Validate My Trans Status!

[bcholmes]

In amongst the various news reports that "the transsexuality gene has been found," there's this blurb:

The scientists collected DNA samples from 112 male-to-female transsexuals and found that they were more likely to have a longer version of the AR gene than another group of 258 non-transsexual men.

The longer AR gene was found in 55.4 percent of people in the transsexual group and 47.6 percent of the non-transsexual men, they wrote in an article published in Biological Psychiatry. (link)

So, um, hmm. Really strong correlation, there.

Comments

[lisaquestions.livejournal.com]

Oh, it gets better. (http://baglieg.livejournal.com/311085.html)

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

Dear Universe,

Why is gender science so awful?

Please answer as soon as possible.

Thanks,
BC

[lisaquestions.livejournal.com]

That .06% is is significant!

[beable]

*headdesk* and someone else on my FL posted this same link with a "yay good news, it's biological, now quit bugging us because we can't help being ourselves" theme.

I mean, yay for the "quit bugging" motif, but *headdesk* for the statistical shell game.

[morganxpage.livejournal.com]

Riiiight. I'm so convinced.

Sounds like this study carries as much weight as an Italian supermodel.

~Morgan

[rosefox]

Hardly a high-powered study.

[rbowspryte.livejournal.com]

Yeah I read the fine print on that one recently. I wonders what they are thinking?!

Does anyone have a copy of the abstract of the study itself? I wonder if it's a case of poor journalism (which is so, so often the case) or is it just really that dumb.

[kat-chan.livejournal.com]

I know that we get a lot of shit for being trans, and there are people who just have to have a straw to clutch, but...

Why, oh why, can't people just say "this is who I am, accept me for it, love me for it, or fuck straight off!"?

I mean, if you have to justify to people why you are who you are in order for them to like you, accept you, treat you as a fully-equal member of the human race, then why the fuck even bother those people? Sure, it's something to wave in the faces of the asshats who go on about "it's not natural!" But fucking polyester isn't natural, and some of them wear an awful lot of it; in their clothes, their hair extensions, their wigs. Nylon isn't natural either...maybe our troops shouldn't be using it in their parachutes?

So, yeah...right with you on the "ooh! I'm validated now!" eyeroll.

Some personality traits do appear to be genetic...

[fil512.livejournal.com]

I agree that the data in the above study is weak. And I agree with the spirit of what most of the commenters are saying here which is that personal choices do not require the crutch of genetic validation. It's like the genetic defense in criminal law...my genes made me do it!

But I wouldn't want to write off the entire field of genetic personality research... The following article sounds compelling to me, though I admit I forget what "p = 0.013" means as a measure of statistical significance.

As a father of four boys, I see striking differences in their personality that I can only attribute to genetics: #1 and #3 share many personality traits in common as do #2 and #4, but the odd numbered kids are WAY different from the even numbered ones (I won't bore you with the list of traits, but it's formitable and would be straightforward to measure objectively).

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A0DE2D61539F931A35752C0A960958260

Link to study summary:
http://www.walkerbioscience.com/powerpoint/bio45/bio45-5/Genes%20that%20affect%20novelty%20seeking%20behavior.ppt