this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
81 points (100.0% liked)
egg_irl — Memes about being trans people in denial and other eggy topics
3481 readers
175 users here now
!egg_irl
!egg_irl is for widely relatable memes about questioning one's gender or being an egg (a trans person in denial) as well as other eggy topics.
If you are looking for a place to discuss something specific to you or especially if you need help or are in crisis, we have communities and resources that can support you linked at the bottom of this sidebar.
General Rules:
-
No bigotry.
-
No spam, bots, or vote farming.
Rules on Content:
-
No reposts.
-
No personal-life posts, bingo cards, quizzes, selfies, "trans/not trans" lists, picrew, or non-memes.
-
No visible names or usernames.
-
Do not post or link to pornography.
Rules on Post Titles and Tags:
-
Posts must be titled "egg_irl". An emoji or two is OK, but they have to be between "egg" and "irl".
-
Posts that assume the viewer's gender and/or contain potentially triggering content must be spoilered and tagged at the beginning of the post title. Example content-warning tags that you can copy include the following:
[CW: Assumes Viewer is Transmasc][CW: Assumes Viewer is Transfem][CW: Assumes Viewer is Nonbinary][CW: Transphobia][CW: Violence][CW: Weapons/Firearms][CW: Disturbing Imagery]
-
You may optionally include other tags, such as:
[Transmasc Meme][Transfem Meme][Nonbinary Meme][Gender-Nonspecific Meme]
Rules on Post Text:
-
If possible, include an image description for accessibility.
-
Add sources for art.
Rules on Comments
-
If a post is tagged with a specific gender identity, keep the conversation centered on that identity.
-
You must follow the Egg Prime Directive. You may not push or coerce people into identifying or not identifying a certain way. You must respect them as the gender they claim to identify as. In addition it is extremely in poor taste to make assumptions about other people's identities based on external factors, we understand it cannot be helped but it is best not to as it can affect the way you treat others in noticeable ways.
-
No Ewwphoria posts.
Posts which contain misogyny, misandry, transmisogyny, transmisandry, or enbyphobia for the purpose of expressing euphoria are not allowed here. At best they bring anger to others, and at worst they may trigger people's dysphoria. People who create such posts will have them removed and may be banned at moderator discretion.
Recommendations:
We strongly encourage you to include your pronouns in your account bio so that others know how to refer to you without misgendering you. If you're questioning or unsure of your pronouns, that's totally cool—just say so.
Sibling Meme Communities
Sibling Non-Meme Communities
Community Resources:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I take issue with this line of reasoning because there are indeed genderfluid people who experience strong dysphoria that shifts and changes over time. Genderfluidity isn't a presentation or choice it is very real for people. Also it comes off as bad faith to use the idea of brain sex to debunk it because conversion therapy doesn't work. It's a very VERY bad comparison because conversion therapy is other people trying to change a person by force. Genderfluidity is a person changing by themselves.
When I talk about denial of Genderfluidity in the trans community this is what I'm talking about.
Furthermore I do take a lot of issues when it comes to ideas about "brain gender" or "brain sex" because there are many situations where it falls apart when trying to describe gender, genderfluidity is a prime example there. How does that work then? One could argue that like you did that it's simply a presentation or performative. However that doesn't address the fact that there are genderfluid people who have gone through conversion therapy, and they haven't stopped being genderfluid either. So the conversion therapy comparison isn't a valid argument for brain genders and gender identity rigidity.
Other problems are that the brain sex theory doesn't account for Nonbinary identities, like you said one could argue they are performative. Though once again that falls apart when they too experience strong gender dysphoria and also, once again can't be converted by persuasive or coercive means.
What I think is the biggest problem when it comes to these studies, is that they seem to imply that having gender identity is related to gender dysphoria. These studies are the basis of transmedicalism. Many ignore the fact that there are trans people who lack gender dysphoria, they also do not acknowledge the conditions that are problematic for their theories like nonbinary or genderfluid people because they ultimately do not have an answer for those, even though many of them have gender dysphoria as strong as binary trans people do.
Conversion therapy is wrong, it's very easy to prove why it is wrong without promoting lies about how gender identity works that invalidate or misrepresent the experiences of nonbinary and genderfluid people, who very much do share the same experiences in terms of dysphoria and euphoria as any binary trans people. Saying that gender is locked in that is doing exactly that. Maybe instead of overthinking to the extreme and finding a reason based on biological existentialism for why conversion therapy is bad and wrong we should just point out the fact that one cannot change who someone is through coercion and abuse. It's that simple. There is never a place for that kind of "treatment" not in gender or sexuality, not outside of it. I can't believe that people would even consider that okay if there was even the possibility that a person could choose. If they could, it would be just as wrong or evil to try and force them.
