Actually, in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
To the extent there are studies on this, they indicate that a plurality of trans people are bisexual or pansexual, so you're both wrong. But it's no surprise when anti-trans people also ignore the B in LGBT or pretend the people it refers to don't exist, or are confused or lying.
But the other poster and I weren’t speaking about “trans people” in general. We were speaking specifically and solely about “trans people” who are male.
Moreover, I made it crystal clear that I was speaking specifically and solely about male trans people in certain parts of the world:
in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
In Western countries in the northern hemisphere, most transwomen are straight men like Bruce Caitlyn Jenner.
That’s why for a number of years now, places and events in the Anglophone world billed as for, by or about lesbians - online forums, dating apps, social events, political organizations, arts festivals - have had a considerable number of straight men.
Here, I’ll narrow down the group I'm talking about even further by saying that I am speaking about white men in the parts of the worlds I've mentioned: Most of the white men in Western countries in the so-called “Global North” who adopt in a trans identity are heterosexual.
If it were true that the majority of the white men in the parts of the world I’m speaking of who “transition” are really are "bisexual or pansexual" like you say, and that's always been their sexual orientaiton, then it’s reasonable to expect that in the years or decades of their lives prior to when they declared themselves to be women, most these men would have some history of dating, shagging, partnering with, or at least showing sexual interest in other fellas. But that’s not the case.
Take Jenner, for example. Back in the 70s, 80s and 90s when Jenner was still young enough to be considered hot in the eyes of same-sex attracted men, he would have had oodles of opportunities for sexual and romantic involvement with other guys. But all his life, Jenner only dated, partnered with and expressed sexual interest in women.
If it were that the majority of the white men in the parts of the world I’m speaking of who “transition” really are “bisexual or pansexual” like you say, then it also seems reasonable to expect that at least some of them would have been involved in the fight for LGB rights and acceptance before they "transitioned" - and before the recent era when the T glommed on to the LGB and the LBGT was born, and then the incoherent alphabet soup of 2SLGBTQIA+ came into being. But that’s not the case.
Jenner and Levine, for example, spent decades of adulthood living as conventionally heterosexual husbands of women and fathers. AFAIK, never once in all that time did either one of them express solidarity with LGB people. In fact, Jenner publicly opposed equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.
According to all the bios of Levine I’ve read, Levine only started to “became a vocal advocate for LGBTQ rights” after/during his so-called “transition” in 2011-2013. Levine was not active in LGB politics when he was an undergrad at Harvard college or in his years at medical school at Tulane. In the 1980s and early 90s, Levine lived and practiced medicine in NYC when the city was hard hit by HIV-AIDS and the Big Apple became one of the epicenters of gay rights and MSM activism in the USA. Legions of New York residents of all sexual orientations, including many in the medical fields, turned out to support the gay community back then. But DIck Levine was not among them. Levine was not involved at all, not even in passing.
It’s bad enough that straight men like Jenner, Levine, Clymer and oodles more are claiming to be women, and that they’ve gotten enormous praise for supposedly being women from the MSM and establishment organizations like ESPN and the Biden White House too. But for these men to claim to be lesbian or bisexual women - and to be hailed by others like the White House as “Lesbian Leaders” - is “stolen valor” to the nth degree.
Your claim that most of the adult males in the Western world who today call themselves transwomen have actually been “bisexual or pansexual” all along just goes to show your own “male chauvinism” and your willingness to say pretty much anything to defend any bloke who claims he's a woman.
As a female bisexual near Richard Rachel Levine’s age who was involved in LGB and women's rights activism all those years when Levine and Jenner were living as ultra-conventional straight married men benefitting from heaps of "male privilege" - and they relied on their girlfriends and wives to "be there" for them emotionally, provide them with domestic labor to keep the home fires burning , and shoulder the burden of having and raising the children they fathered - I personally am affronted by the idea that all the years/decades when blokes like Levine and Jenner were growing up, building their careers, fathering children and living conventional lives as hetero “family men,” they were actually members of the "LGB" contending with same sorts of prejudices, difficulties, discrimination and legal restricitons that their openly same-sex attracted peers had to deal with.
This post was edited 13 minutes after it was posted.
Boston has a non-binary category, I think. Should I assume that trans people are required to run in this category?
