LGB Alliance: Myths and Truths
Part 2: What the LGB Alliance say about wider issues.
Part 1 looking at the Myths that the LGB Alliance claim to address, examined claims made about the LGB Alliance and their counters. This second article will look at wider subjects they claim are “myths”; the intention being to show that far from being “truths” their position is as much based on the same ideology based position the same as they accuse their detractors of being motivated by.
As Obi-Wan said “you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view”. We all build our own ideology based on a combination of experiences and facts and there is no absolute truth: not in science, not in sociology and certainly not in the (so-called) gender debate which the LGB Alliance have put themselves squarely in the middle of – while arguable having nothing to loose whatever the outcome!
Sex is a spectrum / Sex is not binary
LGB Alliance say: “Sex in human beings is binary. Male biology supports the production of small gametes (sperm), and female biology supports the production of large gametes (ova or eggs), whether or not they produce them at any point, or ever.”
Their defence of this is basic high school biology. And at a superficial level they are right. But only if you read a high school biology book and stop there.
Sex is a binary because society likes neat categories. It wasn’t ‘biology’ which created male and female, but society. Thousands of years ago, humans noticed that some people gave birth, and some people impregnated others in order to give birth. As science and society developed: the terms egg and sperm were introduced, and when an egg was fertilised by a sperm it became called a zygote. Males produced sperm, females produced eggs. But that’s was the start of the story of ‘sex’ as a concept, not the end.
Over the past hundred odd years since the X and Y chromosome were first drawn in 1906 there have been huge leaps forward in our understanding of ‘sex’.
It is a fact (something repeatedly observable) that the vast majority of people have either XX or XY chromosomes; however it is also a fact that some people have XXY, or XO or other combinations. It’s also true that chromosomes are evident from conception and that they determine the direction of genital development during the first trimester.
But the LGB Alliance state that “sex [is determined by] gametes […] whether or not they produce them at any point, or ever”. Which is a paradox; if someone has never produced either gametes, then we are making assumptions based on something else. We assume a male “supports the production of small gametes” because we decided they are male – at the point where babies are categories there is NOT small gametes production.
In reality, sex is more than simply chromosomes and the resultant physiological characteristics: the way the foetus develops into a baby is affected by many factors including hormones which (and this is more a hypothesis but a hypothesis based on observation) affects the development of the brain and body.
And while at birth we judge, “is this baby male or female?” This is SOCIAL categorisation not based on ‘biology’ beyond observation of genitals. For the vast majority this is correct and everything aligns; but on occasions they don’t. Some people will not produce either gamete, some people will react differently to natural hormones, some people have strengths and weaknesses in different aspects of the collective mush we call intelligence: all these are signs that rather than there being two distinct sexes, male and female, there are points along a continuum where people fit. Most people are clustered close to each end, but while it is not technically correct to call it a ‘spectrum’ – there are discrete points NOT a continuous scale – sex is NOT a simple binary. To call it such is simply an opinion used to affirm an ideology.
LGB Alliance says: Homosexuals are people who are sexually attracted to people of the same sex as them. Bisexuals are people who are sexually attracted to people of either sex.
This is again an ideology based point of view. As examined above, their view of biology is based on their ideology, and to a certain extent this is the same ideology they are trying to assert. In reality people are attracted (sexually and otherwise) to people, they may be able to categorise that attraction, but that attraction and the words used to describe their attraction should be personal to themselves — no one has the right to say “you are not a lesbian”, “you should call yourself gay”, etc.
Not only do LGB Alliance have a very narrow view of how homosexual – and lesbian and gay – and bisexual are defined, but they also object to the recording of sexualities beyond the straight / bi / gay-lesbian trinary.
Many people also consider the use of ‘homosexuals’ / ‘bisexuals’ as a noun as degrading.
Addressing this is part of a much wider discussing over what sexual orientation is which is outside the scope of this article.
