This article on gender dysphoria consists of eleven reflections, listed according to sections (that is, groups of paragraphs), each of which is preceded by a heading identifying the number and title of that group or section. When needed, sub-sections were added to adequately explain the topic; these are numbered 3A, 4A, 5A, 8A, 9A, 10A, and 11A. Here’s an outline of the major sections:
- Introduction
- Describing gender dysphoria
- Feelings don’t come directly from reality
- Feelings are changeable
- Feelings are notoriously UN-reliable indicators of truth
- From another perspective
- What is a reliable indicator of truth?
- Science is an indicator of gender
- Logic is an indicator of gender from the entire history of human life on Earth!
- Scripture as an indicator of gender
- What to do with the unsettled feeling
1. Introduction
Gender dysphoria is a phenomenon experienced by some individuals in our culture today. Concern over this, in the minds of those who base their beliefs on reason (or evidence and logic), has increased to the degree that I felt prompted to write this article.
My writing here is based on reason or evidence and logic. Logical reasoning and basic scientific evidence—facts that are undisputed and regarded as settled science—answer the basic questions. After describing why feelings are UN-reliable indicators of gender (in reflections 3 through 6), and after explaining science and logic as indicators of gender (in reflections 8 through 9A), reflections 10 and 10A point out why numerous scientific and historical evidences support Scripture as an indicator of gender. Also, reflections 11 and 11A, on the unsettled feeling, put forward theistic considerations as a possible solution.
2. Describing gender dysphoria
Dysphoria refers to a sense of unease, restlessness, or dissatisfaction. Gender dysphoria, therefore, refers to uneasy, dissatisfied feelings about one’s biological sex or gender, accompanied by a desire to live as the opposite sex or gender. (Cf. American Heritage Dictionary; Collins English Dictionary; Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary.)
Gender dysphoria is sometimes characterized by a feeling that “I’m a woman trapped in a man’s body” or by “I’m a man trapped in a woman’s body.” To complicate matters, some individuals have speculated or proposed the existence of seventy or more human genders (!) that a person may hypothetically choose to identify with—all on the basis of feelings!
Yet, as we shall see, gender dysphoria can arise from as little as modeling or imitating (when one is a child) the personal preference or behavior (regarding gender) of a parent or close relative. This preference or behavior—though not chosen or selected by the child—can nevertheless become deeply ingrained within the child’s heart or psyche.
From my perspective, the two critical questions to ask are these: Are feelings or emotions reliable indicators of one’s gender? And: What is a reliable indicator of one’s gender?
3. Feelings don’t come directly from reality
Suppose I told you that a man entered a room, saw a woman there, and then he immediately grabbed a knife and cut the woman’s body open! Many people, upon hearing this, would begin to have feelings of anger and even hatred toward that man!
But if, in addition, I told you that the man was a surgeon, the room was an operating room, the woman was lying on an operating table surrounded by nurses and an anesthesiologist who had just put the woman to sleep, and if I told you that the baby’s heart had just stopped beating, while the baby was still inside the mother, minutes from being born—then the situation changes completely!
The man changes from being perceived as an evil, brutal slasher and attacker to being perceived as a heroic surgeon who was desperately trying to save the life of the baby!
What happened to our emotions of anger and hatred that some of us had a minute ago? These emotions now dissolve because we realize that the man was actually a surgeon who was trying to be a hero—he was doing what he had to do to try to save the baby.
Thus, it’s clear that our emotions or feelings don’t come directly from reality; they come from what we perveive and believe ABOUT reality. Similarly, our feelings of being happy or hopeful or hurt or disappointed or sad don’t come directly from what has happened—these feelings come from what we believe ABOUT what has happened.
3A. Another example
Here’s another example: suppose someone told you that a certain person stole money from you—but in reality, this claim was false. Nonetheless, you easily might begin to have negative feelings toward the supposed thief, even though these feelings would not be based on reality, but instead on false information.
Sometimes what we believe is true, but sometimes it’s false; it all depends on the information that we’re given. Our feelings come from what we believe about a situation—regardless of whether or not what we believe is true (corresponds to reality) or is false.
Furthermore, false information can produce feelings which will then (correspondingly) support propositions contrary to reality. For example, if a feeling has been prompted or activated by false information (as in the false thief example above), the feeling will tend to confirm it—that feeling itself will thereby incline a person to believe that the false information was true. Why? Many people believe that feelings always reflect or correspond to reality—but feelings sometimes don’t. Again, it all depends on the information that we’re given. Is that information true? (Does it correspond to reality?) Or is it false?
