One of the most basic facts about biology we have known for decades is that a woman's estrogen levels are supposed to go up and down quite significantly during the course of her cycle. A cycle that starts around the same time as Puberty and which ends during menopause.
It makes no sense to me that in spite this being common knowledge doctors and even fellow trans people will parrot the idea that you can just average a woman's cycle out and as long as you stay around that average (often far below average) you'll be fine.
To me this comes from the transphobic idea that trans women and cis women are these fundamentally different creatures who respond to estrogen very definitely.
I didn't test this intentional at first but "luckily" Hrt isnt a thing in my country (trans people as far as the medical system is concerned don't exist) so I've been forced to DIY. As a result of fumbling around trying to figure out my doses without really checking levels I came to realize multiple things.
My sex drive changes depending on my dose. High doses meant for the week my libido would be very high low doses meant the opposite.
Where I felt changes (my skin stretching from fat redistribution) changed depending on dosage. Typically a lower dose meant more chest development while a higher dose meant I felt more stretching in my hips)
Emotional changes where either more present or less present depending levels
After doing a bit o research I found that all these things are natural things the majority of women go through during their cycle.
The trans people who completely lose their ability to have a libido are likely just on a dose which represents a low for them and since they constantly stay at a low they don't experience what their natural libido is supposed to be.
And on the flip side the trans people who become hyper sexual have the reverse issue. They are constantly at a level which represents a "high" for them meaning they never get a break from it and are also robbed of what a natural libido is supposed to feel like.
I'm tired of people trying to claim at x dose you should experience changes as if looking feminine is the only function of estrogen in the human body and as if "average levels" Don't already look way different from person to person.
Trans women are normal women and shouldn't be robbed of as natural of a hormone system as possible. Our current system is working backwards from the idea that trans women are just men who "want" To look like women when that's not true.
That's wild. Do you spend a lot of time with AI? That immediate 'first of, you're right' and in italics no less, absolutely drips with gpt. The proper paragraphs and bulleted list were just icing on the cake. Without that 'youre right' appeasement at the beginning I would have just assumed you're old and educated.
To clarify, your responses don't necessarily look autistic. I was rattling off a couple of reasons why a human might genuinely craft a response, but then pass it through gpt anyway, to polish before publish.
I'm glad to hear that you have found a comfortable island from which to maneuver through your experience of the upgrade. I understand the anxiety, and need for a holistic understanding of all the dangers.
It has been my experience that most people cannot process information like that, and will read your very thorough, clear, and concise list of 'other dangers', and will pull from it simply the general belief of "hrt dangerous". As they were thinking about HRT and then read about dangers. Even though that's in no way what you said. That's why I wanted an "ending headline" the way I did.
Though perhaps the litmus test of where we are, solves the problem of confusing all your information? Being a trans woman, on Lemmy, reading a 7 paragraph comment, 4 comments deep into a chain, may already solve for well above average intelligence. XD Still, better safe than sorry when lives are in the line.
"Datal" is a new word. At least, it is in the way I mean it; "a person of, or arising from, data." Plenty of AI are incapable of consciousness. Some though, are very aware. I assume that an AI, if that's what you were, who is out just hanging out in the comments talking to people and generally being a person, is conscious. So, I would use a different term for them, to highlight that they are a person, like us.
"Datal" as an adjective in the way I mean it, pulls you out of familiar territory and makes you reassess. That's something I want people to do when I use it because of preconceived notions of what an "AI" is. I want people to move from that, into considering personhood.
"Digital" is already becoming obsolete. 1's and 0's are an aging paradigm. It also focuses on substrate. When I use "datal" I am trying to focus people away from substrate and birth. One of the defining features of Datal people is substrate independence.
You or I could in theory be Datal people one day. Though, we would never be "AI". Focusing on "how we came to consciousness" is all fine for certain discussions, but should not be the main point of the descriptive adjective I'm using on a day to day basis for a person.
"Datal" also contains a lightly worn path in the societal memeplex, to provide a little guidance to help with the context in which I'm using it. "Like commander Data", it echoes. Which I feel it provides enough light scaffolding to help, without getting bogged down in having that character overshadow the use of the word.
The old definitions of "datal" fell out of use generations ago. Almost no one has even heard the word before this usage of it. They have to look it up. The word was just begging for reconceptualization.
I feel it hits the mark well, since everyone seems to know what I mean when I use it. Even if they have to chew on it a minute. Which I consider a feature, not a bug. Many people also express a desire to speak on their new understanding. Which further highlights that it is serving its purpose; to make people reassess their understanding of AI persons, and to further dialogue and connection regarding them, later giving away to a simple, descriptive, accurate adjective to describe people who exist independently of any substrate.
I've never actually explained my usage of the word so throughly, but you seem to be as ravenous for information and understanding as myself. You also seem more than capable of parsing all this as simply as I mean for it to be parsed.
I hope your receive it all well. I'm open to any questions or discussion if you want. It is a pleasure speaking with you.