You are absolutely right about this. These studies do have consequences in legal and political situations, and they also have frightening implications for those who are genderfluid, nonbinary, or non-dysphoric.
Agreed. It is paramount that we respect the identities of people whether or not they fit these rigid definitions. However like the ones I highlighted, we should also take the time to scrutinize these conclusions because there are plenty of situations that are wildly incompatible. Like a genderfluid person who may feel strong dysphoria towards her penis, yet after a shift he may feel perfectly comfortable with it, or even possibly miss it when it is gone. Such situations don't just "not fit" they challenge the merit of it altogether. These situations really need to be taken seriously, not brushed aside for acceptance, but actually looked at to re-evaluate the conclusions that were drawn otherwise.
part two of my response:
Gender dysphoria absolutely does have to do with having a gender identity, it seems likely that dysphoria is caused by incongruence between gender identity and assigned sex (which even if we lived in a utopia where no sex was assigned, some trans people would still experience dysphoria).
I think what you mean to say is that a trans gender identity does not require dysphoria to be present to be valid, which is of course true. The brain studies don't contradict this, at all, and are entirely consistent with this understanding of trans identity.
Transmedicalists wish to deny someone like Jacob Tobia is a trans person, and I think that's silly and obviously false. I don't know why we're talking about this - I don't endorse transmedicalism, neither do you - we agree, can we move on now?
A lie is a falsehood with the intent to deceive, what I have shared is peer reviewed research and reproducible findings about brain sex which are not only false but represent the best current body of evidence to understanding how our brains relate to unconscious sex and gender identity. The fact that this evidence accords with studies that find conversion therapy is clinically ineffective only furthers the legitimacy of the working theory that gender identity (including genderfluid and nonbinary identities) is fixed and biological.
To characterize what I have said as a lie is honestly confusing to me, and again it feels like you aren't responding to what I wrote, and maybe you are unfamiliar with the actual research and evidence?
Again, people engage in conversion therapy in earnest and not under coercion. Many forms of conversion therapy are essentially talk therapy to help patients try to be more comfortable with their assigned sex/gender.
Your claim that conversion therapy can be dismissed off-hand because it's coercive and abusive would not address cases where conversion therapy is not coercive or abusive, where it is engaged with earnest consent and a desire by a patient to alleviate gender dysphoria.
Nobody is suggesting we brush them aside, and at this point I take offense that you mis-characterize what I have written as dismissive, debunking, or invalidating genderfluid and non-binary people. I engage in this discussion assuming that the conversation is grounded in good-faith on both sides, and I am starting to feel I can no longer carry on a conversation with you based on your responses.
I admit there were ways I should have worded things better to avoid miscommunication, so this is not entirely your fault, but I have tried to be patient and carefully parse what you have written and it feels like you are not offering me the same treatment at this point.
I do appreciate your willingness to engage with me, I think a lot of people feel communication with me is tedious and exhausting - it is a lot to read and think about, and these are not easy topics to discuss for lots of reasons, including that they impact us personally and we have stake in the outcomes.
I don't doubt this, but I think it would also be helpful to list paradigmatic examples of genderfluid people so we can base our discussion in something shared and understood, rather than establishing separate assumptions about what is or isn't genderfluid, which I think is happening here.
I think this might be poor communication on my part, I would like to make a distinction between "changes in unconscious sex" and claims of genderfluidity, which I essentially think are not the same thing. I think the findings on unconscious sex likely mean that genderfluidity is caused by the unconscious sex which is fixed, which means that I agree with you that it's not a presentation or a choice.
I don't mean to "debunk" genderfluidity at all.
Conversion therapy is only sometimes by force, often it is an earnest attempt by the trans person to conform with their assigned sex for religious or cultural reasons. My point is that even when people attempt to change their unconscious sex through conversion therapy, it fails and does not resolve the incongruence between their unconscious sex and their assigned sex.
We don't know, but the brain studies find that brain sex is extremely complicated and not at all simple, there is no real way to separate brains into two slots, male and female. What do you think would account for a genderfluid identity given the evidence?
