Current Events > How about this gender scheme.

(+) Yeah! (+)

MM
MF
FM
FF

the first is your "Brain" gender. the second is your "Body" sex. here's how it workes: everyone is born MM or FF (legally, this is placed on your birth certificate). If you believe your brain gender is incorrect (i.e. many people who are currently trans), you can get that checked out through an eval and an exam that will do MRI (or w/e) and look at your brain and see if your brain doesn't match your physical sex, which does happen for some people, causing their emotional distress/confusion. If it's not matching, you can be relisted as MF or FM (where your brain is switched to one that you feel / the exam identifies as being valid).

Sports and bathrooms and jails only look at the second one (sex), which helps with physical balancing in sports, comfort in bathrooms, and safety in jails. (there would also be the equivalent of female only gyms and such that look at the second one). This scheme, however, also acknowledges the identity/brain portion of people who may, as people, feel more aligned with the other gender because of characteristics other than genitalia. People can be identified with whatever pronouns they want, but likely this would match their brain gender. Thus, people will not feel "misgendered" because of their body parts. Example: someone who is a MF would maybe want to be called "he", because they identify / have the brain of a male, even though they have a vagina.

The other alternative is to just allow people to declare their "brain" gender however/whenever they want, and one would have to think about how often they can change that / cost of that / ramifications, but I think all of the institutitions above going by their "body" sex would be a good thing based on the reasons above.

this doesn't accommodate me as I identify as an attack helicopter
---

do you run things through your head before you post?
---

TwoDoorPunkCab posted...

this doesn't accommodate me as I identify as an attack helicopter

@0AbsoluteZero0 See? Now this is an actual, intended to be offensive use of the whole attack helicopter meme, and ISNT meant tongue in cheek like my post was.
Not that you care and will continue shitting on me for no reason, but whatever, I fucking tried.
---

What about this one:
XX - XY ?
---

Or we can just do like we do now and refer to people as the gender they identify as and keep it as simple as possible.
---

CyricZ posted...

Or we can just do like we do now and refer to people as the gender they identify as and keep it as simple as possible.

how is this complicated?

you get assigned MM or FF. You take an eval and exam if you want to change to MF or FM. End of story.

LionLuBu posted...

do you run things through your head before you post?

what's the problem

The idea that you need to do a "brain scan" to validate your feelings is ridiculous. Should we also do scans for everyone who says they are depressed and if it doesn't look the way we want it to we just tell them they can't get help?

I literally do fMRI and EEG research for a living and I find it hilarious people think it's this simple. Do you even know how much time and money it takes to do an fMRI?
---

Penis Vagina

Its not that difficult.
---

See this is a perfect example of the golden mean fallacy.

In your proposal, you've alienated both pro-trans and anti-trans people.
---

ssjevot posted...

Should we also do scans for everyone who says they are depressed

Yes, if it aides in diagnosis and treatment. Depression is an extremely heterogeneous category. Not saying that the research is quite there for that, but the possibility certainly exists.
---

ssjevot posted...

The idea that you need to do a "brain scan" to validate your feelings is ridiculous. Should we also do scans for everyone who says they are depressed and if it doesn't look the way we want it to we just tell them they can't get help?

I literally do fMRI and EEG research for a living and I find it hilarious people think it's this simple. Do you even know how much time and money it takes to do an fMRI?

what are you talking about? no one said anything about diagnosing depression with scans / denying medicine if someone doesn't have a scan. we give medicine all the same without scans.

ssjevot posted...

The idea that you need to do a "brain scan" to validate your feelings is ridiculous. Should we also do scans for everyone who says they are depressed and if it doesn't look the way we want it to we just tell them they can't get help?

I literally do fMRI and EEG research for a living and I find it hilarious people think it's this simple. Do you even know how much time and money it takes to do an fMRI?

it's not to "validate feelings", its to diagnose a legitimate condition where one's brain does not match ones body, leading to body dysmorphia, which is a legitimate condition that ails people. this system would officially recognize where people actually ARE trans (i.e. having a body that doesn't match "who they are", i.e. their brain). It would recognize that this IS a legitimate issue that people have, and would allow people to be identified properly.

people who just "feel" they are the wrong gender are often people who are confusing gender (something of the brain) with gender roles. You can feel like you aren't "like other boys/girls", even when your body/brain matches with them. People should recognize the difference between when there actually is a disconnect with body/brain, and when it's an issue of just not "fitting in" with what you are "supposed to" do/feel. that's a big problem.

