New Call of Duty game let's players be Non-binary

[Shadyside]

This thread is still going?

 

[blockhead77]

I guess? By the way how do you quote posts?

 

[Houseman]

I guess? By the way how do you quote posts?

Press the reply button on the bottom right
Or highlight some text and click "reply" that appears

 

[Shadyside]

Maybe I have a disorder? Maybe I don't process emotions like you do?

Most likely. You do show signs of sociopathy.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

It really isn't the same as psychosis or delusion and anyone who's spent any serious amount of time among psychotic people and talking to transsexual people would know that. I think it is pretty well-established in this thread by now that human gender is a nebulous concept, it is hard to pin down and is largely a result of what society expects of the sexes (to see this in action, just look at how the idea of 'masculine' is very different in different cultures across the world). To feel that you are of the wrong sex is thus at many levels also a distinct rejection of the gender role thrust upon you by society. Most transsexual people do not suffer from other mental disorders or cognitive impairments, but they feel that their biological sex doesn't correspond to their lived experience of what sex they should be.

That is very different from psychosis, in which the sufferer has a very tenuous grasp on reality, often including poor sense of time and place. Someone in a psychosis can be convinced that a bog standard hospital room is in fact their private bedroom and that the entire psychiatric ward is their house. They can be convinced that it is the middle of the night despite the sun shining outside. They will absolutely not accept any evidence that their delusions are wrong, either outright failing to comprehend them or weaving them into an ever more elaborate narrative ("Gravity is gone!" "But I can drop this pen." "That's because you are doing a magic trick!"). On top of that they are often cognitively impaired during their psychosis, and can have problems with simple memory tasks like remembering their own phone number or what they wanted for dinner.

As several of us have been saying repeatedly in this thread: So far gender correction therapy is the treatment with the best success rate for transsexual people. All the research bears this out. It rings pretty hollow when you say you want the best treatment for transsexual persons but consistently refuse to accept that a lot of mental health professionals have been doing a lot of research to figure out what best treatment is and are using the treatment currently known to have the highest chance of success. It doesn't mean gender correction always works (but neither does any other psychiatric treatment or many somatic treatments for that matter) or that there aren't risks associated with it, but that as far as we know today it is the best treatment available for transsexual people and compared to everything that's come before it (none of which worked) it has an absolutely tremendous success rate.

I guess what’s confusing to many including myself, is how gender confusion leads to genital confusion, especially if it’s supposed to be delegated only to a social construct and has no biological bearing. It makes it seem like you ultimately can’t have one without the other, which is a whole other can of worms because it kinda flies in the face that gender roles shouldn’t carry as significant amount of weight as they do.

 

[blockhead77]

Press the reply button on the bottom right
Or highlight some text and click "reply" that appears

Thanks

 

[Terminal Blue]

That's even worse... How can Terminal Blue say that "being trans is not debilitating" with such a high suicide rate?

Again, I'm going to point something out.

In the UK in 2019, 4303 men committed suicide compared to 1388 women, meaning 3/4s of suicides were committed by men.

This means that, relative the population as a whole (since the population is 51% female) men as a category experience an increased suicide risk of more than 50% relative to the national average.

If we're going to argue that being trans is debilitating because of the increased risk of suicide after treatment, then is being male debilitating? Do we need to start treating the state of being male as something inherently pathological?

Fun as that sounds, the answer is no.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Is to be female or male a physical, psychological, or social trait? And are any of you willing to define even though that means not everyone can be male or female for whatever reason?

 

[Specter Von Baren]

.
Jordan Peterson: Well if you’re transgender, is it immutable?

???: I dunno

Jordan Peterson: Right. Neither does anyone else. And so there’s tremendous incoherency in the theory.
So at the moment for example, it’s perfectly reasonable to formulate the proposition, and this is very characteristic of, let’s say, the ideological types who drove bill c16 to say; you can be a man born in a woman’s body, which is a biologically determinist argument, and to say that gender is socially constructed, and to say that it’s a personal choice.
It’s like, sorry, all three of those things cannot simultaneously be true.