To support their optioning, LGB Alliance cite two sources. The first is a web page of Fair Play for Women, another campaign group who oppose trans rights and recognitions similar to LGB Alliance. Although this page is written by a pair of biologists, it is partisan and full of strawman arguments. The second is a video from an organisation calling itself the Paradox Institute. While claiming they are “an independent science education group” all their material focuses on gender and sex. The founder, Zach Elliot, is in reality a 4th year architecture student who self-published a book called “The Gender Paradox”. Like similar organisations they claim rationality and to be informed by scientific literature and professionals, but in reality they are only interested in literature and views which support their ideology.
Intersex people are proof biological sex isn’t binary
LGB Alliance say: A tiny percentage of people are born what is commonly referred to as “intersex” but is more accurately called Differences of Sexual Development (DSDs). These differences can produce chromosomal, hormonal or genital variations but this does not equate to being something other than female or male. In fact, many DSD conditions are found only in one or other of the sexes.
As stated about, sex is much more complex. Indeed nothing LGB Alliance say here is wrong, however unlike their conclusion it shows that from a biological sense, intersex people (many, perhaps the majority find the term DSD to be degrading and so it should be avoided outside of clinical usage) are outside a binary. Binary literally means two, if there are people who exist outside those two options, it means the binary is wrong – again the binary is not something handed down by biology, but a human categorisation system.
Indeed the 2013 Malta Declaration signed at Third International Intersex Forum states:
To register intersex children as females or males, with the awareness that, like all people, they may grow up to identify with a different sex or gender.
To ensure that sex or gender classifications are amendable through a simple administrative procedure at the request of the individuals concerned. All adults and capable minors should be able to choose between female (F), male (M), non-binary or multiple options. In the future, as with race or religion, sex or gender should not be a category on birth certificates or identification documents for anybody.
This declaration recognises that sex is much more complex than simply looking at (observable) biological characteristics.
Yes there is some conflation between ‘biological sex’ and socially recognised sex which is also called ‘gender’, but even in purely biological terms (rather than reproductive), humans sex is not just male or female in absolutes; and even in reproductive terms we see some produce sperm, some produce eggs and some neither. What is that but more than a binary male-female?
Again we see that what the LGB Alliance want to label as “truth” is no more than an ideology.
The source to support this is the same Paradox Institute mentioned above. There are many biologists who disagree with the binary classification system and over 2600 scientists, including biologists, geneticists and novel laureates, signed a letter in 2018 against “legally defin[ing] gender as a binary condition determined at birth, based on genitalia, and with plans to clarify disputes using “genetic testing”. This proposal is fundamentally inconsistent not only with science, but also with ethical practices, human rights, and basic dignity.” And that “There are no genetic tests that can unambiguously determine gender, or even sex.” (My emphasis)
Sex is assigned at birth
LGB Alliance says: Our biological sex (female or male) is determined at conception.
Incorrect: chromosomes are determined at conception. That is one aspect of ‘biological sex’.
LGB Alliance says: When we are born, our sex is observed and recorded, and is often observed before we are even born. In 99.98% of cases, our primary sex characteristics, ie our genitals, will clearly indicate which sex we are. in very small minority of some, but not all, people with Differences in Sex Development conditions (or “intersex”), the sex of a newborn is not obvious.
Incorrect: when we are born, our genitalia is observed. This observation is used to assume sex.
The proportion of people with intersex conditions is debatable, some experts consider it as low as the 0.02% cited by LGB Alliance, others put it as high as 1.7% of the population. Again these depend on social categorisation not biological absolutes with definitions vary depending on the needs of the definitions.
The misconceptions pushed by LGB Alliance far from helping intersex people as they claim, these misconceptions are the ones used to justify IGM (intersex genital mutilations).
LGB Alliance says: The term “sex assigned at birth” is only correctly applied in these circumstances where it is not possible to observe and record the sex with certainty. For the rest of us, our sex is not assigned. It is observed and recorded.