CyricZ posted...

See this is a perfect example of the golden mean fallacy.

In your proposal, you've alienated both pro-trans and anti-trans people.

how come?

we recognize that some people have brains that don't match with their body (a legitimate issue), and place people in sports and such based on their body (which is legit also).

Fam_Fam posted...

CyricZ posted...

See this is a perfect example of the golden mean fallacy.

In your proposal, you've alienated both pro-trans and anti-trans people.

how come?

we recognize that some people have brains that don't match with their body (a legitimate issue), and place people in sports and such based on their body (which is legit also).

I think you're giving way too much credence to the sports issue, which I don't think is nearly as much of a problem as you want it to be.
---

CyricZ posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

CyricZ posted...

See this is a perfect example of the golden mean fallacy.

In your proposal, you've alienated both pro-trans and anti-trans people.

how come?

we recognize that some people have brains that don't match with their body (a legitimate issue), and place people in sports and such based on their body (which is legit also).

I think you're giving way too much credence to the sports issue, which I don't think is nearly as much of a problem as you want it to be.

it's not a big problem at all. but it's one that is resolved if you divide sports based on biological sex, not gender.

_Lyonidias posted...

TwoDoorPunkCab posted...

this doesn't accommodate me as I identify as an attack helicopter

@0AbsoluteZero0 See? Now this is an actual, intended to be offensive use of the whole attack helicopter meme, and ISNT meant tongue in cheek like my post was.
Not that you care and will continue shitting on me for no reason, but whatever, I fucking tried.

i want intentionally trying to be offensive, it's just a joke
---

Fam_Fam posted...

it's not to "validate feelings", its to diagnose a legitimate condition where one's brain does not match ones body, leading to body dysmorphia, which is a legitimate condition that ails people. this system would officially recognize where people actually ARE trans (i.e. having a body that doesn't match "who they are", i.e. their brain). It would recognize that this IS a legitimate issue that people have, and would allow people to be identified properly.

Please check the DSM entry for gender dysphoria. There is nothing about brain and body mismatch. Stop trying to redefine medical categories to suit your political agenda.
---

ssjevot posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

it's not to "validate feelings", its to diagnose a legitimate condition where one's brain does not match ones body, leading to body dysmorphia, which is a legitimate condition that ails people. this system would officially recognize where people actually ARE trans (i.e. having a body that doesn't match "who they are", i.e. their brain). It would recognize that this IS a legitimate issue that people have, and would allow people to be identified properly.

Please check the DSM entry for gender dysphoria. There is nothing about brain and body mismatch. Stop trying to redefine medical categories to suit your political agenda.

Gender dysphoria (GD) is the distress a person experiences as a result of the sex and gender they were assigned at birth.

As I said, assign gender at birth, and then allow them to change this if the gender they were assigned does not match the one they should have.

How about we stop giving a fuck about gender

Its so boring and 2017

Romes187 posted...

How about we stop giving a fuck about race

Its so boring and 1968

Fam_Fam posted...

A reason why people have GD is because their brain does not match their body.

Seriously, stop inserting your political agenda into this. Some people with GD have brains that look more similar to a typical brain of a biological female than a biological male in some regions. This is not a diagnostic criteria nor should it ever be. Brains vary dramatically in many ways and fMRI and EEG do not capture much of that variation. It's obvious your entire goal is to justify bigotry against trans people, and attempting to pretend you know more about the science than the people who actually do it isn't helping.
---

Romes187 posted...

How about we stop giving a fuck about gender

Its so boring and 2017

Gender was first applied to describing human traits in in 1945 and got popular in the 70s. It was originally just for describing grammatical gender in language.
---

ssjevot posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

A reason why people have GD is because their brain does not match their body.