And sadly, people are quite capable of spreading false information, if that information appeals to what some people would prefer to believe—which is a matter of personal preference, and not necessarily fact. (Some people simply prefer to believe that which is contrary to reality, as established by reason or evidence plus logic. I’ve observed numerous examples of this phenomenon.)
4. Feelings are changeable
Sometimes we can change what we believe about the very same circumstances—i.e. even though nothing has changed in these external circumstances. When we do, we can have peace and emotional victory, even in difficult circumstances.
An example is found in Post #11, in which I describe how I experienced two great losses, and then felt profoundly depressed and suicidal. Nevertheless, after some months, my feelings became utterly transformed because I believed in theistic implications arising from the fine-tuning of the universe and in one particular, potent verse of Scripture. My emotional state was transformed from suicidal depression to being happy and hopeful because I believed differently—within the exact same circumstances!
In fact, ANYONE’S emotional state can be transformed if he or she believes differently—within the exact same circumstance. How can you do this? That depends on the circumstance; I used scientific evidence for God and a very potent Scripture verse. (Post #11)
4A. A striking example
A striking example of changeable feelings may be found with a person who “feels” that he should rob a bank! It’s obvious that, before robbing a bank, a person actually feels good about it—otherwise, he wouldn’t go through with it. If some (rare) individuals didn’t feel good about robbing a bank beforehand, banks would never be robbed—but they sometimes are.
Yet, after spending ten years in prison—or ten years as a fugitive—his or her feelings about robbing that bank may well change dramatically! Many individuals in comparable situations have come to regret their past behavior—though at the time, it “felt right.” I once participated in a prison ministry and heard such regretful feelings expressed firsthand by inmates.
5. Feelings are notoriously UN-reliable indicators of truth
(By the way, about philosophical relativism’s postulates that “all truth is relative” and that “there is no objective truth” — anyone taking these postulates seriously should carefully read through my Anti-Philosophical-Relativism page. The reasoning on this page is extremely cogent in terms of exposing the obvious erroneous nature and falsity of philosophical relativism.)
In addition to all of this, it’s quite apparent that feelings in general are notoriously UN-reliable indicators of truth—of that which corresponds to reality. Psychologists readily admit that human emotions are influenced by many factors—some of which have little to do with truth or with the real world, but instead are products of what we imagine to be true.
We saw earlier in section 3 that the man we imagined to be a brutal slasher was actually a heroic surgeon; we saw in section 3A how we might easily have negative feelings towards a supposed thief who was actually not a thief. We saw in section 4A how a bank robber’s imagined feelings of happiness and satisfaction can easily turn into feelings of regret and remorse. These examples demonstrate how emotions or feelings do not reliably indicate truth.
Also, when we were children, our parents and close relatives taught us to react to certain stimuli in certain ways—often in accordance with reality, but sometimes in accordance with their own personal preferences. Yet, since we modeled our behavior after theirs, we may still react to some stimuli today by manifesting an emotion that is a product of their personal preference!
And yes, many people have a preference for being pleased by a person of the opposite gender, especially if that person is attractive. A child seeing this may interpret it as, “It would be better for me to be a boy/girl.”
5A. An example and inferences from it
Here’s a personal example, though with a behavior instead of an emotion. (Emotions can be ingrained in a person’s psyche in the same way as a behavior; both are reactions to a stimulus; both can be taught through modeling, especially to a young child, who typically likes to imitate his/her parents and close relatives in order to please them, and thus reap possible rewards. Children can and do plan ahead.)
To this day, I still often write the number “8” not in the usual way, but instead unconventionally, as my Aunt Mary taught me when I was a young child. (She taught me to write it by drawing two circles, a smaller one on top of a slightly-larger one.) If I write the number “8” without forethought, I always write it Aunt Mary’s way automatically. In order to write it the normal or conventional way, I have to focus and force myself to write it that way. What she taught me when I was a young child became deeply ingrained within me.
To sum this up: as children, we model the emotional reactions of our parents and close relatives—but these, at times, are based on mere personal preference and not always on a principle that reflects reality.
Thus, our feelings about being a particular gender may have been implanted within us when we were young children, by a parent or close relative, on the basis of their particular preference, but not always on the basis of a principle that reflects reality.
