I remember back in high school people always used to tell me that if I kept sitting outside under a tree with my headphones and sunglasses on reading a book, nobody would want to talk to me. Which was bullshit, because they apparently still did, but aside from that my response was basically "good."
No one ever told me that, and if they did I think I'd laugh in their faces, because it's always when I'm reading a book in public that people decide I must not want to be reading, I must only have a book because no strangers whose crap I don't fucking care about haven't come over and nobly saved me from the boredom of page-turning. Yet no one pulls that shit when my nose is in my phone or tablet. Still haven't figured out why.
Even if I myself would feel the need of dressing or behaving like the opposite sex I certainly wouldn't be offended by someone addressing me using an objectively accurate statement, and I was offended it would be my decision. There is offending, and there is taking offense.
There is probably no way to ask this question without triggering a defensive response, but I'm going to ask you this in total sincerity: Do you genuinely not see how saying, "I don't have this condition, and the things I say about it are at odds with the experiences had by the people who do have the condition and the general consensus of the medical community, but even so, I consider myself an authority who can say that if I did have this condition, I'd totally be so much cooler about people saying to me the things I say to them than the people I'm inaccurately portraying are" can rightly piss some people off? I understand that you think you're correct in your stance, but you have not at all demonstrated how your position is rooted in anything but the most shallow understanding of science with no particular basis in the specifics, which makes it seem very much like you're arguing from a prejudice you'd prefer to confirm than from any actual schooling on the topic.
I understand very well how this condition can lead to difficulties, can attract hate from intolerant/ignorant people and that it's important to be as open, compassionate and respectful with those who suffer as a result of it.
If someone feels better by dressing, behaving and appearing in a manner normally not associated with their sex, all the power to them.
What I will not do, is lie to them and pretend that they magically change their sex and become a person of the opposite sex - because currently there is no way of achieving this.
Furthermore, there are situations [http://www.mediaite.com/online/nyc-bans-employers-from-calling-transgender-employees-wrong-gender/] in the U.S. where laws pushed by the liberal regressive left can lead to situations where people could be fined tens of thousands of dollars to address people with their "wrong" - that is, their right - sex.
This require a reaction - it is great to be compassionate and inclusive, but not to the point of denying the reality of our nature and actually persecuting those that do not.
JimB said:
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
I think that if someone goes as far as suffering all those symptoms, the answer is not a surgery that, among the other things, may remove one's ability to reproduce; it's accepting themselves for what they are.
That is really not how psychiatric disorders work. Telling someone to simply get over the way their brain works is like telling someone with a broken arm to just get over the broken bones. These symptoms are not ephemeral, magical phenomena with no basis in physical reality; they are grounded in the fleshy physical systems of the brain, and asking people to try to solve the problem by living in denial is asking them to live in a much more delusional state than accepting the reality of gender dysmorphia and transgenderism.
True, one cannot just "will" someone else over their condition, but an effort should also be made toward trying to accept the gender associated with their sex.
It can also go the opposite way - think of those parents that are "trans-gendering" their three-years old son because he said that he likes to dress as a woman while playing. People that are unaware of what sexuality is about or that are going through transitional periods associated with growth are being further confused by projecting unto them a reality that may not be their own, that they may ultimately end up embracing when they could have avoided it.
I met gay men that say that you just become more and more gay/inclined to same-sex preferences through continuous exposure - gender is not set in stone, which is precisely way I utterly reject cultural criminalization of objectivity.
I find this to be an interestingly inverse situation to one that is taking place in South Korean pop culture at the moment. While the LGB side of LGBTQ+ people in Western society still see a lot of prejudice, I think it would be a fair statement to say that many Western people understand the concept of homosexuality better than they understand the concept of transsexuality. In Korea it's distinctly the opposite.
