In 2003, the Full Bench of the Australian Family Court reviewed all the scientific evidence about transsexuality, calling multiple expert witness from around the world. The decision has been mentioned in evidence before the SCOTUS.

This is from the Deakin Law Review:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/DeakinLRev/2004/22.html#Heading437

At paragraph [248]: ‘In my view the evidence is, in essence, that the experts believe that the brain development view is likely to be true, and they explain the basis for their beliefs. In the circumstances, I see no reason why I should not accept the proposition, on the balance of probabilities, for the purpose of this case.’

At paragraph [252]: ‘The traditional analysis that they are "psychologically" transsexual does not explain how this state came about. For example, there seems to be no suggestion in the evidence that their psychological state can be explained by reference to circumstances of their upbringing. In that sense, the brain sex theory does not seem to be competing with other explanations, but rather is providing a possible explanation of what is otherwise inexplicable’.

At paragraph [253]: ‘In other words (as I understand it) the brain of an individual may in some sense be male, for example, though the rest of the person’s body is female’.

At paragraph [265]: ‘In my view the argument in favour of the “brain sex" view is also based on evidence about the development and experience of transsexuals and others with atypical sex-related characteristics. There is a vast literature on this, some of which is in evidence, and I can do no more than mention briefly some of the main points’.

At paragraph [268]: ‘It seems quite wrong to think of these people as merely wishing or preferring to be of the opposite sex, or having the opinion that they are’.

At paragraph [270]: ‘But I am satisfied that the evidence now is inconsistent with the distinction formerly drawn between biological factors, meaning genitals, chromosomes and gonads, and merely "psychological factors", and on this basis distinguishing between cases of inter-sex (incongruities among biological factors) and transsexualism (incongruities between biology and psychology)’.

At paragraph [272]: ‘In my view the evidence demonstrates (at least on the balance of probabilities) that the characteristics of transsexuals are as much “biological” as those of people thought of as inter-sex’.

Some will continue to ignore the autopsy results. They will continue to ignore the fMRT imaging data. They will continue to ignore the experts on neurology, the surgical success rate, and any other data makes their comfy, simplistic world-view untenable.

All we can do is to continue gathering evidence (some of which is bound to contradict our own cherished beliefs, but that's Science), and to present it.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no-one is entitled to their own facts.

I'm a registered nurse, gay male, and have for years questioned the omni-inclusional addition of "Letters" to the LGB appelation. Psychiatric reasons for feeling your in the wrong body seem to me to be an entirely seperate concern to those of us who are certain of who we are and how we got here.

Perhaps you should study the area before commenting from authority, but no-one can keep up with every development in medicine. I recommend "The Praeger Handbook of Transsexuality" as a good primer for a medical professional not specialising in the area.

But this "transgendered" stuff is nonsense. A man can be mutilated into looking like a woman and vice versa, but there's still that pesky xx/xy chromosome stuff to deal with. You've either got testes and a prostate, or you've got ovaries and a uterus. You can't change sexes like you can religion. Maybe medical science will one day figure out a way to make a human look like a giraffe. But that person will only *look* like a giraffe.

The "transgendered" are as clinically insane as somebody in the 21st century claiming to be Napoleon Bonaparte.

A good friend of mine is 90% xx, 10% xy. But he's a guy. Another is a woman, she has 47xxy chromosomes, breasts, and more M than F genitalia. Some have ovotestes, a gland neither one or the other. Or one of each.

Your Ignorance is excusable though, not many people know this stuff. But blame Reality for being insane, not the people suffering from these congenital conditions. They just get persecuted and called insane by bigots and the ignorant. Some do develop insanity as the result of the constant persecution of course.

So what's really going on here? What nobody seems willing to come out and state is the underlying presumption that "the gays" will dump "the trannies" and go their separate way as soon as they get their version of ENDA passed. This is the real reason for the objection to Barney Frank's maneuver.

Why are the Ts so insecure about this? Surely it's not a rational concern..

Given the historical record, and the many comments on this forum about how GLBT should be GLB, the concern is all too rational. It's happened every other time, this is not new.

Now a disclaimer: I'm Australian, and won't be affected either way. I'm also technically Intersexed, one of the weird "serials", though I identify more as TS. That my transition was mostly from natural causes is just a minor detail.