6. From another perspective
From another perspective, here’s a different kind of scenario: diverse factors such as improper diet, lack of exercise, lack of sleep, being raised by a single parent, rejection by a parent or teacher or friend, and other factors as well—may easily give rise to feelings of weakness and vulnerability, resulting in a man concluding that he’s feminine or a woman—despite the fact that he may have abilities and skills which could enable him to achieve success in life as a man. But if he bases his feelings of gender on these incidental factors, he may feel weak and vulnerable, and may—needlessly—conclude that he’s a woman trapped in a man’s body.
I of course do NOT mean to imply that all women are weak and vulnerable! Unquestionably not! Many women have great strength of character, and some have developed great physical strength as well. But the above scenario is one possibility that could persuade a man (in today’s culture) that he’s a woman, because, in our culture, women have often been characterized or mischaracterized as being weak and vulnerable. The prevailing notion in a culture sometimes has more to do with how often something is mischaracterized than it does with how often it’s accurately portrayed.
The bottom line again is that human emotions are notoriously UN-reliable indicators of truth.
7. What is a reliable indicator of truth?
Someone might ask, “If feelings are not reliable indicators of truth, WHAT IS?” As I’ve often conveyed, I believe that evidence plus logic (or what I call “reason”) is the surest indicator of truth. Of course, I’m well-aware that a person can be given faulty or contrived or made-up “evidence” (which can be directly contrary to the empirical evidence) or one can use faulty or fallacious logic. (By the way, excellent books which expose some of this erroneous “evidence” and faulty logic are Dr. Stephen Meyer’s astute Return of the God Hypothesis and the lay-friendly book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek.)
Reason, or evidence plus logic, is the main factor why I stopped being an atheist and believed in the Judeo-Christian God instead! The evidences supporting His existence were too logically-cogent or compelling. As examples: section #4 of Post #8, which lists reasons why the New Testament is historically reliable, and Post #11, explaining why the fine-tuning of the universe (and of a possibly-existent multiverse) requires the existence of an intelligent Fine-Tuner or Designer.
Thus, if we’re sure of the evidence (that it’s genuine and not faulty) and if we’re sure of the logic (that it’s valid and not fallacious), reason (evidence plus logic) is the best indicator of truth we’ve got. Genuine evidence and valid logic won’t vary with people’s opinions or feelings—which DO vary greatly from individual to individual! (One person believes in God, while another person doesn’t; one votes a particular way, while another votes a very different way [for different candidates & policies]; one person believes in global warming, while another thinks the problem is exaggerated; one person believes in Ivy League universities, while another believes in community colleges; one prefers popular music, while another listens to classical—these preferences are made, many times, on the basis of feelings.)
This is why I’m so sold on reason or evidence plus logic: provided that we’ve got genuine evidence and valid logic, reason is stable and steadfast.
8. Science is an indicator of gender
Let’s consider science as an indicator of gender. One’s biological sex is not merely indicated by the sexual organs; it’s indicated by the sex chromosomes in every one of the 30 to 40 trillion human cells in our physical body! The sex chromosomes in every one of our cells identify us as either male or female! And, of course, there’s no technological way that we can change our chromosomes. (Cf. https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Sex-Chromosome and https://www.britannica.com/science/sex-chromosome.)
So while our feelings may be trying to persuade some of us that we’re the opposite gender to our biological sex, our sex chromosomes in every one of our 30 to 40 trillion cells are identifying us AS the same gender as our biological sex! Furthermore, the genes on these chromosomes cause hormones to be secreted that are consistent with our biological sex. The only way to overcome these hormones is to receive hormone injections for the opposite sex, but this is a purely artificial and unnatural way of altering what the human body naturally does.
8A. A pertinent question
A person might say: “Wait a minute! I can’t see my chromosomes! So how can I tell what my gender is?”
The answer is simple: in our mother’s womb, when our physical body was developing its organs, head, limbs, hands, and feet, the genes on our sex chromosomes—either XX for female or XY for male—caused our body to develop the sexual organs and the organs having reproductive function. Our sexual organs, in particular, are clear and unquestionable indicators of whether our sex chromosomes are XX for female or XY for male. Our biological or birth sex is therefore our real gender, regardless of what our changeable feelings might indicate.
9. Logic is an indicator of gender from the entire history of human life on Earth!
There are literally billions of examples in the history of human life on Earth that indicate that only a naturally-biological woman can give birth to a child or to children. This has been observed universally (as far as we know) and should therefore be unquestionable as an inference to the best explanation. (I have a reason why I’m framing this as an inference to the best explanation. Also, this is not a deduction because there could have been, hypothetically, unreported examples to the contrary, but science tells us that this is impossible because men lack the biological means to give birth.)