And "trans woman" is not specifically defined as to where someone is in their transition, vis-a-vis hormones or surgery. Honestly, I believe trans folks should be listened to, and honored, as they self-advocate about their gender expression. I am not trans phobic, I support all legal rights for LGBTQIA people, but at present I would opine that competing as a woman should perhaps have a definition based on levels of testosterone and estrogen. What do people think?
Do people with ovotesticular syndrome produce a third gamete? Or...do they have a developmental disorder of the reproductive system.
Also, they have nothing to do with trans people. People with DSDs are used as a cudgel by people who want to push their metaphysical gender beliefs onto others under the guise that these beliefs are scientific. They are not.
PS: are you going to give us more "dude looks like a lady" pictures? That's my favorite part of these threads!
Actually, in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
In Western countries in the northern hemisphere, most transwomen are straight men like Bruce Caitlyn Jenner.
Why don't you cite survey data instead of a few anecdotes that may or may not represent a larger trend?
In the transgender population, the most frequently endorsed sexual orientation identities were “bisexual” (18.9%), “queer” (18.1%), and “straight” (17.6%).
Specifically among transgender women, 29% are bisexual, 23% are straight/heterosexual, 11% are lesbian, 10% are pansexual. (Figure 2A) 68% are attracted to cis women, but 66% are also attracted to cis men. (Figure 2C)
Background Sexual orientation refers to a person’s enduring emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to other people. Sexual orientation measures do not typically consider desires for, or sexual behavior with, transgender p...
Background Sexual orientation refers to a person’s enduring emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to other people. Sexual orientation measures do not typically consider desires for, or sexual behavior with, transgender p...
Actually, in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
In Western countries in the northern hemisphere, most transwomen are straight men like Bruce Caitlyn Jenner.
Why don't you cite survey data instead of a few anecdotes that may or may not represent a larger trend?
In the transgender population, the most frequently endorsed sexual orientation identities were “bisexual” (18.9%), “queer” (18.1%), and “straight” (17.6%).
Specifically among transgender women, 29% are bisexual, 23% are straight/heterosexual, 11% are lesbian, 10% are pansexual. (Figure 2A) 68% are attracted to cis women, but 66% are also attracted to cis men. (Figure 2C)
So while 2/3 of transwomen are attracted to cis women, most of them are either bisexual or pansexual.
Thanks for the references. According to this study, this is if anything more pronounced among trans women, with "bisexual" being a plurality (above straight or even the sum of lesbian + gay + same-gender-loving), even without rolling in pansexual (or the more ambiguous "queer" or "other").
Apparently, Raggedy is impressed with her ability to argue that a few lesbian trans women who no one ever said were bisexual aren't bisexual, and, shock, horror, invalidation of all trans people's support for cis LGB people ever, might not have done a whole lot to support LGBT rights and activism back when they were in denial about not being cis straight men.
Actually, in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
In Western countries in the northern hemisphere, most transwomen are straight men like Bruce Caitlyn Jenner.
Why don't you cite survey data instead of a few anecdotes that may or may not represent a larger trend?
In the transgender population, the most frequently endorsed sexual orientation identities were “bisexual” (18.9%), “queer” (18.1%), and “straight” (17.6%).
Specifically among transgender women, 29% are bisexual, 23% are straight/heterosexual, 11% are lesbian, 10% are pansexual. (Figure 2A) 68% are attracted to cis women, but 66% are also attracted to cis men. (Figure 2C)
So while 2/3 of transwomen are attracted to cis women, most of them are either bisexual or pansexual.
This isn't the own you think it is. Self-reported sexual orientation has changed a lot in recent years with 25-30% of Gen Z women identifying as LGBTQ. Most of this has to do with self-reported attraction, fantasisies, etc. It does not translate into behavior. The same thing is probably happening among trans-identified males.
We've reached that really interesting point in the identity revolution where most LGBTQ people are straight.
If you’d bothered to read what your link says, you’d see that it just goes to show that human sex is binary.
Binary means “relating to, composed of, or involving two things.”
People with ovotesticular DSD have both kinds of the two different types of binary gonadal tissue found in humans, other vertebrates and many invertebrate species: ovarian and testicular.
These two kinds of tissue are characteristic of the two different kinds of human gonads there are: ovaries and testes.
The two different kinds of gonads are the source of the two different kinds of gametes that are necessary for sexual reproduction to occur. The large female gametes called eggs or ova come from ovaries. The small male gametes called sperm come from testes.
