed when you were born, or whatever else.
Ok but if trans women are biologically women because of HRT, then doesn’t that conclude trans women who don’t take HRT are biologically male? What about trans women who would take HRT given the chance but don’t for financial or medical or legislative reasons?
So is it the case that “trans women are biologically women” is false, since some aren’t. Or is it that “you’re not trans unless you receive HRT” - and at that point what’s your term for the people that identify as trans but don’t receive HRT for whatever reason?
You’re in an area where a binary gender model just breaks down. Whilst convenient for most people in most situations, this is like trying to use Newton’s laws of motion to understand the event horizon of a black hole. You need a different model of the world.
The model I use is this: humans have many independent systems/traits within their brains and bodies, several of which are typically found in a bi-modal distribution of states which we label “male” and “female”. In trans, non-binary, and intersex people the bi-modality of that distribution starts to break down. Some systems/traits are aligned with the “male” mode, others with the “female” mode. Not all are easy or even possible to change: some are baked into how the brain works.
In some of those people (trans men, trans women) it just happens that several less-visible systems/traits we cannot (or should not) change are aligned in the opposite direction to a bunch of more-visible systems/traits we can change, and that their lives become much more tolerable if they are allowed to make some changes. This usually happens via some combination of hormones & surgery, and really needs to depend on the individual because the systems/traits can be misaligned in a variety of ways and some of the treatments affect several systems in a way that cannot be quantified before treatment.
If the ultimate goal of a trans man / trans woman would be to transition to better fit the classical male/female mode they would prefer, then they probably want to be labelled and treated as their preferred gender with no additional qualifications at all, but some still want their journey to be recognised so sometimes you need to ask anyway.
so right wing people make up a term to describe something hatefully, but in a way that doesnt sound hateful if you dont know where it comes from. they get a lot of people to start using it without knowing its roots of hate. in time the term catches on with people who dont know better. later people learn what it means and since theyve been hearing it and using it and believing it they may just swallow the hate as a matter of course once they learn of it. they keep hearing it being used, so they feel like everyone is agreeing with them. thus hate is spread and reinforced by a seemingly innocuous word or phrase. words have meaning and context beyond their literal dictionary definition. so to answer your question, its hateful rhetoric because it comes from hateful people and is intended to carry a hateful message. well meaning ignorance is a tool of hate.
That word is used by either those:
- ignorant about the meaning
- intentionally using it as a dog whistle
So I usually roll my eyes when I hear that word
“Cis” gets the point across without the unnecessary baggage.
These are often the same people who rush to defend cis men who actually commit violent sexual acts.
Holy shit, you’re right.
Ayup. When the biology is controlled by hormones, what hrt mandates becomes the biology.
Yes even if you stop (i have a friend who stopped taking her E but because we’re both menopausal age it did jack and shit but line her up to where she’s supposed to be anyway)
I’ll join you! We can haunt it together afterwards
-
Now if they would stop calling women females.
…
…
Trans women are females
Trans-inclusive trolling 🤣
Ooh ya bugger
Thank you 🥰🥰
Love this and thank you for posting this!
It’s a big club, and we’re thankful ya’ll are in it!
So that’s why it’s called the transitive property