They are quite understanding of gender reassignment surgery and the idea of people being born with the wrong sex for their gender is a long-standing part of their culture, but a lot of times anyone who tries to come out as gay is met with a great deal of confusion. In particular, there is one very famous celebrity known as "the" Gay Celebrity, who often holds informative talks with communities and other celebrities trying to explain what homosexuality is, and he is constantly asked why he doesn't simply transition to a woman if he is interested in men, and has to explain very patiently that no, he is a man, he just also finds men attractive. When he announced once that he was dating a man, the country had a collective freak-out because "WHAT???? THERE ARE TWOOOOOO??!?!?! HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST HIM?!?!?!?!?!?"
Right now a tabloid paper in South Korea has published an article stating that two members of a popular boyband (as yet unnamed, they put the rumour out there first to stir up speculation and presumably prompt the members in question to out themselves and possibly face extreme danger) are gay and the uproar is quite incredible (in a very "this makes me sad for the human race" kind of way).
I hope the human race gradually moves towards a more complete understanding of these things so we can stop hurting each other.
OT: Very big props to Lilly Wachowski for making the announcement herself even though it wasn't her intention. I wish her all the best!
I'd gladly trade you the gender identity issues and fear of social repercussions for the right to swap names.
Also, just going to point out that nobody took issue with me going by an alias, but the minute I started going by "Amy," it became a problem.
Silvanus said:
There is strong medical consensus that reassignment surgery is generally the most appropriate method of dealing with gender dysphoria. It tends to have, by far, the best results in terms of emotional wellbeing, social wellbeing, and a dozen other indicators. There are a host of studies on this (which I've posted in the past; if you like, I'll grab them and put them here).
There's a strong medical consensus that transitioning is the most appropriate method. This usually involves at least hormones, but even that isn't required and SRS certainly isn't. In fact, there are a lot of risks associated with SRS.
JimB said:
That is really not how psychiatric disorders work. Telling someone to simply get over the way their brain works is like telling someone with a broken arm to just get over the broken bones. These symptoms are not ephemeral, magical phenomena with no basis in physical reality; they are grounded in the fleshy physical systems of the brain, and asking people to try to solve the problem by living in denial is asking them to live in a much more delusional state than accepting the reality of gender dysmorphia and transgenderism.
No one ever told me that, and if they did I think I'd laugh in their faces, because it's always when I'm reading a book in public that people decide I must not want to be reading, I must only have a book because no strangers whose crap I don't fucking care about haven't come over and nobly saved me from the boredom of page-turning. Yet no one pulls that shit when my nose is in my phone or tablet. Still haven't figured out why.
Because normal people use tablets. Abnormal people read. >.>
Honestly, though, people will bug me even when I'm reading off a Kindle--which looks like a tablet--so I don't know if that works more broadly. But yeah, people seem to see reading as a cry for help, be it my Kindle today or a beat-up paperback in the 90s.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
True, one cannot just "will" someone else over their condition, but an effort should also be made toward trying to accept the gender associated with their sex.
What I will not do, is lie to them and pretend that they magically change their sex and become a person of the opposite sex - because currently there is no way of achieving this.
I have never argued there is, nor have I, on an admittedly brief skim of this page, seen anyone else argue that. As the term "transgender" denotes, we are talking about gender; how a person is treated in society due to sex or perceived sex, not about biological constraints. However, since you keep bringing up biology and chromosomes, I am curious, how do you know the people whose sexes you insist on defining for them don't, say, have an uneven entanglement of chromosomes that caused the person's second chromosome to carry the opposite SRY chromosomal features, resulting in XX male syndrome or XY female syndrome? How do you know the people you're defining in absence of their own input don't have Klinefelter's syndrome, granting them a third chromosome? What exactly is your basis for making these determinations in complete absence of specific knowledge of their chromosomal pairings, and in a seeming absence of specific knowledge of how chromosomes actually work?
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
True, one cannot just "will" someone else over their condition, but an effort should also be made toward trying to accept the gender associated with their sex.