Seriously, stop inserting your political agenda into this. Some people with GD have brains that look more similar to a typical brain of a biological female than a biological male in some regions. This is not a diagnostic criteria nor should it ever be. Brains vary dramatically in many ways and fMRI and EEG do not capture much of that variation. It's obvious your entire goal is to justify bigotry against trans people, and attempting to pretend you know more about the science than the people who actually do it isn't helping.

"Some people"

What I'm saying is that this system helps people who don't.

And if it's not the body, and not the brain, what is the source of the gender dysmorphia that people are facing? Is there an alternative that you are suggesting?

Fam_Fam posted...

And if it's not the body, and not the brain, what is the source of the gender dysmorphia that people are facing? Is there an alternative that you are suggesting?

Try reading my post where I describe how neither EEG or fMRI can possibly tell you enough to diagnose such a complex behavior. I literally study color processing in the brain and we can't even figure that out in detail. What makes you think we can look at some scans (nevermind the immense cost) and diagnose something as complex as GD?
---

ssjevot posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

And if it's not the body, and not the brain, what is the source of the gender dysmorphia that people are facing? Is there an alternative that you are suggesting?

Try reading my post where I describe how neither EEG or fMRI can possibly tell you enough to diagnose such a complex behavior. I literally study color processing in the brain and we can't even figure that out in detail. What makes you think we can look at some scans (nevermind the immense cost) and diagnose something as complex as GD?

because scientists have been able to identify when brain activity looks more like the typical brain of someone of the other sex?

"Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to findings to be presented in Barcelona, at the European Society of Endocrinology annual meeting, ECE 2018."

"In this study, Dr. Julie Bakker from the University of Lige, Belgium, and her colleagues from the Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria at the VU University Medical Center, the Netherlands, examined sex differences in the brain activation patterns of young transgender people. The study included both adolescent boys and girls with gender dysphoria and used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to assess brain activation patterns in response to a pheromone known to produce gender-specific activity. The pattern of brain activation in both transgender adolescent boys and girls more closely resembled that of non-transgender boys and girls of their desired gender. "

This is why I think it's possible.

ssjevot posted...

Romes187 posted...

How about we stop giving a fuck about gender

Its so boring and 2017

Gender was first applied to describing human traits in in 1945 and got popular in the 70s. It was originally just for describing grammatical gender in language.

I really don't care. It's boring and fucking tired.

roowoorwho im a man weoohwrohwohr im a girl

womworhowrhworw

nobodies cares about you , nobody cares about anyone, stfu, go get a job and be productive. stop talking about it rarhwhrwohrowhrow

Chicken posted...

Penis Vagina

Its not that difficult.

It is when you consider who has what.
---

My gender is 45,000 acre blaze
---

Fam_Fam posted...

because scientists have been able to identify when brain activity looks more like the typical brain of someone of the other sex?

Yeah, I already said that. Then you posted excerpts repeating what I already said. And again it's a comparison of averages. Not everyone with GD has a BOLD signal that would match a typical male or female's and there is great variation among male's and female's to begin with. Your entire premise is to use fMRI to gatekeep who can and can't be trans for no reason other than to justify your bigotry. There is zero reason to do it. No one in the field wants to do or would do what you are saying so the whole thing is idiotic. It's as dumb as using hippocampus activity to determine if depression is "legitimate" or whatever. You can't use a crude measure of brain activity to determine the legitimacy of complex behavior.
---

ssjevot posted...

hypocampus

lol
---

COVxy posted...

ssjevot posted...

hypocampus

lol

Nice response. Really convincing.
---

It's not like you engaged with my earlier post lol.
---

We should probably learn more about the human brain and gender before implementing something like this.

ssjevot posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

because scientists have been able to identify when brain activity looks more like the typical brain of someone of the other sex?

