/fa/ - Fashion

>tfw you and this thread will get nuked for talking back but these bastards get a free pass to post off topic /pol/ shit

>>14754336
1. Hence "female-typical". These are group-level differences but they are significant. You can guess a person's sex just by looking at their brain some 93% of the time.
https://www.pnas.org/content/113/14/E1968
2. That was not the point. The point was that straight and gay trans women have the exact same neural markers. This contradicts Blanchard's typology.

The identical twin of a trans male has a ~33.3% chance of being trans as well. Being trans correlates with genes that reduce one's sensitivity to the dominant sex hormones of one's sex. Trans people, even before undergoing HRT, tend to respond to certain stimuli (like androstadienone) in a sex-atypical manner. Why is that? Seriously. Consider why that's the case instead of reaching for simple answers. I'm not saying that trans people are "actually the other sex inside" or whatever but there's a reason why the theory that transness is caused by exposure to an abnormal amount of cross-sex hormones during one's natal development is extremely popular among doctors.


>>14754323
Here's the study in question:
https://www.europsy-journal.com/article/S0924-93381930101-4/fulltext

It also found that 11% of cis males have autism. That's off by an order of magnitude and already puts the veracity of the rest of the data into question. Can we also divide the rest of the figures by 11? What's more, it found that only 5% of trans women have been diagnosed with autism, with another 16% having autistic traits. The correlation is there but the data is suspect.

The study's methodology was.. posting surveys in Facebook groups?
>The survey was distributed on eight Facebook groups, which acted as support groups for transgender individuals.
>The survey was also shared on three other general Facebook groups which targeted Anglia Ruskin students..

>tfw you and this thread will get nuked for talking back but these bastards get a free pass to post off topic /pol/ shit

>>14754336
1. Hence "female-typical". These are group-level differences but they are significant. You can guess a person's sex just by looking at their brain some 93% of the time.
https://www.pnas.org/content/113/14/E1968
2. That was not the point. The point was that straight and gay trans women have the exact same neural markers. This contradicts Blanchard's typology.

The identical twin of a trans male has a ~33.3% chance of being trans as well. Being trans correlates with genes that reduce one's sensitivity to the dominant sex hormones of one's sex. Trans people, even before undergoing HRT, tend to respond to certain stimuli (like androstadienone) in a sex-atypical manner. Why is that? Seriously. Consider why that's the case instead of reaching for simple answers. I'm not saying that trans people are "actually the other sex inside" or whatever but there's a reason why the theory that transness is caused by exposure to an abnormal amount of cross-sex hormones during one's natal development is extremely popular among doctors.


>>14754323
Here's the study in question:
https://www.europsy-journal.com/article/S0924-93381930101-4/fulltext

It also found that 3% of cis males have autism, meaning that it overestimated the prevalence by a factor of three. That already puts the veracity of the rest of the data into question. Can we also divide the rest of the figures in three? What's more, it found that 5% of trans women have been diagnosed with autism. The correlation exists but we're still talking about a small minority.

The study's methodology was.. posting surveys in Facebook groups?
>The survey was distributed on eight Facebook groups, which acted as support groups for transgender individuals.
>The survey was also shared on three other general Facebook groups which targeted Anglia Ruskin students..