Now, with an inference to the best explanation, if the premises are true and if the induction is logically-strong (i.e. such as when all of the known examples agree with the inference drawn), then this is universally regarded (by scholars) as a logically-correct inductive inference. We can formulate this as an inductive argument, as follows:
Premise 1: Throughout the entire history of human life on Earth, it has been universally observed (from billions of examples) that only a naturally-biological woman has given birth to a child or to children.
Premise 2: Throughout the entire history of human life on Earth, it has never been observed (from billions of hypothetical possibilities) that a naturally-biological man has given birth to a child or to children.
Conclusion: Therefore, as an inference to the best explanation, it is exceedingly probable (with odds of billions to one) that only a naturally-biological woman is able to give birth to a child or to children.
9A. A deductive argument from science
Alternately, we can frame this as a deductive argument on the basis of the scientific evidence, as follows:
Premise 1: From a scientific perspective, naturally-biological women have the biological means (the internal organs) to be able to bear children (after their egg has been fertilized by a donor sperm, and after the normal period of gestation).
Premise 2: From a scientific perspective, naturally-biological men do NOT have the biological means (the internal organs) to be able to bear children.
Premise 3: From a scientific perspective, a person is only able to bear children if she has the biological means (the internal organs) to do so.
Conclusion: Therefore, from a scientific perspective, only naturally-biological women are able to bear children.
In a deductive argument, when all of the premises are true and the logic is valid (as is the case here), the conclusion follows inescapably; i.e. with 100% certainty; there’s no logical “wiggle room” to dispute the conclusion.
10. Scripture as an indicator of gender
Scripture indicates that there are two genders, as displayed in creation (Genesis 1:26-27). The characteristics of men and women are abundantly clarified in many of the 66 “books” within the Bible: 27 books in the New Testament and 39 books in the Old Testament.
Supporting the veracity of Scripture are the scientific evidences for God’s existence and creation, which are cogent and numerous. Dr. Stephen Meyer covered these evidences superbly well in his book, Return of the God Hypothesis, in chapters 4 through 20 (HarperOne, 2021). Astrophysicist Hugh Ross likewise covered the cosmological and astrophysical evidences for God in his informative book, The Creator and the Cosmos (RTB Press, 2018). We covered the evidence of the fine-tuning of the universe (and the fine-tuning of a possibly-existent multiverse) in Post #11.
Also supporting the veracity of Scripture are numerous evidences for New Testament historical reliability, and by logical implication, for the historical reliability of the Old Testament as well. (The Old Testament or Hebrew Scriptures are cogently supported by archeological discoveries; see the book Is Atheism Dead? By New York Times bestselling author Eric Metaxas, Salem Books, 2021.) There’s a list of many of these evidences, supporting the historical reliability of the New Testament, in section #4 of Post #8.
A lay-friendly book that provides details supporting both the scientific evidence for creation and the evidence for New Testament reliability is “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist” by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek (Crossway Books, 2004).
10A. Since the New Testament is reliable
And since the New Testament is historically reliable, Jesus of Nazareth really existed (and exists) and was raised from the dead—demonstrating that his claims were true! (Unquestionable evidence for Jesus of Nazareth as a real, historically-existent person was presented in Post #3. Again, many evidences for the New Testament’s historical reliability are in section #4 of Post #8.)
In my opinion, the most-impressive evidence for Christ’s resurrection is found in Paul’s (Saul’s) conversion, especially as he described it in Acts 26:9-20 – these verses logically establish that Jesus Christ was a living reality after his physical death. He had died physically because of John 19:31-37 and because Roman soldiers were extremely careful to not let anyone down from the cross alive; if they did, they themselves could be crucified as a penalty! (For more on this, see Post #2.)
Since Paul had been an ardent opponent of Christianity, and since he was completely persuaded to believe in Jesus by this vision and by his conversation with Jesus (Acts 26:9-20)—and since he maintained his faith in Jesus for the rest of his life (2Timothy 4:6-8)—I find that this proof (of Christ as a living reality after his physical death) is logically air-tight and incontrovertible from any realistically-objective perspective. Paul (Saul) would have never been persuaded by a man jumping out from behind the bushes with a torch in his hand! Paul was so ardently opposed to Christ, no NATURAL event would have ever persuaded him; only a SUPER-natural event would have—and that’s exactly what he reported! (Acts 26:9-20)
And since Christ affirmed the reliability and veracity of Scripture (Matthew 5:17-18; Luke 24:44; John 8:31-32; John 10:34-38), it is therefore God’s inspired truth AND a reliable indicator of gender. (For much more information on this, see Post #4. For more information on God’s existence, see Post #11 and the home page.) If I had been taught these obvious facts—that are solidly-supported by evidence—as a young man, I never would have become an atheist!