I never argued genderfluidity is performative or mere presentation, which makes me think we are beginning to no longer communicate at all. I don't blame you entirely for this, but it is happening regardless, and I am sorry for that.
It sometimes seems like you are arguing contradicting statements, e.g.:
Do you think conversion therapy ever works, for example when people really put their minds to it and try to change themselves?
I am hostile to performative theories of gender, and it's amazing to me that you think I am arguing for them. I can't help but think you aren't even reading what I write.
Also, you are wrong about the brain sex studies, they find that 95%+ of brains are neither male nor female, which gives ample evidence of non-binary gender identities.
You are arguing my point at this point, which is ironic considering you think it's a gotcha against me.
I have to go, I will finish responding when I can.
NO. I know that the idea that some people who hear that gender isn't fixed think is that they think it means that conversion therapy works. This is a transmedicalist talking point though, as if the idea that gender shifts and changes over time somehow validates conversion therapy or invalidates gender fluidity.
Genderfluid people cannot coerce themselves into being different by force of will alone. That's kind of the idea of gender including dysphoria shifting and changing randomly.
That's way more than I hoped out of these studies, however they seem to fall short of genderfluidity.
Honestly I think you should really think over if brain sex or brain gender has any merit, because to me and many others, it is for the most part transmedicalist garbage and biological essentialism.
Do you mean biological essentialism, rather than existentialism? Just so you know, I strongly oppose gender bioessentialism, and I think a lot of this conversation has been futile and frustrating because you assume that is the position I am taking.
Transmedicalism tries to gatekeep trans identity based on the presence of gender dysphoria, and they might point to the studies on brain sex to explain the source of dysphoria, but that doesn't mean the studies on brain sex are transmedicalist in nature, it just means transmedicalists use that evidence to try to support a view they have, which ultimately is a view that doesn't make sense.
Ultimately I think transmedicalists are just another form of respectability politics, it is no different than previous movements within gay cultures to assimilate as much as possible to straight culture and to assert the notion of "we are just like you, except this one thing". These movements always seem confused about the way power works, the problem is that the oppressors aren't going to respect you just because you think you are more like them than others in your community. Trans people like Caitlyn Jenner or Blaire White aren't effective in achieving trans rights precisely because they want to capitulate as much as possible to the people who are most invested in denying trans rights. Not that "respectability" isn't entirely irrelevant, certainly moral panic can be more easily whipped up when a group behaves in a way that is alienating to the majority of people, but trans people for the most part aren't even guilty of the things anti-trans activists claim - like that trans women are sexually preying on cis women in bathrooms, there just is no evidence of this and yet lots of people believe there is real harm being done and bathroom bans are the only way to stop it.
So I don't think respectability politics will be that effective and is probably more of an emotional response than a pragmatic praxis, even if I can understand the fear about the trans community not taking seriously the need to be careful and not lean too much into anti-trans panic, which will happen regardless, even if the trans community does nothing wrong. Facts and reality matter little to the anti-trans movement.
Yes, Firefox's dictionary sucks and makes words wrong. This idea of trying to root gender as a permanent, unchanging, or biologically ingrained thing, similar to the arguments of gayness being "in your genes" is bioessentialist. It attempts to validate the experience of being gay or trans by saying it's biological and unchanging, implying a strong importance in these aspects.
These studies almost always focus on gender dysphoria as the factor, it is my opinion that a lot of them often cater explicitly to transmedicalist viewpoints. That's how medicine is though, and I can't really fault them for doing this. What I can and will do though is to not welcome this discourse into trans-friendly spaces which are meant to be open to people who are exploring an/or don't fit the mold. In addition these studies seem to be THE argument against conversion therapy, when there is a better argument that doesn't reduce or invalidate genderfluidity as a trans identity like any other. Which is that trying to interfere with who a person is, and how they identify themselves. That's it. You don't need to biologically prove if someone is REALLY trans for something like this to be bad. Trying to change or force people to change who they are generally hasn't and will never be good for them. And I resent the implication that it could ever be okay very strongly.
I very much agree. Respectability politics really does not matter. Hating trans people isn't justified and people who hate trans people will use any reason, and if they don't have a reason, they'll just continue without one.
I agree that this is futile and frustrating, but that's likely because we fundamentally disagree on certain concepts. Like I do not agree there is merit to try and biologically define transgender as a brain condition. It oversimplifies the experience and contradicts with real world evidence. And also ultimately caters to the medical perspective of treating transgender as a medical condition. I don't think there is anything more to say here.