There are no other kinds of gametes beyond ova and sperm. Not in humans or in any of the millions of other vertebrate and invertebrate species that reproduce sexually.
There are no other kinds of gonadal tissue in humans beyond ovarian and testicular. There are only two types.
In other words, gonadal tissue and gametes are both binary.
If people with OT DSD were a third sex, then they’d have gonadal tissue characteristic of a third kind or more kinds of gonad. They’d produce, or have the potential to produce, another kind or kinds of gamete that isn’t ova or sperm. They would produce this third or more or kind(s) of gamete either instead of sperm or ova, or in addition to sperm or ova.
But that’s not the case. People with OT DSD simply have both of the two binary kinds of gonadal tissue.
However, people with OT DSD never have both of the two kinds binary gonadal tissue in fully developed and fully functioning form. Usually one kind of the two types of gonadal tissue is in a primitive stage of development, and this tissue either doesn't function or it only functions partially.
Sometimes, in people with OT DSD, both of the two binary kinds of gonadal tissue they have are under-developed and doesn't work.
Many people with OT DSD are infertile because their gonads don’t make either kind of gamete. But when the gonads of people with OT DSD do make gametes, they make only one kind - either ova or sperm. Not both.
No one with OT DSD or any other DSD makes both kinds of gametes. Nor does anyone with a DSD make a third kind of gamete.
There is no third kind of gamete. There’s just ova and sperm.
That’s as binary - “relating to, composed of, or involving two things" - as you can get.
Actually, in countries like the US, Canada and the UK, the majority of guys who "transition" are heterosexual (sexually attracted to women).
In Western countries in the northern hemisphere, most transwomen are straight men like Bruce Caitlyn Jenner.
Why don't you cite survey data instead of a few anecdotes that may or may not represent a larger trend?
In the transgender population, the most frequently endorsed sexual orientation identities were “bisexual” (18.9%), “queer” (18.1%), and “straight” (17.6%).
Specifically among transgender women, 29% are bisexual, 23% are straight/heterosexual, 11% are lesbian, 10% are pansexual. (Figure 2A) 68% are attracted to cis women, but 66% are also attracted to cis men. (Figure 2C)
So while 2/3 of transwomen are attracted to cis women, most of them are either bisexual or pansexual.
I don’t cite survey data like you've done here because I don't put much stock in it. The paper you've now linked to is a particularly egregious example of the rubbish "research" papers put out by gender identity ideologues that have been published in social science and science journals in the current century.
For those who haven't clicked on the links that JAHJ has provided, they're both to the same paper by well-known trans activists.
Published in 2023, this paper has the grand and promisng title, "Sexual orientation in transgender adults in the United States" - which makes it sound impressively informative, comprehensive and authoratative.
But anyone who reads the text, examines the tables, and looks into the background to find out where the data its based on comes from, will find that it’s utterly worthless.
First of all, the survey data this paper is based out of date, and the sample size was teeny- tiny to begin with.
The 2023 paper analyzes data obtained by "TransPop, United States, 2016-2018," an anonymous survey conducted a couple of years before the world first heard of Covid-19. The TransPop survey can be found here:
The TransPop study is the first national probability sample of transgender individuals in the United States (it also includes a comparative cisgender sample). A primary goal of this study was to provide researchers with a rep...
A grand total of 274 respondents to the 2016-2018 TransPop survey said they were “transgender.” But that’s only if you count “nonbinary individuals” as “transgender.”
If you count only transwomen and transmen as transgender, then the grand total of transgender respondents to the TransPop, United State, 2016-2018, survey was 198.
Of the total of 198 survey respondents who said they were transgender, 120 said they were transgender women.
Table 3. Demographics and Sexual Orientation (Identity, Behavior, Attraction) in the Transgender Population by Gender Identity (n = 274): Transgender Women (N = 120) Transgender Men (N = 78) Nonbinary Individuals (N = 76)
Background Sexual orientation refers to a person’s enduring emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to other people. Sexual orientation measures do not typically consider desires for, or sexual behavior with, transgender p...
The 2023 paper says that of the 120 anonymous respondent who described themselves transgender women in 2016-2018
28.9% identified as bisexual, 23.3% as straight/heterosexual and 11.3% as lesbian.