What effort is that, Emanuele Ciriachi? If you have some grounding in psychology, psychiatry, or therapy, then I would very much like to know what therapeutic regimens have been overlooked by the medical community that you have reason to believe are effective, or, if none currently exist, what regimens you have invented that you believe would be effective. Please, do share with us your research and methodology.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Think of those parents that are "trans-gendering" their three-years old son because he said that he likes to dress as a woman while playing. People that are unaware of what sexuality is about or that are going through transitional periods associated with growth are being further confused by projecting unto them a reality that may not be their own, that they may ultimately end up embracing when they could have avoided it.
I do not see what hypothetical, ignorant laypersons misdiagnosing their children has to do with whether a medical condition acknowledged and that has an accepted and effective course of treatments available is actually real. Quite frankly, it comes off as a "Won't someone please think of the children?" argument, and I am not impressed by it until and unless you can demonstrate to me with cited data that the damage you insist is being done is somehow caused by transgenderism being accepted as a genuine and real thing.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
I met gay men that say that you just become more and more gay/inclined to same-sex preferences through continuous exposure; gender is not set in stone, which is precisely way I utterly reject cultural criminalization of objectivity.
You are misusing the words "gender" and "objectivity." The former, you are using as a synonym for "sexual orientation;" the latter you are misusing by assuming you have on visual inspection knowledge of a person's chromosomal makeup that you do not possess.
Dutch law can be really -pardon the language- ass backwards at times. A woman can choose to keep her own family name when married however (not sure if that is possible in every country?).
But that's a whole diffirent story.
Something Amyss said:
Poetic Nova said:
Honestly, that's why my social phobia wont go away anytime soon. When not at home I pretty much block out the whole outside world by listening to music with my headphones on high volume.
Yes, but in this day and age, how can you tell the difference? >.>
I know how you feel, though. I remember back in high school people always used to tell me that if I kept sitting outside under a tree with my headphones and sunglasses on reading a book, nobody would want to talk to me. Which was bullshit, because they apparently still did, but aside from that my response was basically "good." Because I wanted to be left alone for...some reason.
For me it actually stems from being bullied for 12 years or so, which only stopped because someone pushed my buttons hard enough that I beat him up. I hardly hanged out with dudes, which was reasons enough to pick on me appearantly.
anyway. Ive been reading somewhere earlier in this thread that having friends while being trans can be a difficult thing to have, and it is something I have to agree on. The amount I have can be counted on pretty much on one hand, and only 2 of them I'm really close with; them being a guy who's my best friend for 10 years now, and my boyfriend who accepts me for who I am despite the fact that I wont start on HRT untill it is june.
I don't know if I wouldve come this far without those two. Considering I had a severe depression that still kinda lingers on.
Didnt expect ending up in a short rant, appologies.
What effort is that, Emanuele Ciriachi? If you have some grounding in psychology, psychiatry, or therapy, then I would very much like to know what therapeutic regimens have been overlooked by the medical community that you have reason to believe are effective, or, if none currently exist, what regimens you have invented that you believe would be effective. Please, do share with us your research and methodology.
The worst thing is that society already pressures us to do what he's asking. It even tells us to go on step further, and fake it if we can't undo being trans through some wu-wu-horseshit. It doesn't work, and it's part of the high suicide rate among transfolk. This idea that if we only tried harder, we could be "normal," whatever that is. This whole argument is tone deaf, assuming the best of intentions.
I don't know that there's a universal trans experience, but this sort of issue is incredibly common to come up at some point in a trans individual's life.
Which sort of segues into the next quote, so....
Poetic Nova said:
For me it actually stems from being bullied for 12 years or so, which only stopped because someone pushed my buttons hard enough that I beat him up. I hardly hanged out with dudes, which was reasons enough to pick on me appearantly.
anyway. Ive been reading somewhere earlier in this thread that having friends while being trans can be a difficult thing to have, and it is something I have to agree on. The amount I have can be counted on pretty much on one hand, and only 2 of them I'm really close with; them being a guy who's my best friend for 10 years now, and my boyfriend who accepts me for who I am despite the fact that I wont start on HRT untill it is june.