Yeah, I already said that. Then you posted excerpts repeating what I already said. And again it's a comparison of averages. Not everyone with GD has a BOLD signal that would match a typical male or female's and there is great variation among male's and female's to begin with. Your entire premise is to use fMRI to gatekeep who can and can't be trans for no reason other than to justify your bigotry. There is zero reason to do it. No one in the field wants to do or would do what you are saying so the whole thing is idiotic. It's as dumb as using hippocampus activity to determine if depression is "legitimate" or whatever. You can't use a crude measure of brain activity to determine the legitimacy of complex behavior.

again, "not everyone"...I did not say everyone would display it. What I'm saying is that you have an indicator for some people, for whom this would identify as having a brain that is more like the opposite gender, and this would identify those people and mark them accordingly. Right now, we have zero people being identified in any scientific way; this would find some.

And in terms of "bold" signal...you set the threshold at whatever is appropriate to identify a deviation from what is normal for males/females and then judge accordingly. That is a parameter that can be set as appropriate.

You almost had me until you mentioned MRIs. The human brain is constantly changing from what I
understand, from birth till death, constantly shaped by an insane number of variables encountered in
everyday life. From your diet, sleep habits, hobbies, sunlight, you friggin name it. So I don't follow that.

However, if you want to keep it as simple as two genders, I'm down. You want to be MF/FM, fine. You can be one
of the two biological genders, your choice. Declare it, it becomes legal when you're an adult, no taksies backsies.

I sincerely don't care, just fucking pick one or the other and stick with it.
---

And what about mMFFFmm you bigot?
---

COVxy posted...

It's not like you engaged with my earlier post lol.

Because you can't be bothered to read my posts. Even if it could be used to daignose it's much to expensive to be used practically and offers no advantages over the current methods used. You really need to ask yourself why do you want to gatekeep who can be diagnosed with a behavioral illness by looking at a crude measure of brain activity instead of relying on the behavioral measures used by experts in the field? What does it do other than potentially allow you to be a bigot to people you think are "faking" it for attention or whatever it is that makes you want this so badly?
---

midgar posted...

You almost had me until you mentioned MRIs. The human brain is constantly changing from what I
understand, from birth till death, constantly shaped by an insane number of variables encountered in
everyday life. From your diet, sleep habits, hobbies, sunlight, you friggin name it. So I don't follow that.

However, if you want to keep it as simple as two genders, I'm down. You want to be MF/FM, fine. You can be one
of the two biological genders, your choice. Declare it, it becomes legal when you're an adult, no taksies backsies.

I sincerely don't care, just fucking pick one or the other and stick with it.

you can certainly have it be when someone is an adult and the brain stabilizes as a cutoff for when you can do this.

Fam_Fam posted...

again, "not everyone"...I did not say everyone would display it. What I'm saying is that you have an indicator for some people, for whom this would identify as having a brain that is more like the opposite gender, and this would identify those people and mark them accordingly. R

Fam_Fam posted...

If you believe your brain gender is incorrect (i.e. many people who are currently trans), you can get that checked out through an eval and an exam that will do MRI (or w/e) and look at your brain and see if your brain doesn't match your physical sex, which does happen for some people, causing their emotional distress/confusion. If it's not matching, you can be relisted as MF or FM (where your brain is switched to one that you feel / the exam identifies as being valid).

Yeah man you totally weren't trying to gatekeep who can be trans with fMRI. You might want to read your own posts in the future. And we have a current way to classify GD, it's using behavior. You know the thing we are actually concerned about.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

you can certainly have it be when someone is an adult and the brain stabilizes as a cutoff for when you can do this.

Your brain never stops changing. The degree of change slows, but never stops. You continue losing and making new neurons and new connections between neurons.
---

ssjevot posted...

Because you can't be bothered to read my posts. Even if it could be used to daignose it's much to expensive to be used practically and offers no advantages over the current methods used.

Current methods lead to 30% success rate with SSRI's in depression. There are over 1000 permutations of possible forms of "major depression". Diagnosis and treatment is too vague and imprecise for actual progress in psychiatry. So, yes, the goal of high precision individualized medicine in psychiatry is certainly there and of interest to the field. It's expensive, of course, but so is all medicine.

ssjevot posted...

crude measure of brain activity instead of relying on the behavioral measures used by experts in the field?