But tellingly, a good chunk - 27.7% - of the 120 anonymous respondents identifying as transgender women when they took the survey in 2016-2018 also said they had not had sex with another person in the past 5 years. (TranPop survey, page 12, Question 33)
The TransPop study is the first national probability sample of transgender individuals in the United States (it also includes a comparative cisgender sample). A primary goal of this study was to provide researchers with a rep...
Equally important, the 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents about their actual sexual orienation and made no effort to see if their sexual orientation has been stable over the longer course of their lives. Rather, it only asked respondents to choose which label best describes their sexual orientation at the time they took the survey:
Which of the following best describes your current sexual orientation: Straight/heterosexual Lesbian Gay Bisexual Queer Same-gender loving Other
Moroever, the TransPop 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents questions meant to determine which biological sex respondents were attracted to. Rather, it asked them questions meant to tell which sex and “gender identities” and kind of "gender expression" they were attracted to.
The researchers who did the TransPop 2016-2018 survey expressly rejected using the measures for assessing sexual orientation devised and recommended in 2009 by the transactivist think tank that Williams Institute because the 2009 recommendations focused exclusively on sex rather than gender identity.
In the 2009, “Sexual Minority Assessment Research Team (SMART). Best Practices for Asking Questions about Sexual Orientation on Surveys," the Williams Institute said recommended that surveys determine respondents' sexual orienation by asking questions phrased as follows:
People are different in their sexual attraction to other people. Which best describes your feelings? Are you: Only attracted to females? Mostly attracted to females? Equally attracted to females and males? Mostly attracted to males? Only attracted to males? Not sure?
But the 2016-2018 TransPop survey that the 2023 paper is based on phrased the questions used to gauge "sexual orientation" so that they were as much about gender identity as sex:
Q 34. Please indicate how sexually attracted you are - Not at all, Not very, Somewhat, Very, Not Sure - to the following types of people: Women, Non-Transgender Men, Non-Transgender Transgender Women/Male-to-Female (MTF) Transgender Men/Female-to-Male (FTM) Females at birth, Genderqueer Males at birth, Genderqueer
(Page 12 of the TransPop questionnaire)
The 2023 paper changed the language used in the 2016-2018 survey to play down or even obscure sex further by renaming the categories listed above as follows in the tables:
Cisgender women Cisgender men Transgender women Transgender men Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary
But in the body of the text, the authors of the 2023 paper changed the language further in the case of the last two categories to de-emphasize people’s sex even further, to replace "genderqueer/nonbinary" with just plain "nonbinary, " and to to get in the nelogisms "AFAB" and "AMAB." So
“Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” has been turned into “AFAB nonbinary” “Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” have become “AMAB nonbinary”
The reason for the all the changes in language is that over the years, gender identity theorists and activists have embraced and promulgated the view that human beings are attracted primarily to other people because of their own and other people's gender identity and gender expression, not because of their sex. Hence, "sexual attraction" and "sexual orientation" really mean which kind of "gender identity" and gender expression" people are attracted to.
Those are just some of the reasons I am not persuaded by the “survey data” you find so convincing.
HTH.
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.
If you’d bothered to read what your link says, you’d see that it just goes to show that human sex is binary.
Binary means “relating to, composed of, or involving two things.”
People with ovotesticular DSD have both kinds of the two different types of binary gonadal tissue found in humans, other vertebrates and many invertebrate species: ovarian and testicular.
These two kinds of tissue are characteristic of the two different kinds of human gonads there are: ovaries and testes.
The two different kinds of gonads are the source of the two different kinds of gametes that are necessary for sexual reproduction to occur. The large female gametes called eggs or ova come from ovaries. The small male gametes called sperm come from testes.
There are no other kinds of gametes beyond ova and sperm. Not in humans or in any of the millions of other vertebrate and invertebrate species that reproduce sexually.
There are no other kinds of gonadal tissue in humans beyond ovarian and testicular. There are only two types.
In other words, gonadal tissue and gametes are both binary.
If people with OT DSD were a third sex, then they’d have gonadal tissue characteristic of a third kind or more kinds of gonad. They’d produce, or have the potential to produce, another kind or kinds of gamete that isn’t ova or sperm. They would produce this third or more or kind(s) of gamete either instead of sperm or ova, or in addition to sperm or ova.
But that’s not the case. People with OT DSD simply have both of the two binary kinds of gonadal tissue.
