TransJenner™ gets its name from a self-promoting transsexual who prefers to call herself Caitlyn Jenner. Caitlyn Jenner, aka Bruce Jenner, is the noted 1976 Summer Olympics Gold Medal winner in the Men’s Decathalon.
TransJenner™ is a belief system predicated, in part, upon a myth created by social engineers. Not only has the myth been successfully sold to an unwitting American public, but to challenge the myth that men can become fully functioning women or vice versa is tantamount to an expression of hatred, prejudice or bigotry toward any person who would promulgate the myth.
TransJenner™ is predicated upon this false notion: Gender identity is nothing but a social construct. As a social construct, the myth would have us believe, that one can change their gender identity with nothing more than an assertion: “I am now a man, I am now a woman.”
The TransJenner™ myth is rooted in a particularly powerful delusional belief about man’s power over himself and nature. One of the earliest proponents of this myth was Rene Descartes in the 1600s. Descartes asserted the following: Je pense donc je suis, i.e., “I am because I think I am.” The proliferation of Descartes’ intoxicating delusion is that man is not bound by the confines of reality. The myth goes a step further in that it asserts that man creates his own reality.
TransJenner™ must excise biology as an important contributor to gender identity. Transjenner™, to be valid, must separate genetic sex and gender identity into unrelated entities, both of which are impossible to do.
A brief discussion of why gender identity is not exclusively a social construct is required reading for anyone seriously interested in developing an informed opinion on the subject of TransJenner™.
Biology is not only a factor, it is the key dispositive factor in defining gender identity. This is true because genetic sex and gender identity are inextricably woven together and cannot be untangled. Later I will prove the validity of that statement by showing you how anomalies in a person’s biologically based sex typing are dispositive factors in the genuine desire to modify one’s assigned gender identity, that is, being a transsexual.
Throughout this monograph I will make direct and indirect references to genuine motivations to modify one’s gender identity. This is because one of the many problems created by social engineer’s promulgation of the myth that gender is purely a social construct, encourages some individuals, with purely psychological or other self-serving motivations, to assert that they have modified or intend to modify their gender identity for purely political, publicity or other manipulative reasons.
A PRIMER ON BIOLOGY, SEX AND GENDER IDENTITY
At conception one pair of sex chromosomes, of human’s 22 pairs of autosomes, define the anatomical and physiological blueprint for sexual identity. Men are Xy and women are XX. There are literally thousands of meaningful differences between the blueprints for males versus females. These differences include the obvious distinctions in external genitalia and internal sex organs to subtle differences in molecular physiology. Most important for our discussion here, the stark differences between male and female brains, both in structure and function, and their resultant psychology, is no longer disputable. In other words, social engineers who would have you believe that gender identity is exclusively a social construct, are either ignorant, misinformed or engaged in an duplicitous attempt to modify the public’s attitudes and behaviors about gender in ways that may benefit the people who pay social engineers to engage in their social engineering efforts. What follows is a summary made by researchers at Cambridge University of the last 20 years of scientific research on sex and gender identity differences that are hard wired:
“Reviewing over 20 years of neuroscience research into sex differences in brain structure, a Cambridge University team has conducted the first meta-analysis of the evidence, published in the Journal Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews.
The team, led by doctoral candidate Amber Ruigrok and Professors John Suckling and Simon Baron-Cohen in the Department of Psychiatry, performed a quantitative review of the brain imaging literature testing overall sex differences in total and regional brain volumes. They searched all articles published between 1990 and 2013. A total of 126 articles were included in the study, covering brains from individuals as young as birth to 80 years old.
They found that males on average have larger total brain volumes than women (by 8-13%). On average, males had larger absolute volumes than females in the intracranial space (12%; >14,000 brains), total brain (11%; 2,523 brains), cerebrum (10%; 1,851 brains), grey matter (9%; 7,934 brains), white matter (13%; 7,515 brains), regions filled with cerebrospinal fluid (11.5%; 4,484 brains), and cerebellum (9%; 1,842 brains). Looking more closely, differences in volume between the sexes were located in several regions. These included parts of the limbic system, and the language system.
Specifically, males on average had larger volumes and higher tissue densities in the left amygdala, hippocampus, insular cortex, putamen; higher densities in the right VI lobe of the cerebellum and in the left claustrum; and larger volumes in the bilateral anterior parahippocampal gyri, posterior cingulate gyri, precuneus, temporal poles, and cerebellum, areas in the left posterior and anterior cingulate gyri, and in the right amygdala, hippocampus, and putamen.
By contrast, females on average had higher density in the left frontal pole, and larger volumes in the right frontal pole, inferior and middle frontal gyri, pars triangularis, planum temporale/parietal operculum, anterior cingulate gyrus, insular cortex, and Heschl’s gyrus; bilateral thalami and precuneus; the left parahippocampal gyrus, and lateral occipital cortex.
The results highlight an asymmetric effect of sex on the developing brain. Amber Ruigrok, who carried out the study as part of her PhD, said: “For the first time we can look across the vast literature and confirm that brain size and structure are different in males and females. We should no longer ignore sex in neuroscience research, especially when investigating psychiatric conditions that are more prevalent in either males or females.”