I don't know if I wouldve come this far without those two. Considering I had a severe depression that still kinda lingers on.
Didnt expect ending up in a short rant, appologies.
No worries on the rant. I am the queen of rants. Actually, I am the Overlady of Smug, but still.
So those things are all sort of interrelated to me. I'm antisocial because I got the crap kicked out of me for not being enough of a "boy" or "man," depending on the time period. And for being a "******," for not meeting those gender expectations. The weirder thing is I grew up liking traditionally "male" hobbies, but something about me screamed "gay" or "girly" to pretty much everyone, and I don't know what. Later on, at least, I would wear nail polish, started keeping my hear long, even wore skirts to school, so I can see why someone would think I wasn't meeting gender stereotypes there, but that was after the fact, and in part a "screw it" reaction.
Similar to you, I eventually snapped and fought back. But for me it was more like the Nolan Batman movies. I escalated, so they did. Thankfully, nobody collapsed a football field around here, but it got to the point where I was being "bullied" with guns and knives and the police still wouldn't help me.
...I wonder why I don't hang around a lot of people.
This exacerbates the existing situation, where I have had trouble forming bonds with people because I knew I was effectively lying to them. And with two words, I can radically alter a relationship and end a friendship. Because people who are fine with me will suddenly not be. And I've lived that. And so it's like, "what's the point?"
I've only got a handful of personal friends I trust. And even then...one of them's someone who's only known for a couple of months, despite us going back together more than 20 years. He's an LGBT supporter who I've known for over half my life and is one of my closest friends. So what's the problem? The last time I was in a similar situation (an LGBT advocate who in this case was bisexual and who had been friends with me half our lives), it was the last thing I ever said to him. He cut me off. And given my history, I'm just glad he didn't try and rape or murder me.
How's that for a mini rant? >.<
LifeCharacter said:
So New York City instituted a law whereby you are required to refer to your employees by their legal gender? And that's a problem for you? Do you think employers shouldn't give their employees the incredibly low bar of respect that "referring to someone by their legal gender" is?
Well, it's not about legal gender or I could see a problem with it. It can be difficult to change your legal details. Not being a New Yorker, I'm no intimately familiar with the process there, but it can be a real pain. That would actually make it harder on a lot of trans individuals, since many states require some level of transition first last I knew.
However, as-is, an employer would be required to address me as Amy if I told them to, regardless of whether my ID says "Amy." It literally states this in Emanuele's own article. Christ, I should see if my brother has room.
I'm missing the "regressive" part of this, though.
Whatever makes them happy, is fine with me. It must have been tough going through life feeling like you're in the wrong body. I will say with full awareness that this is not the issue at hand however, that I imagine they are not attractive women. They were not particularly easy to look at as men, and I somehow would guess that hasn't changed. Again, to be clear, not a value judgement, or a statement about trans people as a group.
For me it actually stems from being bullied for 12 years or so, which only stopped because someone pushed my buttons hard enough that I beat him up. I hardly hanged out with dudes, which was reasons enough to pick on me appearantly.
anyway. Ive been reading somewhere earlier in this thread that having friends while being trans can be a difficult thing to have, and it is something I have to agree on. The amount I have can be counted on pretty much on one hand, and only 2 of them I'm really close with; them being a guy who's my best friend for 10 years now, and my boyfriend who accepts me for who I am despite the fact that I wont start on HRT untill it is june.
I don't know if I wouldve come this far without those two. Considering I had a severe depression that still kinda lingers on.
Didnt expect ending up in a short rant, appologies.
No worries on the rant. I am the queen of rants. Actually, I am the Overlady of Smug, but still.
So those things are all sort of interrelated to me. I'm antisocial because I got the crap kicked out of me for not being enough of a "boy" or "man," depending on the time period. And for being a "******," for not meeting those gender expectations. The weirder thing is I grew up liking traditionally "male" hobbies, but something about me screamed "gay" or "girly" to pretty much everyone, and I don't know what. Later on, at least, I would wear nail polish, started keeping my hear long, even wore skirts to school, so I can see why someone would think I wasn't meeting gender stereotypes there, but that was after the fact, and in part a "screw it" reaction.