 

[deleted20220709]

DELETED

 

[Specter Von Baren]

The question you posed about what exactly it means to be a man/woman and whether it is physical, social or psychological holds some merit. It is, after all, one of the questions that gender theorists try to answer. However, I would suggest searching for the answer to it in either gender studies or philosophy (depending on how abstract you want to be) and not with people like Peterson who have absolutely no clue about what contemporary studies say on the topic and then murder a strawman that has absolutely no bearing on either the gender theory studies, the psychiatric diagnosis or the philosophical question.

I have. Thus the inconsistency. But perhaps I haven't been listening to the correct people. Could you suggest anyone in particular?

In general, avoid Jordan Peterson. If nothing else, any man who claims to have been on a diet of only water, salt and beef for over a year is a liar of the utmost degree (malnutrition would set in after about a month at the most), and is a dangerous quack when he recommends everyone to adopt that diet because it supposedly treats a lot of diseases, including depression and rheumatoid arthritis.

In regards to his diet, he's made it clear that the reason for his diet shift is because of how it helped his daughter who switched to such a diet because of horrible health problems she has and that are likely genetic. In other words, he's said it's because of his and her particular medical conditions.

 

[stroopwafel]

The question you posed about what exactly it means to be a man/woman and whether it is physical, social or psychological holds some merit. It is, after all, one of the questions that gender theorists try to answer. However, I would suggest searching for the answer to it in either gender studies or philosophy (depending on how abstract you want to be) and not with people like Peterson who have absolutely no clue about what contemporary studies say on the topic and then murder a strawman that has absolutely no bearing on either the gender theory studies, the psychiatric diagnosis or the philosophical question.

In general, avoid Jordan Peterson. If nothing else, any man who claims to have been on a diet of only water, salt and beef for over a year is a liar of the utmost degree (malnutrition would set in after about a month at the most), and is a dangerous quack when he recommends everyone to adopt that diet because it supposedly treats a lot of diseases, including depression and rheumatoid arthritis.

He's a bit weird and goes into too many directions at once but I think he's still pretty good at making a counterpoint. Even if much doesn't hold up to close scrutiny the same can be said of many of the things he's arguing against. It isn't hard science, a lot depends on perspective.

On a related note, his new book is coming out so maybe a nice read for christmas?

 

[Houseman]

If we're going to argue that being trans is debilitating because of the increased risk of suicide after treatment

I'm not arguing that. What I said was: "How can Terminal Blue say that "being trans is not debilitating" with such a high suicide rate?"
Not: "Anything that causes an increased risk of suicide is a disorder".

 

[stroopwafel]

If we're going to argue that being trans is debilitating because of the increased risk of suicide after treatment, then is being male debilitating? Do we need to start treating the state of being male as something inherently pathological?

Not that but it does add credulence to the notion that the vast majority of men suffer in silence. Maybe they don't want to be seen as weak or lack the support structure many women have or they feel hopeless b/c they can't meet expectations. Anything is possible. Men definitely seem to fall easier into social isolation.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

He's a bit weird and goes into too many directions at once but I think he's still pretty good at making a counterpoint. Even if much doesn't hold up to close scrutiny the same can be said of many of the things he's arguing against. It isn't hard science, a lot depends on perspective.

On a related note, his new book is coming out so maybe a nice read for christmas?

Dude gets stumped by low effort comedians making basic arguments
In general, don't trust anybody that publishes more than one self-help book

 

[Dreiko]

Again, I'm going to point something out.

In the UK in 2019, 4303 men committed suicide compared to 1388 women, meaning 3/4s of suicides were committed by men.

This means that, relative the population as a whole (since the population is 51% female) men as a category experience an increased suicide risk of more than 50% relative to the national average.

If we're going to argue that being trans is debilitating because of the increased risk of suicide after treatment, then is being male debilitating? Do we need to start treating the state of being male as something inherently pathological?

Fun as that sounds, the answer is no.