The following short, animated video displays some of the convincing evidence that Jesus rose from the dead; it includes quotes from reputable scholars. It was made in association with Reasonable Faith, the organization founded by Dr. William Lane Craig. Click or tap on the center of the following YouTube block to play this video right on this page:
If this video doesn’t appear in your browser, the link is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qhQRMhUK1o.
A second short, animated video (Part 2 of the above) is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SbJ4p6WiZE.
To summarize where we’ve been: (1) feelings are UN-reliable indicators of a person’s gender (as in reflections 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, and 6), (2) reason (or evidence plus logic) is the best indicator of truth we’ve got (as in reflection 7), and (3) science, logic, and arguably Scripture are reliable indicators of a person’s gender (as in reflections 8, 8A, 9, 9A, 10, and 10A).
11. What to do with the unsettled feeling
Individuals who have gender dysphoria feel that there’s an unsettledness or unsettled feeling about their life in general and about their gender identity in particular. In fact, “dysphoria,” by definition, is a state of unease or restlessness or dissatisfaction; hence, the term “gender dysphoria” is directly based on the condition’s characteristics.
Thus, my pointing out logical reasons and indicators for a person’s gender—my appealing to the intellect—may or may not make the unsettledness go away. Facts can change our feelings, but sometimes they only go so far and no further. Feelings can be amenable to change at times, but at other times, they can stubbornly resist change; depending on various factors, feelings sometimes get “stuck” where they are. This can be either beneficial or hurtful, depending on the nature of that particular feeling.
What, then, will work to change the unsettled feeling? Some individuals with gender dysphoria have testified that a personal relationship with God helps them to deal with the unsettledness, and, over time, diminishes it.
This solution, of course, is predicated on the logically-recognized facts (established by numerous evidences) that the Judeo-Christian God exists and is willing to interact with an individual who needs His help. According to the prophet Jeremiah, God directed us to: “Call to me and I will answer you, and will tell you great and hidden things that you have not known.” (Jeremiah 33:3, English Standard Version)
(For some of the many evidences for God, see my posts and the home page at https://reasonbasedfaith.com/.)
11A. What is a personal relationship with God?
One might ask, “What’s a personal relationship with God?” John, one of Christ’s earliest disciples, wrote in First John 1:1-3: “What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.” (New American Standard Bible)
A personal relationship with God consists of fellowship—of our praying to God and of our listening to hear Him speak to us, particularly out of His Word or revealed message; i.e. the Bible. I don’t mean to sound spooky here, but there are times, when I read the Bible, that I can dwell in His Presence and ask Him questions—and be guided to precisely the right answers.
It’s a bit like the critical point of change in this story, in the following video, which is an outstanding testimony from a former atheist. This is one of the best testimonies I’ve ever heard! Click or tap on the center of the following YouTube block to play the video:
If this video doesn’t appear in your browser, the link is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXWR5UL9BKo.
One might ask, “How do I begin a personal relationship with God?” Again, according to the prophet Jeremiah, God said: “Call to me and I will answer you, and will tell you great and hidden things that you have not known.” (Jeremiah 33:3, ESV) Call to Him—and I recommend using the name of Jesus, as the woman did in the above video. In the Gospel of John, Jesus said: “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.” (John 14:13-14, New American Standard Bible) Of course, such passages must be harmonized with First John 5:14-15.
What will also assist you is reading the Bible; I recommend starting in the New Testament with the Gospel of John – that’s where I started and where many others start as well. The Gospel of John makes the Gospel message perfectly understandable. Bible translations I recommend are: the King James Version (KJV), unless you have difficulty with the old English vocabulary and syntax – in which case, I recommend the New King James Version (NKJV) or the English Standard Version (ESV) or the New American Standard Bible (NASB). Those who are eager to learn may want to buy several of these translations and compare them when you read. (That’s what I’ve done for years.) Also, my favorite Bible commentary—by far—is the Believer’s Bible Commentary by theologian William MacDonald (Thomas Nelson, 2016).
Reason Based Faith: Why a Former Atheist Now Believes in God 
Beautifully written!
LikeLike