A long time ago, when I lived in Arbroath in Scotland, my role before opening up the old Fleming Partners office was to do the school run. Our kids went to a small village school just outside the town itself and there was no bus.
On these runs I always tried to entertain the boys by talking about whatever came into my mind (and would not take more than 10 minutes.) So one day I explained why humans can see in colour and many animals can’t. This is because, I said, there are two types of vision receptor cells, rods and cones. Cones see colour and rods see brightness—monochrome, in other words. (I do know it’s a bit more complex than that, but these were primary kids.) Humans have both rods and cones, and many animals, like dogs, only have rods. So we see colour and they don’t.
This went fine and was met with all the usual approval that could be mustered from a 5-year old and an 8-year old.
I grew up lucky, though I didn’t fully realise how much, then. In my home there were microscopes and telescopes and, perhaps more importantly, too many science books to count.
My father, though he was an engineer, was fascinated by science and subscribed to the weekly science magazines that were available in the 1960s. Through them I learned about Darwin and the voyage of the Beagle; about basic psychology and anthropology; about physics and space.
This was the era of the Space Race; terms like ‘escape velocity’, ‘orbit’, ‘action-reaction’ and ‘solar system’ were everyday language amongst primary schoolchildren.
Although this is often deliberately obscured, there is actually a significant amount of scientific literature on the subject of transsexualism or transgender, particularly Male-to-Feminine (Male sex, Feminine gender.) I have linked to the most important papers below and have commented on some.
Essentially, the so-called ‘Feminine Essence’ hypothesis, which is often touted by propagandists for one type of MtF, for example Julia Serano, who is actually autogynephilic, has absolutely no basis in science at all. It is an artefact of Postmodernism and Serano, in espousing the hypothesis and deliberately ignoring the actual science, betrays an underlying hostility to science that is typical of Postmodernists.
We know what causes transsexualism. Both types are firmly rooted in sex drive and sexuality.