For my readers who are wedded to the TransJenner™ myth, you may find yourself desperately searching for ways to keep the myth of genetic sex and gender identity equivalency alive. After all, a relentless barrage of brainwashing on the part of the media, your teachers and your peers has inculcated the myth of TransJenner™ into you. The myth is protected by PC laws enforced by PC Policemen, both created by those same social engineers who generated the myth in the first place.
To those of you so inclined to minimize what you have just learned, please understand that all of the structural and physiological differences between male and female brains I have just presented to you represent only the tip of the iceberg. For every difference in structure and function of the human brain there exists at least one or more behavioral differences that distinguish men from women that are NOT social constructs.
Once the sex identity blueprint is laid down, the developing child spends the first 9 months of his or her life in mother’s womb. This maternal environment is defined by the biochemical characteristics of the mother, herself. A maternal environment that is neutral, that is, neither flooded with male or female hormones, doesn’t modify or alter the development of the child’s genetically programmed sexual and future gender identity. A maternal environment that includes an excess of male hormones, e.g., androgen, as would occur in some women whose adrenal glands are hyperactive, can and often do accentuate the Xy developing child to make him “hyper-male” and make the developing XX child to become more male like.
Any number of psychiatric conditions have been shown to be influenced by hormonal modification to the intrauterine environment of the mother. Anorexia Nervosa is one such condition. Doctors. Procopio and Marriott published research in the Archives of General Psychiatry in December of 2007 (12):1402-7, that demonstrated changes to mother’s intrauterine hormonal environment increased the risk of developing anorexia nervosa in female children, but not in male children.
Lesbianism has been positively associated with intrauterine environments that are androgen rich. Here is what authors Dreger A, Feder EK, Tamar-Mattis A. wrote in their study published in the journal of Bioethics, 2012 Sep;9(3):277-294.
“Following extensive examination of published and unpublished materials, we provide a history of the use of dexamethasone in pregnant women at risk of carrying a female fetus affected by congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH). This intervention has been aimed at preventing development of ambiguous genitalia, the urogenital sinus, tomboyism, and lesbianism.”
As the article noted, some parents, upon discovering that the pregnant mother has an androgen rich intrauterine environment secondary to CAH, have chosen to be treated with a substance named dexamethasone. Dexamethasone blocks the effect of the excess androgens circulating in the mother’s blood. This is done in order to reduce the chances that their XX developing child will become a lesbian, develop ambiguous external genitalia as well as any number of other physiological and behavioral characteristics.
For those in the PC crowd clamoring to jump in as they have been pre-programmed to do, realize that I am only reporting to you what some parents are doing as of today in the year 2015. Whether the PC crowd agrees with what some parents have chosen to do and why they do it is NOT the subject of this monograph.
My point in sharing with the reader these few, but representative, studies on how intrauterine environments may affect sex and gender identity is solely to illustrate to a public denied knowledge of this information that sex and gender identity are inextricably intertwined and are not exclusively social constructs as social engineers would have all of us believe.
When it comes to the epidemiology of transsexualism, the best research estimates the incidence of genuine transsexualism at 3/10ths of 1 percent of the American population. What does research tell us about the biology of transsexualism? Is it purely a social construct? Was Descartes correct when he said “Je pense donc je suis?
Transsexuals’ brains are markedly different than non-transsexuals in some key ways. Dr. Antonio Guillamon conducted research in Madrid Spain, which showed that transsexual’s brain differ in at least 4 regions of white matter. His work proved, for the first time, that transsexuals who had a desire to become women possess different neural structures from men who did not have those neural differences and who had no desire to trans-sex. His work was published in the: Journal of Psychiatric Research, DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.05.006.
In a separate study using an independent methodology, Dr. Guillamon’s team studied the brains of 19 transsexual men and 19 transsexual women. In each subject MRI imaging showed 4 regions of white matter that had been altered from the nominal condition of being 100% male or female, as it were, to approximately half male and half female. Dr. Guillamon described the genetic males in his study this way: "Their brains are not completely masculinized and not completely feminized, but they still feel female," says Guillamon.
Dr. Sean Deoni, on staff at King’s College in London, has demonstrated through her work, that anomalous brain structures can be visualized on MRI scans as early as two or three years of age.
Dr. Ivanka Savic-Berglund at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden believes she has indentified one particular area of white matter than may explain the discordance between genetic sex and its expression in neural structures. Dr. Berglund said: “One of the four regions – the superior longitudinal fascicle – is particularly interesting, It connects the parietal lobe [involved in sensory processing] and frontal lobe [involved in planning movement] and may have implications in body perception."
These studies demonstrate that genetic sex blueprints and gender identity are inextricably linked by anatomy and physiology, especially CNS structure and function, both of which are a function of genetics, intrauterine environments and subsequent hormonal influences on sex and gender expression and identity. And yes, social engineers have influenced this entire process by promulgating their TransJenner™ myth. Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists have known for a very long time that some populations suffer from delusions and sometimes those suffering from those delusions act on their delusions.
