Transgender Sexual Predators

Recent news about a non-op transgender male bodied individual demanding women, who perform very intimate grooming services for female clients, provide it for him, and then making official complaints about them for “discrimination” if they don’t, has caused a serious kerfluffle for the trans communities.  So, let me state in this editorial, with no equivocation, I do NOT support this person nor his actions.  (Yes, you read that right; I will not offer the courtesy of using feminine pronouns for a male sexual predator and bully attempting to use the cover of being a transwoman.)

For a pre-op / non-op male bodied person to demand, using the force of law, to be allowed to, in effect, expose himself to non-consenting women is the action of a sexual predator, period.  This behavior is identical to a public ‘flasher’.  It is one of the four “Courtship Disorders” that include paraphilic rape, frotterism (rubbing one’s penis against non-consenting people in public), and voyeurism (Peeping Tom).  This behavior is a paraphilia that seeks, requires, non-consenting participants and is by definition a sexual offense.

The various transcommunities should, nay, must denounce this behavior and any and all individuals who attempt it.  Further, we should recognize that this is an abuse of non-discriminational laws.  We should support changes in law to end such abuse.

Further Reading:

Dangerous Thoughts

How Many Trans Folk Are There, Really?

If we are to meaningfully discuss the impact of trans people in society and public policy recommendations we need to know how many transfolk there are.  For this we need to define who we mean and who we don’t.  This is a topic I’ve explored before, but it is worth going into greater detail.  I’ve remarked before that we need to have very clear definitions and about the problems that occur when we don’t.

The media and the press often talk as though “transgender” = “transsexual”.  That is to say, that there is an assumption that those who identify as transgender are all socially transitioning from one social sex to the other, prescribed cross-sex hormones, and either have or would strongly consider, if affordable, surgical interventions.  Nothing could be further from the truth, as the vast, in fact, a super-majority, of such self  identified transgender people have not, nor do they wish to, permanently socially transition, nor are they gender dysphoric.

We also need to know how many people fall into each category, as it directly effects policy and politics, from school bathroom use to potential medical transition services demand in the military.

In a 2016 paper exploring this very issue, spelling it out in the title, “Prevalence of Transgender Depends on the “Case” Definition”, paraphrasing their results,

“27 studies provided necessary data for a meta-analysis to evaluate the epidemiology of transgender and examine how various definitions of transgender affect prevalence estimates and to compare findings across studies that used different methodologies, in different countries, and over different periods.  Overall estimates per 100,000 population were 9.2 for surgical or hormonal gender affirmation therapy and 6.8 for transgender-related diagnoses. Of studies assessing self-reported transgender identity, the estimate was 871; however, this result was influenced by a single outlier study. After removal of that study, the estimate changed to 355.”

These numbers tally very well with those from another study using US Census and Social Security data in which name and sex were changed in various US states.  In that study no state had more than ~10 per hundred thousand.  Note that this study was not included in the meta-analysis conduced by Collins, et al.

These numbers also tally with the several order of magnitude larger estimates of those who self identify as “transgender”.

One of the most enlightening results of the Collins study was that though there was a slight increase in the number of gender dysphoric cases in a given clinic over time, there was no increase in prevalence over all.  That is to say, there is no “epidemic” of gender dysphoria.

Given that we can’t demand that people who self identify as transgender stop doing so, I recommend that we as a community and in science studies differentiate gender dysphoric individuals by resurrecting and reclaiming the old fashioned, but very useful term, “transsexual”.  Only those who permanently social transition with some medical interventions should be so designated.  Those who wish to conduct sociological studies of non-gender-dysphoric people who self identify as “transgender” should so specify in their publications.  Given the large disparities in the numbers, without an operational definition of “transgender” or “transsexual”, a given study is almost assured to be about non-gender-dysphoric people.

Further Reading:

The New Math:  Using US Census and Social Security data to estimate the number of transsexuals in the United States.

Getting Lost In The Crowd:  The problem of conflating self identity as “transgender” with prevalence of gender dysphoria.

Reference:

Lindsay Collin, Sari L. Reisner Vin Tangpricha, and Michael Goodman, “Prevalence of Transgender Depends on the “Case” Definition: A Systematic Review” (2016) Journal of Sexual Medicine
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.02.001

Who Would Date Transgender People?

A very recent paper by Dr. Karen Blair and R. A. Hoskin received a bit of publicity in both pro and anti- trans publications.  BOTH mischaracterized the paper and its findings.

But before I go into the paper, I have to make some strong editorial and political statements:

All acts of sexuality and romance should be joyously consensual.  No one may coerce, by force or by emotional blackmail, anyone to participate in any sexual or romantic activity.  To be even more specific; No, you may NOT berate people who won’t date or have sex with transfolk into doing so.  No, you may NOT call such people “transphobic” just for not being attracted to you or other transfolk.

On the flip side; No, you may NOT call transfolk respectfully seeking to date non-transfolk “rapists” or “rapey”.  No, you may NOT use examples of transfolk lashing out in frustration (no matter how unkindly) as exemplars of all transfolk’s behavior or attitudes.

The first thing to understand about this new paper is that it is a byproduct of another study and was not conducted to test any hypothesis.  The manner of obtaining its subjects was more typical of a convenience sample and may have some bias to it.  Specifically, there were many young people who were in college.  So, this study is an “exploratory” study and was never intended to find out “why” people feel they way they do about transpeople, only whether they would “hypothetically” be interested in dating transpeople.

In reporting responses, Blair et al., use the sexual orientation of the subjects compared to the post social transition identification as either “congruent” or “incongruent”.  That is to say, if a straight man said that he would date a transwoman, that is “congruent” with his sexual orientation.

Response categories by sexual and gender identity.
.                                                       Exclusionary N (%) Congruent N (%) Incongruent N (%)
Bi/queer/non-binary                   56 (48.3)                    40 (34.5)                20 (17.2)
Lesbian women                           79 (71.2)                    10 (9)                      22 (19.8)
Gay men                                        108 (88.5)                  10 (8.2)                   4 (3.3)
Heterosexual women                 388 (98.2)                  6 (1.5)                     1 (0.3)
Heterosexual men                       206 (96.7)                  3 (1.4)                    4 (1.9)

Given some of the friction found between some gynephilic transwomen and a certain element of the lesbian community, the data from the study is perhaps surprising.  Ten percent of the lesbians indicated that they would consider dating transwomen.  Doing a bit of math, given that lesbians comprise a bit over ~1% of women and 9% are willing to date transwomen = 0.1% of women, while post social transition gynephilic transwomen are only 0.04% of socially identified women, there are more than enough willing lesbians as there are lesbian identified transwomen; a happy coincidence.

Interestingly, happy circumstances occur for every one else as well.  There are more people in each congruent and incongruent category to allow every transperson of every sexual orientation to find a willing partner.  It may be a more arduous task for transfolk to find willing partners, but there is no shortage.  Far from transfolk being shut out of the dating (and marriage) market, we are very much welcome in it.

Further Reading:

Going to the Chapel

Reference:

Blair, K.L. & Hoskin, R.A. (2018). Transgender exclusion from the world of dating: Patterns of acceptance and rejection of hypothetical trans dating partners as a function of sexual and gender identity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
https://www.drkarenblair.com/s/blair2018.pdf