Who said anything about crude measures? The field is heavily developing, becoming increasingly sophisticated in it's approaches and quantifications. Secondly, output of a system can be produced by many different ways, 1+4 = 5, but so does 7 - 2. Understanding the underlying biological mechanisms will lead to better more precise treatment.
---

COVxy posted...

Current methods lead to 30% success rate with SSRI's. There are over 1000 permutations of possible forms of "major depression".

That's literally a treatment we don't understand fully the mechanism behind because of the complexity of the brain is it relates to depression and you are saying we need to diagnosis depression based on brain measures?

COVxy posted...

Who said anything about crude measures? The field is heavily developing, becoming increasingly sophisticated in it's approaches and quantifications. Secondly, output of a system can be produced by many different ways, 1+4 = 5, but so does 7 - 2. Understanding the underlying biological mechanisms will lead to better more precise treatment.

There is no way to use electrodes on human subjects outside epilepsy patients. PET is even more expensive and hard to get permission to do because of the radioactive isotopes involved. And yes fMRI is an extremely crude measure. I combine it with EEG at the same time to deal with issues in the temporal resolution, but it's nothing close to what you can do with electrodes and the data analysis is messy by requirement. The whole field of fMRI is controversial because of the all the stats fudging needed to even get any usable data.
---

ssjevot posted...

COVxy posted...

It's not like you engaged with my earlier post lol.

Because you can't be bothered to read my posts. Even if it could be used to daignose it's much to expensive to be used practically and offers no advantages over the current methods used. You really need to ask yourself why do you want to gatekeep who can be diagnosed with a behavioral illness by looking at a crude measure of brain activity instead of relying on the behavioral measures used by experts in the field? What does it do other than potentially allow you to be a bigot to people you think are "faking" it for attention or whatever it is that makes you want this so badly?

you're the only one taking about "faking it"

the point of this is that some people have no recognition of a legit medical issue, and this gives them recognition. its not to benefit "everyone"

ssjevot posted...

That's literally a treatment we don't understand fully the mechanism behind because of the complexity of the brain is it relates to depression and you are saying we need to diagnosis depression based on brain measures?

No, I'm saying current research AND treatment is done by categorizing people into symptom clusters that in reality are both too vague and post-hoc to be useful in understanding when a biological treatment will be effective.

ssjevot posted...

There is no way to use electrodes on human subjects outside epilepsy patients. PET is even more expensive and hard to get permission to do because of the radioactive isotopes involved. And yes fMRI is an extremely crude measure. I combine it with EEG at the same time to deal with issues in the temporal resolution, but it's nothing close to what you can do with electrodes and the data analysis is messy by requirement. The whole field of fMRI is controversial because of the all the stats fudging needed to even get any usable data.

Trust me, I know BOLD is far and away from a direct measure. That doesn't make it crude, and certainly doesn't mean that technological developments aren't being made to ensure both the interpretability and reliability. The latter statement is entirely incorrect lol. Not to mention, BOLD is certainly not the only thing you get from MRI lol.
---

>gender scheme
>sex

uhhh
---

This is really shitty bait.

COVxy posted...

Trust me, I know BOLD is far and away from a direct measure. That doesn't make it crude. The latter statement is entirely incorrect lol.

What?

You claim you know BOLD and then say that is incorrect?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_magnetic_resonance_imaging

Might want to at least read a Wikipedia article before saying stuff you don't understand. The issues reflect what I said. I wonder how you can know what the BOLD signal is and not call it crude since it isn't even a measure of brain activity, but an assumed correlation. There are a number of people in neuroscience who completely dismiss fMRI for reasons that have some validity. I am not a fan of it myself, but think it is a useful measure for what I do and think the stuff we do with primates also has limitations.
---

I've worked in nonhuman primates before, and am currently finishing my PhD in a lab that does primarily MR imaging. I don't need to read anything on wikipedia.
---

COVxy posted...

I've worked in nonhuman primates before, and am currently finishing my PhD in a lab that does primarily MR imaging. I don't need to read anything on wikipedia.

Already got my PhD. And clearly you do, since you apparently don't know any of the issues related to it.
---