Similar to you, I eventually snapped and fought back. But for me it was more like the Nolan Batman movies. I escalated, so they did. Thankfully, nobody collapsed a football field around here, but it got to the point where I was being "bullied" with guns and knives and the police still wouldn't help me.
...I wonder why I don't hang around a lot of people.
This exacerbates the existing situation, where I have had trouble forming bonds with people because I knew I was effectively lying to them. And with two words, I can radically alter a relationship and end a friendship. Because people who are fine with me will suddenly not be. And I've lived that. And so it's like, "what's the point?"
I've only got a handful of personal friends I trust. And even then...one of them's someone who's only known for a couple of months, despite us going back together more than 20 years. He's an LGBT supporter who I've known for over half my life and is one of my closest friends. So what's the problem? The last time I was in a similar situation (an LGBT advocate who in this case was bisexual and who had been friends with me half our lives), it was the last thing I ever said to him. He cut me off. And given my history, I'm just glad he didn't try and rape or murder me.
Well, first things first, I'm terribly sorry to hear what you had to deal with.
And touche on the rant I suppose. I'm not a lady who can make long stories, useally keeping it short.
I didn't come out as transgender until 2 years ago, but was dealing with an identity crisis beforehand which made me fail my course in college. Which is probably a good thing because I knew a guy who thought that anything not straight and such was unnatural, up to the point of bullying someone for being gay.
I'm going to be frank here, if it weren't for the 2 people I am very close with, I would've ended it a few years ago.
I've lost a few friends aswell just due to suddenly losing contact, but that honestly doesn't bother me. Weren't as close with them.
Now I'm still dealing with moodswings I dont have control over, which either means that I am irritated really fast, not thinking of the consequences and pretty much lashing out for the slighest of reasons, or a kind but not exactly a social person. Kinda tiring and awhile ago I unintentionally lashed out to my boyfriend which made me feel bad.
And that's not even talking about the terrible self image I'm dealing with with thanks to the fact that I dont have the lady parts yet. Broke down quite a few times due to it.
Furthermore, there are situations [http://www.mediaite.com/online/nyc-bans-employers-from-calling-transgender-employees-wrong-gender/] in the U.S. where laws pushed by the liberal regressive left can lead to situations where people could be fined tens of thousands of dollars to address people with their "wrong" - that is, their right - sex.
So New York City instituted a law whereby you are required to refer to your employees by their legal gender? And that's a problem for you? Do you think employers shouldn't give their employees the incredibly low bar of respect that "referring to someone by their legal gender" is?
Like, let's ignore your notion that you are somehow more informed and authoritative than the entirety of the medical community on this matter, we're talking about the law here. When the law says that a person is a certain gender, you refer to that person as a member of that gender, especially if you happen to have a legal relationship with them, as an employer has to an employee. What you're complaining about in this instance is the apparent tragedy of the "regressive left" punishing employers for violating the law for no other reason than their personal opinion on the workings of sex and gender and complete lack of respect for their fellow human being.
Isn't it obvious why this doesn't make any sense? This is not about being kind and compassionate with people that struggle with their identity - we all agree about this. It's about punishing a factually accurate statement because someone chooses to be offended about it - no matter how sincerely. Philosohically it's about putting subjectivy before objectivity, ethically literally means punishing someone for a non-crime and I take exception to this - greatly so.
Like other people I also had to struggle with my own limitations and a complex social environment. I believe in overcoming difficulties for the greater good, I also believe in the social duty of furthering society - among the other things - with one's children, and I pursued this goal in spite of whatever personal inclination conflicted with it. I don't expect other people to share this sentiment, but I strongly contest the notion that personal inclinations cannot be changed or defied through will with the intention of a greater goal.
This should not be enforced on anyone obviously, although it should be encouraged and cherished.