However, people with OT DSD never have both of the two kinds binary gonadal tissue in fully developed and fully functioning form. Usually one kind of the two types of gonadal tissue is in a primitive stage of development, and this tissue either doesn't function or it only functions partially.
Sometimes, in people with OT DSD, both of the two binary kinds of gonadal tissue they have are under-developed and doesn't work.
Many people with OT DSD are infertile because their gonads don’t make either kind of gamete. But when the gonads of people with OT DSD do make gametes, they make only one kind - either ova or sperm. Not both.
No one with OT DSD or any other DSD makes both kinds of gametes. Nor does anyone with a DSD make a third kind of gamete.
There is no third kind of gamete. There’s just ova and sperm.
That’s as binary - “relating to, composed of, or involving two things" - as you can get.
This is like saying that "purple" is not a real color because it is mixture of blue and red.
I don’t cite survey data like you've done here because I don't put much stock in it. The paper you've now linked to is a particularly egregious example of the rubbish "research" papers put out by gender identity ideologues that have been published in social science and science journals in the current century.
Yeah, a sample of THREE people (Clymer, Levine and Jenner) is far more credible than a sample of 120 people because those three were chosen by the great wisdom of RunRagged. You cannot possibly beat that!
Why don't you cite survey data instead of a few anecdotes that may or may not represent a larger trend?
In the transgender population, the most frequently endorsed sexual orientation identities were “bisexual” (18.9%), “queer” (18.1%), and “straight” (17.6%).
Specifically among transgender women, 29% are bisexual, 23% are straight/heterosexual, 11% are lesbian, 10% are pansexual. (Figure 2A) 68% are attracted to cis women, but 66% are also attracted to cis men. (Figure 2C)
So while 2/3 of transwomen are attracted to cis women, most of them are either bisexual or pansexual.
I don’t cite survey data like you've done here because I don't put much stock in it. The paper you've now linked to is a particularly egregious example of the rubbish "research" papers put out by gender identity ideologues that have been published in social science and science journals in the current century.
For those who haven't clicked on the links that JAHJ has provided, they're both to the same paper by well-known trans activists.
Published in 2023, this paper has the grand and promisng title, "Sexual orientation in transgender adults in the United States" - which makes it sound impressively informative, comprehensive and authoratative.
But anyone who reads the text, examines the tables, and looks into the background to find out where the data its based on comes from, will find that it’s utterly worthless.
First of all, the survey data this paper is based out of date, and the sample size was teeny- tiny to begin with.
The 2023 paper analyzes data obtained by "TransPop, United States, 2016-2018," an anonymous survey conducted a couple of years before the world first heard of Covid-19. The TransPop survey can be found here:
A grand total of 274 respondents to the 2016-2018 TransPop survey said they were “transgender.” But that’s only if you count “nonbinary individuals” as “transgender.”
If you count only transwomen and transmen as transgender, then the grand total of transgender respondents to the TransPop, United State, 2016-2018, survey was 198.
Of the total of 198 survey respondents who said they were transgender, 120 said they were transgender women.
Table 3. Demographics and Sexual Orientation (Identity, Behavior, Attraction) in the Transgender Population by Gender Identity (n = 274): Transgender Women (N = 120) Transgender Men (N = 78) Nonbinary Individuals (N = 76)
The 2023 paper says that of the 120 anonymous respondent who described themselves transgender women in 2016-2018
28.9% identified as bisexual, 23.3% as straight/heterosexual and 11.3% as lesbian.
But tellingly, a good chunk - 27.7% - of the 120 anonymous respondents identifying as transgender women when they took the survey in 2016-2018 also said they had not had sex with another person in the past 5 years. (TranPop survey, page 12, Question 33)
Equally important, the 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents about their actual sexual orienation and made no effort to see if their sexual orientation has been stable over the longer course of their lives. Rather, it only asked respondents to choose which label best describes their sexual orientation at the time they took the survey:
Which of the following best describes your current sexual orientation: Straight/heterosexual Lesbian Gay Bisexual Queer Same-gender loving Other
Moroever, the TransPop 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents questions meant to determine which biological sex respondents were attracted to. Rather, it asked them questions meant to tell which sex and “gender identities” and kind of "gender expression" they were attracted to.
The researchers who did the TransPop 2016-2018 survey expressly rejected using the measures for assessing sexual orientation devised and recommended in 2009 by the transactivist think tank that Williams Institute because the 2009 recommendations focused exclusively on sex rather than gender identity.