The psychosocial aspects of gender identity demonstrate that our brains are our control centers, so much so that a fully functioning genetic male like Bruce Jenner may possess a subjective sense that he is a female. If the human brain of an XX person is masculinized at some point in her development, those biological changes manifest as attitudinal and behavioral changes. And if an Xy person is feminized at some point in his development, those changes are reflected in his attitudes and behavior, including at times, a deep-seated desire to be more like a woman.
With an incidence of transsexualism of only 3/10ths of 1% of the American population, the fact that over my career I have treated two transsexuals, one male and one female, may appear to be a small sample size but is actually quite large, especially considering that I did not and do not specialize in the care and treatment of transsexuals.
My fellowship in medical psychology was completed in plastic surgery. My patients were first seen when they sought treatment for the dissonance between their genetic sex and how they felt about their gender identity. I should note that consistent with the body of research on the subject, my patients reported that they first recognized that they felt different before the age of 10. My patients changed as many things about themselves as surgeons and endocrinologists are able to help them change, including what has been termed: sexual reassignment surgery.
Despite the terminology associated with transsexualism and, in particular, TransJenner™, men cannot become fully complemented women and women cannot become fully complemented men. Transsexuals can, however, make some changes to their anatomy and physiology that appears to assuage the psychological dissonance between their genetic sex and their anomalous neural anatomy, physiology and sense of their gender identity. These typically include for men, hormone replacement therapy with estrogens and related female hormones, breast augmentation surgery, the debridement of their Adam’s apple, the debridement of the supraorbital ridge (eyebrow area) and sometimes medications designed to grow longer and darker eyelashes. These surgical interventions are paired with a host of dermatological and makeup treatments that include electrolysis, hair dyes, hair extensions and various waxing and laser treatments to soften the texture of their skin so that it becomes more feminine.
To become a complete genetically viable and fully complemented, brain consonant woman, if your genetic blueprint is Xy, is impossible. To assert otherwise is a delusion born of social engineers who either don’t know any better or have an ulterior motive to convince people that sex and gender are exclusively social constructs.
To assert that a genetic male can become a fully complemented genetic female is not only delusional, it is dismissive of fully complemented women and all that a woman can do and is when her genetic sex and gender identity are in biological and psychological harmony as is the nominative state of affairs for the vast majority of all women on earth.
In a world dominated by selfies and Photoshopped images, advertisers can make a cat look like a dog and vice versa. But that does not mean that the cat has transitioned into a full-fledged dog that will start barking, chasing cars and be able to give birth do puppies, not kittens.
When transsexuals disrobe, the fact that the person dressed like a woman standing before you is not really a woman becomes readily apparent. Moreover, the gender identity of transsexuals always retains a portion of the subjective sense of maleness or femaleness, whichever the case may be. This makes sense and comports with the research that transsexualism is born of a discordance in neural structures and genetic sex that are, according to researchers, somewhere in between male and female.
One test I use when assessing any psychiatric condition, especially when social engineers and their PC edicts become involved when discussing that psychiatric condition, is to ask this question: If doctors were able to offer the patient a relatively unobtrusive treatment to stop the development of the condition, would patients welcome that treatment?
When it comes to transsexuals, my experience informs me that the answer would be yes. I’ll use a description that transsexual patients often use, and I’ll reference TransJenner™ to make the point: According to Bruce Jenner he has lived his entire life feeling as though there was a woman inside of him waiting to come out. Bruce and Caitlyn Jenner has (singular on purpose) shed many a tear and, according to Bruce, has lived a frustrating lie his entire life. I parenthetically make note of the fact that the movie dealing with the general topic of TransJenner™ was named “The Crying Game,” not the “Happiness Game.”
Because it is my belief that one day we will be able to offer patients who are genuine transsexuals an option to opt out, I think it is ill advised for social engineers to reengineer the bathroom, and related habits of 99.7% of the rest of Americans to bend to not only a very small segment of the population but a segment that suffers from an often times painful psychiatric condition.
What the thoughtful reader may realize at this point is that those who get great pleasure from ridiculing TransJenner™ as crazy or a pervert, should reconsider the merit of the epithets that they throw his way. These dismissive epithets may better be directed at the social engineers who have promulgated the myth of TransJenner™. But as far as how society should treat transsexuals they, like everyone else, should be treated with dignity.
What social engineers have done when it comes to promulgating the myth of gender identity, as nothing more than a social construct, borders on criminal. What is bound to occur, and I think we are already seeing it, is that posers and trendy publicity hounds along with those people who have been confused by the promulgation of the myth that gender identity is exclusively a social construct, are going to attempt to join the ranks of the genuine TransJenners™ of this world.
When trendy and publicity craved people do this, it will be a slap in the face to those people who, through no fault of their own, were born with a discordant genetic sex and neural circuitry, which resulted in an often times confusing and unpleasant subjective sense of their gender identity. Life is hard enough for transsexuals as it is, what they do not need is a group of social engineers who want to use their plight to re-engineer the rest of us to their master’s desires. Why social engineer’s masters would want to do that is the subject of my new book coming out in the next couple of months.