LifeCharacter said:
What sort of reaction does it require? Claiming authority over a subject that you have no right to claim it over for the sake of fighting the "regressive left" that wants people to refer to others by their legally recognized gender?
Once again, there is nothing inherently offensive in making a correct statement about someone's biology. Tact and circumstances dictate whethere it can be appropriate - I don't go saying "you're fat" to someone clinically obese - but one cannot in any way make it punishable by law to cause someone's offense, PRECISELY because what leads to this is subjective. Nothing you or other experts' have to say will change this.
As for the regressive left, I call it this way because some of the changes they tout as progress are exactly the opposite of it - it's merely accomodating people's every whim and inclinations even when those might be egocentric and self-serving, it's being culturally populist. And I completely disagree with this notion.
I do not mean gender as sexual orientation. The two are unrelated.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
No, of course it's not. If someone's identity conflicts with their own biology, there is nothing insulting in referring to the latter - identity is subjective, biology is objective.
Firstly, calling somebody who has physically transitioned by their birth sex is not referring to their biology wholly; it is referring solely to their chromosomes. Other biological indicators-- such as genitalia, hormones, body shape, or visible appearance-- may have been changed to match their identified gender. You're referring to only one biological indicator, and asserting that it is a more valid metric than all the others.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Are there such people? Because their conundrum strikes me as very silly - it is merely an issue of definition, which can be resolved by agreeing on what defines a bisexual or a gay person.
You misunderstand. These people do not hold a different definition for bisexuality; they know the word refers to people attracted to those of either sex. They simply believe such people do not exist.
They're willing to invalidate the experiences of the people who actually identify as such, as well as expert opinion, to assert such. But in what way is this "sillier" (or less silly) than invalidating the existence of gender dysphoria?
Something Amyss said:
There's a strong medical consensus that transitioning is the most appropriate method. This usually involves at least hormones, but even that isn't required and SRS certainly isn't. In fact, there are a lot of risks associated with SRS.
What I'd seen & read generally seemed to present SRS as the approach with the greatest success rate, in terms of those measures I mentioned (which is not to say it's necessary). If I'm mistaken, I'll cop to it. I may be.
Then once again, Emanuele Ciriachi, I am forced to ask how you or your so-maligned brother in ideology possess specific knowledge of this person's chromosomes, since you hold that as the only relevant factor in either sex or gender, that allow you to assert with certainty that you know better than the trans person what his or her sex is. Have you an answer for this?
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Once again, there is nothing inherently offensive in making a correct statement about someone's biology.
Nothing is inherently offensive about anything. It is always a subjective response. Nothing about its subjectivity invalidates a sense of offense, though, and neither does your disagreeing with it absolve you of your responsibility for knowingly and repeatedly saying things others will reasonably be offended by.
I am not aware of any phobia in the DSM labeled as such. So you are accusing me of being mentally ill (and a jerk) because I'm calling a man a man when a man prefers to be called something that he is not? Because this is the kind of culturally regressive nonsense that triggers me.
First off I never called you mentally ill, never said transphobia, or transphobic behavior constitute mental illnesses, they're just words used to represent a prejudice, discriminatory, and/or bigoted attitude related to rejection transgenderism as a legitimate condition. The DSM-V talks extensively about gender dysphoria and how the correct manner of addressing it, calling a trans woman a man at any time accordingly is patently incorrect. Meaning you're using selective reading of the DSM for political reasons, that's not how medical manuals work. I never called you mentally ill, but insisting on not sharing any common decency is jerk behavior. Note, I'm not saying you are a jerk, just that you're behaving like one. Also regressiveness requires ignoring progress.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
You are making a whole lot of assumptions here. If you think that calling someone who has XX chromosomes a woman causes all those things, you probably have a way too thin comfort zone, and are literally offended by objective, independently verifiable truth.