In the 2009, “Sexual Minority Assessment Research Team (SMART). Best Practices for Asking Questions about Sexual Orientation on Surveys," the Williams Institute said recommended that surveys determine respondents' sexual orienation by asking questions phrased as follows:
People are different in their sexual attraction to other people. Which best describes your feelings? Are you: Only attracted to females? Mostly attracted to females? Equally attracted to females and males? Mostly attracted to males? Only attracted to males? Not sure?
But the 2016-2018 TransPop survey that the 2023 paper is based on phrased the questions used to gauge "sexual orientation" so that they were as much about gender identity as sex:
Q 34. Please indicate how sexually attracted you are - Not at all, Not very, Somewhat, Very, Not Sure - to the following types of people: Women, Non-Transgender Men, Non-Transgender Transgender Women/Male-to-Female (MTF) Transgender Men/Female-to-Male (FTM) Females at birth, Genderqueer Males at birth, Genderqueer
(Page 12 of the TransPop questionnaire)
The 2023 paper changed the language used in the 2016-2018 survey to play down or even obscure sex further by renaming the categories listed above as follows in the tables:
Cisgender women Cisgender men Transgender women Transgender men Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary
But in the body of the text, the authors of the 2023 paper changed the language further in the case of the last two categories to de-emphasize people’s sex even further, to replace "genderqueer/nonbinary" with just plain "nonbinary, " and to to get in the nelogisms "AFAB" and "AMAB." So
“Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” has been turned into “AFAB nonbinary” “Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” have become “AMAB nonbinary”
The reason for the all the changes in language is that over the years, gender identity theorists and activists have embraced and promulgated the view that human beings are attracted primarily to other people because of their own and other people's gender identity and gender expression, not because of their sex. Hence, "sexual attraction" and "sexual orientation" really mean which kind of "gender identity" and gender expression" people are attracted to.
Those are just some of the reasons I am not persuaded by the “survey data” you find so convincing.
HTH.
NY Post did a news article about the woman Nikki tried to character assassinate. Hiltz' behavior is abhorrent.
A decade ago, if a woman ran a sub-three-hour Boston Marathon only six months after giving birth, she was pretty much guaranteed a fawning spread in a fitness magazine.
This is like saying that "purple" is not a real color because it is mixture of blue and red.
Endosex supremacy in clear exhibit.
Except gametes aren't colours are they 🤦♂️. When you mash sperm and eggs together you don't get a new type of gamete, you get an embryo. Unless you've discovered a third gamete and can enlighten us all? A sperg? A spegg?
Noone is claiming that blue and red are binary singular colours so it's an asinine comparison. Anyone can insincerely compare a binary with a spectrum and claim it creates a paradox. Look, I can do it too: "You're saying a lightbulb can't be on and off at the same time?! What about two bulbs in one light fixture where one is off and one is on? That's like saying green isn't a real colour because it's a mixture of blue and yellow."
Boy, it sure is easy to argue from an intellectually dishonest place.
I don’t cite survey data like you've done here because I don't put much stock in it. The paper you've now linked to is a particularly egregious example of the rubbish "research" papers put out by gender identity ideologues that have been published in social science and science journals in the current century.
For those who haven't clicked on the links that JAHJ has provided, they're both to the same paper by well-known trans activists.
Published in 2023, this paper has the grand and promisng title, "Sexual orientation in transgender adults in the United States" - which makes it sound impressively informative, comprehensive and authoratative.
But anyone who reads the text, examines the tables, and looks into the background to find out where the data its based on comes from, will find that it’s utterly worthless.
First of all, the survey data this paper is based out of date, and the sample size was teeny- tiny to begin with.
The 2023 paper analyzes data obtained by "TransPop, United States, 2016-2018," an anonymous survey conducted a couple of years before the world first heard of Covid-19. The TransPop survey can be found here:
A grand total of 274 respondents to the 2016-2018 TransPop survey said they were “transgender.” But that’s only if you count “nonbinary individuals” as “transgender.”
If you count only transwomen and transmen as transgender, then the grand total of transgender respondents to the TransPop, United State, 2016-2018, survey was 198.
Of the total of 198 survey respondents who said they were transgender, 120 said they were transgender women.