Assigned simply means “observed and recorded” … but as has been argued above, ‘sex’ means much more than can be assessed by observing genitals. It leads to an assumption about sex which it is true is accurate in 98+% of cases, but leaves many in limbo.
LGB sources here start with a link to an NHS Digital webpage talking about the 20-week scan. It’s a page — and it’s important to recognise that NHS Digital are essentially IT services, while the pages are accurate as far as they go, they are brief pages for the public to refer to, not intended as medical reference material — which says:
Can I find out the sex of my baby?
If you want to know your baby’s sex, you should ask the sonographer at the start of the scan, so they know that they need to check.
The second link is to an opinion piece by Leonard Sax MD PhD. As such its very brief (he does however write a longer piece available on a personal website). There is no exploration by LGB Alliance of counter arguments nor any representation .
There is no homophobia anymore
LGB Alliance says: Despite changes in society over the last 50 years, the repeal of laws against homosexuality, the possibility for same-sex couples to marry or become civil partners, and other signs of greater acceptance, homophobia (including lesbophobia and biphobia) is still very much present in the UK. In many other countries, discrimination is overt and legal, and homosexuality is even punishable by death in some places.
At last some opinion from LGB Alliance to be agreed with … the world (including the UK) is still deeply homophobic. Why they felt it needed addressing in “myths” is unclear.
However, there is no evidence that the push to improve trans rights plays any part in homophobia; in contrast it is the opinion of this writer that LGB Alliance are the ones attracting homophobia to their cause, something which they regularly ignore on their threads and from their followers.
Gender transition has nothing to do with homophobia
LGB Alliance say: Very many children, and quite possibly adults, enter the process of gender transition as a result of the homophobia of their parents, peer group, or their own internalised dislike of their sexual orientation. Young gay men or lesbians are being sold a myth that they can be straight, that lesbians are really straight men and that gay men are really straight women. This is homophobic conversion therapy.
Although they provide a link to an article in The Times which wrote about concerns of a small number of clinicians working at (or who previously worked at) GIDS but there has been no independent verification of the claims. In fact the claims of these clinicians were collated by a member of the Tavistock board and investigated.
While the absence of supporting evidence isn’t evidence that this definitely doesn’t happen, to think it is going ahead requires conspiracy level thinking. Not only must respected clinicians be involved, but also the management of GIDS, the management of the Tavistock & Portman Foundation Trust and the CQC (and yes the CQC did find problems with the services but NOT related to the claims of these whistleblowers) – all ignoring homophobia within the service.
The purpose of this is to say “make your own mind up” … listen to the whistleblowers that LGB Alliance want you to listen to, but also listen to the people who work there and support the service, the people who have investigates.
In addition, it appears very unlikely that someone would be homophobic, yet would embrace someone who was transgender.
LGB people who don’t include trans people in their dating pool are transphobic.
LGB Alliance says: Most of us would agree that finding love or a partner is one of the best things in life. The choices we make about which individuals we open to dating are, by definition, exclusionary. Just because a woman is a lesbian it doesn’t mean she is open to dating ALL lesbians. Just because a man is bisexual it doesn’t mean he is open to dating anyone and everyone.
We all have preference or ‘a type’ but it is important not to conflate these preferences with sexual orientation. Lesbians are females attracted to other females. Gay men are males attracted to other males. Homosexuality is not a “genital preference”. It isn’t transphobic to be clear about which sex you are attracted to. No one is under any obligation to date someone they are not interested in, or to have to explain why.
So this is a complex matter and relates to the earlier point about what homosexual and bisexual mean. The LGB Alliance have their ideology about what these terms mean.
But they are misunderstanding what is typically stated. Absolutely, no one is transphobic if they do not find trans people attractive. However what is transphobic is making statements that trans women can’t be in a lesbian relationship, or trans men in a gay relationship. What is transphobic is feeling the need to SHOUT across twitter, “I could never find a trans woman attractive because I’m a lesbian.”