Non-sequitur! Genetics are not objective, verifiable truth. I was born physically male and assigned male at birth, I have XX chromosomes, I transitioned to living as a female, I have not had SRS. In a casual conversation there are two pieces of information you are not going to have about the person you're talking to; their genetic profile, and their genitals. You have way too thin a comfort zone if you're defaulting to genetics, because in a casual encounter that is information you cannot have, you're also ignoring the existance of XX males, XY females, and people with XXY, XXXY, XXYY, and etc chromosomal setups. Genetics isn't the set-in-stone object truth you seem think it is.
See you're the one making assumptions, because you're putting everything on genetics, which you don't seem to understand as well as you think you do. Again that's not information you're going to have, unless you genetically test everyone you talk to in person before you gender them, which is realistically really unreasonable. So I'm gonna say on this subject you're all full of assumptions and scientific misunderstandings.
One assumption I will make, if we met in person and you had no idea that I am the same person attached to the forum name I have here... You'd be referring to me using female pronouns. I actually know this for a fact, because I pass as female well enough that people who don't know I'm trans refer to me as female. I only ever get misgendered after a friend who knows I'm trans outs me to strangers. Even after I'm outed most strangers still refer to me as female, many who want to misgender me as male usually can't do it, as it almost makes them visibly physically uncomfortable, due to how feminine I look and present.
At any rate the genetic argument doesn't excuse behaving with a lack of basic respect and common decency. Misgendering people on the basis of sex over gender identity is objectively insensitive, disrespectful, offensive, and dangerous to the person you're misgendering. You already pointed out that you wouldn't misgender a feminine cisgender man, or a masculine cisgender woman, so doing insisting on misgendering trans folk is at best a double standard.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
EDIT: mis-typed XX as YY. Apparently I am very gender-confused today.
So you consider medically necessary corrective surgeries to be mutilation, good to know, I honestly hope you're not an MD anywhere. Now I have to address your response to @Lightknigt too, no problem but I'm gonna put that in spoiler tags.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
I see, but this would be an example of Guilt by Association. A broad classification based on sex still exists, and while finer one based on sexual preferences may also exist, this does not make the other one irrelevant.
Not really, gender dysphoria isn't fully understood, it's accepted as a legitimate condition, thus the condition and treatment of transgender folk via transition is scientifically valid. That's the opinion of the scientific, psychiatric, and medical community by majority, refuting it is denying science. Now I have to put this fact in nice bold red letters for you: Gender identity and sexual preference are separate and different things. Being transgender is not a sexual preference. I hope we're clear on that now.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
I may also add that words like "homophobia", "islamophobia" and "transphobia" do not describe any actual phobia (which is a very specific medical term and has specific symptoms) and are often used by some people to smear as mentally ill people whose opinion they don't like, to try and engineer an artificial sense of guilt in western society, to redefine our values as prejudices and to silence legitimate opinion and the free exchange of ideas that have made us what we are and that have given us our strength. I believe this is damaging our society in a fundamental way and it has got to stop.
Well the likes of terms like transphobia, homophobia, and islamophobia aren't medical terms, they're terms related to harmfully prejudice attitudes that lead to people being hurt and killed. These words came into existence because just saying something is prejudice, or bigoted isn't a strong enough, or specific enough term to classify such attitudes. Values and ideas stop being valid though when they promote violence, including rape and murder against groups of people, just because those people don't fit into narrowly defined categories.
I want to be absolutely clear on something here, now, with no wiggle room. When universities gather statistics on the transgender community they find that at least 41% of respondents have attempted suicide. That's 41% of transgender people, who have attempted suicide, not counting the ones that succeeded in actually committing suicide. Do you know what causes this? Social rejection and an inability to access transition. What you're doing is contributing to that culture which results in a society that damages trans people, that's not guilt by association, you've actually contributed to a culture that harms trans people, by rejecting our conditions. I'm part of the 59% who have never attempted suicide, mostly because through out my life I've been accepted at least by the people who really matter to me, because I've never experienced an inability to access medical transitional care. The views you're endorsing through out your post here are the views that contribute to trans folk being discriminated against in housing, employment, and access to services, in being unable to transition, in being rejected from society. Please understand that's not guilt by association, it's active contribution, no matter how small, to the problems trans folk face.