You'd not treat it as pathological, you'd treat it as an "at risk group". Treating it as pathological would be like saying it's their fault that society is structured in a way that puts undue stress to them as opposed to women, when in fact they're being victimized by this system and are in no way less deserving of recompense than your run of the mill oppressed minorities would be.

And yeah sure, being born male in a world that only sends men to live wars and only has men do most of the most dangerous jobs and so on and so forth does inherently put men at risk more than the average of the population which is brought down by the inclusion of women in that calculation. There's nothing controversial here. All that's at issue is that such a notion of men being victims over women just doesn't feel right due to people's biases.

 

[Silvanus]

In regards to his diet, he's made it clear that the reason for his diet shift is because of how it helped his daughter who switched to such a diet because of horrible health problems she has and that are likely genetic. In other words, he's said it's because of his and her particular medical conditions.

Regardless, the point is that he's making shit up. He also said he stayed awake for 25 days straight (more than twice the observed maximum that's been achieved ever) with no lasting ill effects. It's just untrue.

We wouldn't believe a stranger if they told us this. Why would we believe someone who's made it part of his professional role to be a provocateur? He's not a credible speaker.

You'd not treat it as pathological, you'd treat it as an "at risk group". Treating it as pathological would be like saying it's their fault that society is structured in a way that puts undue stress to them as opposed to women, when in fact they're being victimized by this system and are in no way less deserving of recompense than your run of the mill oppressed minorities would be.

That's exactly the point Terminal Blue is making. They're not saying it is pathological; that was an analogy. They're pointing out that if a group suffers ill effects as a result of societal factors, you cannot characterise that as a disorder of the group.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Dude gets stumped by low effort comedians making basic arguments
In general, don't trust anybody that publishes more than one self-help book

Wow. Amazing. I too can just pluck clips and shuffle them in whatever order I want to make it seem like I have a point. It also helps to prep with comments before showing the clips so you can lead people into what you want them to think. Or have we forgotten the Sandman case already? Use an argument instead of this dishonest shit.

 

[Dreiko]

That's exactly the point Terminal Blue is making. They're not saying it is pathological; that was an analogy. They're pointing out that if a group suffers ill effects as a result of societal factors, you cannot characterise that as a disorder of the group.

The issue here is that there's a lot more steps removed from society's treatment and its effects when contrasted with society sending you to war through drafts that you will go to jail if you don't obey, or forcing you into soul-defiling occupations to stave off homelessness and the starvation of people you love. You can see a clear link with those things.

The whole "society generally is mean and that somehow manifests not in us not giving a fuck and being cool but in committing suicide" thing needs a whoooooole lotta decrypting to make sense because you need to explain exactly why these people just don't become misanthropes or hermits or something else but choose to instead just kill themselves. There's not much of a logical link explaining that society is even entirely responsible in the same way, I think personally it at best is a factor of why these people suffer, and their families and communities more locally are also to blame, as well as their own outlook in life with regards to how much they value outside approval.

Whereas if your country sends you to fight the germans in the snow under penalty of jail or execution upon refusal...well..that's a pretty clear line drawn from the system to your misery.

 

[stroopwafel]

The issue here is that there's a lot more steps removed from society's treatment and its effects when contrasted with society sending you to war through drafts that you will go to jail if you don't obey, or forcing you into soul-defiling occupations to stave off homelessness and the starvation of people you love. You can see a clear link with those things.

The whole "society generally is mean and that somehow manifests not in us not giving a fuck and being cool but in committing suicide" thing needs a whoooooole lotta decrypting to make sense because you need to explain exactly why these people just don't become misanthropes or hermits or something else but choose to instead just kill themselves. There's not much of a logical link explaining that society is even entirely responsible in the same way, I think personally it at best is a factor of why these people suffer, and their families and communities more locally are also to blame, as well as their own outlook in life with regards to how much they value outside approval.

Whereas if your country sends you to fight the germans in the snow under penalty of jail or execution upon refusal...well..that's a pretty clear line drawn from the system to your misery.

The majority of the homeless population is also male. Another category they're 'privileged' in.