Table 3. Demographics and Sexual Orientation (Identity, Behavior, Attraction) in the Transgender Population by Gender Identity (n = 274): Transgender Women (N = 120) Transgender Men (N = 78) Nonbinary Individuals (N = 76)
The 2023 paper says that of the 120 anonymous respondent who described themselves transgender women in 2016-2018
28.9% identified as bisexual, 23.3% as straight/heterosexual and 11.3% as lesbian.
But tellingly, a good chunk - 27.7% - of the 120 anonymous respondents identifying as transgender women when they took the survey in 2016-2018 also said they had not had sex with another person in the past 5 years. (TranPop survey, page 12, Question 33)
Equally important, the 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents about their actual sexual orienation and made no effort to see if their sexual orientation has been stable over the longer course of their lives. Rather, it only asked respondents to choose which label best describes their sexual orientation at the time they took the survey:
Which of the following best describes your current sexual orientation: Straight/heterosexual Lesbian Gay Bisexual Queer Same-gender loving Other
Moroever, the TransPop 2016-2018 survey didn’t ask respondents questions meant to determine which biological sex respondents were attracted to. Rather, it asked them questions meant to tell which sex and “gender identities” and kind of "gender expression" they were attracted to.
The researchers who did the TransPop 2016-2018 survey expressly rejected using the measures for assessing sexual orientation devised and recommended in 2009 by the transactivist think tank that Williams Institute because the 2009 recommendations focused exclusively on sex rather than gender identity.
In the 2009, “Sexual Minority Assessment Research Team (SMART). Best Practices for Asking Questions about Sexual Orientation on Surveys," the Williams Institute said recommended that surveys determine respondents' sexual orienation by asking questions phrased as follows:
People are different in their sexual attraction to other people. Which best describes your feelings? Are you: Only attracted to females? Mostly attracted to females? Equally attracted to females and males? Mostly attracted to males? Only attracted to males? Not sure?
But the 2016-2018 TransPop survey that the 2023 paper is based on phrased the questions used to gauge "sexual orientation" so that they were as much about gender identity as sex:
Q 34. Please indicate how sexually attracted you are - Not at all, Not very, Somewhat, Very, Not Sure - to the following types of people: Women, Non-Transgender Men, Non-Transgender Transgender Women/Male-to-Female (MTF) Transgender Men/Female-to-Male (FTM) Females at birth, Genderqueer Males at birth, Genderqueer
(Page 12 of the TransPop questionnaire)
The 2023 paper changed the language used in the 2016-2018 survey to play down or even obscure sex further by renaming the categories listed above as follows in the tables:
Cisgender women Cisgender men Transgender women Transgender men Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary
But in the body of the text, the authors of the 2023 paper changed the language further in the case of the last two categories to de-emphasize people’s sex even further, to replace "genderqueer/nonbinary" with just plain "nonbinary, " and to to get in the nelogisms "AFAB" and "AMAB." So
“Females at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” has been turned into “AFAB nonbinary” “Males at birth, genderqueer/nonbinary” have become “AMAB nonbinary”
The reason for the all the changes in language is that over the years, gender identity theorists and activists have embraced and promulgated the view that human beings are attracted primarily to other people because of their own and other people's gender identity and gender expression, not because of their sex. Hence, "sexual attraction" and "sexual orientation" really mean which kind of "gender identity" and gender expression" people are attracted to.
Those are just some of the reasons I am not persuaded by the “survey data” you find so convincing.
HTH.
NY Post did a news article about the woman Nikki tried to character assassinate. Hiltz' behavior is abhorrent.
I agree that the Post is terrible, but this appears to be a true story and you can see Hiltz's attack on the first page of this thread. No reason for her to attack a lady for pointing out the problematic nature of biological men being able to win all three divisions at Boston. She is punching down and she is being a bully. People should be nicer. Hiltz is a tremendous talent and most people want to support her. Sometimes it feels like she's playing the part of the heel in a WWE storyline.
Try running a story about this behavior in NYT, Washington Post, etc.
Here's how it works: people with factual stories that trouble current orthodoxy attempt to bring their stories to media considered mainstream and legitimate. They get turned down for bogus reasons. They finally decide to talk to more fringe media sources or conservative media sources. People accuse them of lying and lacking credibility.
Nearly every researcher who was witch-hunted out of academia has had this very same experience. As another poster said, you don't have to take NY Post's word for it. Nikki posted a tik-tok video about it.