Absolutely, “No one is under any obligation to date someone they are not interested in, or to have to explain why.” But if you find yourself going on twitter explaining why you wouldn’t have a hypothetical relationship, or you are stating that someone else shouldn’t have a particular relationship… you probably should consider your motives.
Children with gender dysphoria are at a high risk of suicide if they don’t transition
LGB Alliance says: There are no good studies about the possible rates of suicide.
They should have stopped here.
LGB Alliance says: Those studies that exist have been debunked.
They really haven’t, not in a non-partisan manner. Witness that two of the sources quoted are from Transgender Trend – an organisation founded on the idea that transgender children and young people don’t exist and need helping to come to terms with their cis sex.
They contributed to a book called “Inventing Transgender Children and Young People” and following the ruling in the Bell -vs- Tavistock case have set their sights on denying medical interventions to transgender people under the age of 25, not just targeting care for under trans minors.
LGB Alliance says: Children with gender dysphoria, or identifying as transgender, are no more likely to attempt suicide than those with mental health problems or those realising their lesbian, gay or bisexual sexual orientation. Very few indeed actually kill themselves. A careful analysis using data from several sources found that in the ten years from 2008 to 2018, four under-18s in the UK killed themselves because of identifying as transgender.
As LGB Alliance started off, there is a limit to the studies of suicide in transgender children. Anecdotes are usually all available, however what data there is does support a higher level of suicide ideation compared with peers – both straight and LGBQ+ peers.
However it is widely accepted that bullying leads to mental health problems which can lead to self harm and suicide ideation. Despite claims that being transgender is trendy, transgender children do suffer a high level of bullying – it would be inhumane to dismiss this. But according to LGB Alliance only 4 children killed themselves so apparently thats okay!
Large numbers of transgender people are murdered
LGB Alliance say: Transgender people in the UK are at no greater risk of murder than the general population (possibly even less).
Thankfully the UK has a relatively low level of murder compared with may other countries; and as a result murder of transgender people (who using conservative estimates make up less than 1% of the population.
However its very difficult to compare numbers for many reasons (a lot of these are listed in the Channel 4 fact check LGB Alliance use as a source.
For starters the Office for National Statistics state that “it is not possible to identify transgender victims in current homicide statistics.” So unless a murder was identified in the press its unlikely that we would know.
Using unofficial data, the Channel 4 calculated a trans person had a 1-in-200,000 to 1-in-500,000 chance of being a murder victim. This is compared to the average of 1-in-100,000 being murdered each year. But the circumstances of murder vary a lot, so to get accurate comparisons figures you would have to look at the circumstances. Transgender people tend to restrict their social circles and places they go which makes them less vulnerable to being victims. In addition, as C4 note, “it’s worth bearing in mind that the recorded number of trans murder victims is so small that it would only take one or two more murder cases [to be recorded] every year for the UK “trans murder rate” to double or triple.”
LGB Alliance say: The high numbers sometimes quoted relate to very different circumstances in other countries worldwide, particularly where transwomen work as prostitutes (a situation where all murders are much higher than in the general population).
Around the world things are different. In the USA, in many states, there is what is known colloquially as the “trans panic defence” … literally you can claim that the killing was justified because you unexpectedly found out the victim was trans – this defence has been used successfully even when someone has formed a relationship with a trans person.
Yes many of the victims are prostitutes, but that doesn’t excuse their murder and its a sign of how society value and treat trans people … as its a sign how they value and treat all women … that they are often left with little other choice.
Again LGB Alliance’s sources are highly partisan or are misrepresented. Except the C4 fact check, there is nothing independent to support their arguments. Indeed the fact check notes that (due to the sources and assumptions made) “Anyone that tells you this is clear-cut – on either side of this often vexed debate – is wrong.”
Puberty blockers just ‘press pause’ on puberty and are fully reversible
LGB Alliance says: [Factual description of treatment] They are intended for use when children start puberty too early and they have not been clinically trialled for use in gender transition.
While they are typically used for when children start puberty too early, they have been used in children with gender dysphoria since the late 1980s in Holland. Saying they have not been “clinically trialed” is a red herring. Medication is regularly used “off label” for under 18s as completing clinical trials on minors is considered unethical – its also impossible to do a blind trial on the effects of puberty blockers as the effects or not of giving these drugs is very visible.
LGB Alliance says: Not enough is known about the reversibility of puberty blockers, and the NHS acknowledges that little is known about the long-term effects, in particular concerning the development of the brain, the health of bones, and psychological impact.
This is a statement from the NHS Digital website which was recently updated. It is a position which is supported by only a minority of endocrinologists, and (ironically given LGB Alliances claims) is completely un-evidenced. Organisations such as Mayo Clinic and Endocrine Society support the use of puberty blockers as part of treating children with gender dysphoria. There is strong evidence that puberty blockers do as they are intended — delay puberty, as is seen in studies on their use in treating precocious (early onset) puberty.
It’s worth noting that most drugs have potential side effects and negatives, but its the job of a doctor who specialises in a particular branch of medicine to assess whether the benefits outweighs the negatives. A recently published study found that:
Overall patient experience of changes on GnRHa treatment was positive. We identified no changes in psychological function. Changes in BMD were consistent with suppression of growth. Larger and longer-term prospective studies using a range of designs are needed to more fully quantify the benefits and harms of pubertal suppression in GD.
One often cited fact which is used to argue against puberty blockers is that 99% or so of patients who receive such treatment continue to hormone treatment. There is a reason for this: the clinicians are very careful to target treatment on those patients who are very likely to continue to identify as transgender.
The Keira Bell court judgment on puberty blockers undermines Gillick competency
LGB Alliance say: Gillick competency and the Fraser guidelines assume adequate understanding of the long-term consequences of the proposed treatment. This remains the case, as the judgement in this case states that an under-16 is unlikely to be able to give informed consent to an experimental and poorly researched treatment with significant long-term consequences involving outcomes that a minor is unlikely to be able to fully envisage.
This is wishful thinking: that Brook and others with expert legal opinion are concerned that the outcome of the case could affect, or be used to affect, Gillick competency on a wider basis should give LGB Alliance cause for concern. Dismissing the concerns of Stonewall is one thing, dismissing the concerns of Brook, Amnesty and other organisations is pushing a conspiracy.
LGB Alliance are missing the point of Gillick competency which is that competency shouldn’t be decided on a blanket, somewhat arbitrary age, but decided based on individual cases. So while it may be a valid opinion the average under 16 couldn’t understand the consequences of puberty blocker treatment; the court has undermined the idea of Gillick competency because they have prejudged the competency of all patients.
The case has set a precedent that there are circumstances where a court can give a blanket ruling which should be applied to all under 16s… so it could now be argued that, based on Bell -vs- Tavistock, that an under 16 should have to apply to the court to be able to access other treatment which has long term consequences. This could include access to contraception or abortion.
The courts ruling has moved the decision on ability to consent out of the hands of a doctor, and placed it in the hands of the courts.
The LGB Alliance want people to think that these subjects are black and white, that there are right answers to each of the “myths” they present. But science and society are not like that: for each there is no clear cut division between what is science, and what is how we interact with society: how society helps make the individual and how the individual helps make society.
Even within hard science discussions, it is important to separate facts — that is repeatable observations — and hypothesise and theories — conclusions drawn from those observations.
To take an abstract example, in 1930 the ninth-largest and tenth-most-massive known object directly orbiting the sun was first observed. At that time it was decided Pluto was the 9th planet of the solar system. In the 1990s as science opinion developed, it was questioned if Pluto was really a planet or if the definition of planet needed to be tightened up.
The physical object Pluto, had not changed, but in 2006 the International Astronomical Union decided on a definition of ‘planet’ which excluded Pluto. However many astronomers of note will disagree with this.
In the same way, relying on a centuries old understanding of something like sex, as taught in high school biology, is not a good way to enforce divisions in society.