Finally, most people disregard buzzword terms like transphobia, homophobia, and islamophobia, they're pretty empty terms any more. They're not silencing you. What needs to stop in culture is the exclusion and devaluation of people for being different.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Lightknight said:
There isn't a "thing" so much as there are "things". Studies have found that, for example, trans-men have brain plasticity, reaction times, and spatial awareness that is more similar to the brains of non-trans men than it is to women. This is in addition to physical qualities like the finger digit ratio that actually is different on average between men and women but a trans-man's average digit ratio lines up with non-trans men more than women. There is also a statistically significant correlation where if one twin pursues transition surgery that the other twin will as well. That points strongly to a biological cause well beyond anything environmental since that twin study was only capturing actual transitions rather than whether or not the other twin identified as transgendered which should be a lot higher.
Consider what this means if transgenderism has actual distinguishable physiological differences that actually does line up with the opposite sex and if there are clear causative correlations with biological factors.
Fair enough - there are also men that have more feminine traits and women who have masculine ones, but they are still men and women - that is, barring situations that make them sterile they are still sexually compatible for reproduction, which is the reason sexes have evolved the way they are. Perhaps one day they will find a biological configuration that affects some men and women which will then generate a new classification, but this will be in addition to their sex, no a replacement of it.
True there are feminine cisgender men, as well as masculine cisgender women, further more they're still the gender they identify as due to being cisgender. Further more I know several feminine cisgender guys who exclusively wear women's clothing, I know several masculine cisgender women who wear exclusively men's clothing, and I refer to them using the gender pronouns they prefer. I know a lot of transgender men and women who haven't transitioned yet, a few who aren't going to, I still use their preferred gender pronouns. Why? Because in both cases it's the right thing to do, using correct gender pronouns for one group, but not another is a double standard.
Your explanation regarding sexual reproductive capability threw infertile people, people born without reproductive parts(like women born without a uterus, men born without testicles), and intersex people under the bus. As in you just dismissed their existence entirely. People are not the sum of our reproductive parts, we do not form personalities from our reproductive parts, thus reproductive parts are also not an excuse for misgendering people.
Now if we find a way to actually change peoples biological sexes, you'd still stick to a means of referring to them as the sex they were assigned at birth? That is without a doubt the most amazing example cognitive dissonance I have ever seen in my entire life. You just obliterated your entire platform. You also still don't address people who don't conform to the gender binary, nor have you addressed the fact that gender is in personality and personal identity, not genitals.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Even if I myself would feel the need of dressing or behaving like the opposite sex I certainly wouldn't be offended by someone addressing me using an objectively accurate statement, and I was offended it would be my decision. There is offending, and there is taking offense.
Because of all this I really don't understand this whole "being offended by facts" business.
That's because just dressing and acting like the opposite gender isn't the same thing as being transgender. There is a lot of neuro-scientific evidence that points to the fact that trans women have brains much the same as cisgender women, and trans men have brains of cis men, and non-binary identifying people fall somewhere between. That's objective scientific fact for you. Even if you dressed and acted like the opposite gender, so long as you're gender identity aligned with your sex assigned at birth, you'd use the pronouns of the sex you're assigned at birth. Chiefly because in such case you wouldn't be transgender. Why is that so hard to understand? You're argument of: "Because of all this I really don't understand this whole "being offended by facts" business." That argument is totally meaningless because you're ignoring the facts.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Lightknight said:
As for "objective situation", you have probably met a lot more transsexual people than you realize. Watching my spouse going through it (Please note that this was a surprise to me, a straight male, and if anyone should be mad here it would be me) led me to be around a large number of people in the trans community. Let me tell you, depending on how long they've been on hormones and what procedures they've undergone you have NO idea what sex chromosome order they have. What would you do then if someone that clearly objectively looks male tells you they were born female? Do you start using female pronouns with that additional information or do you continue using male ones?
I remember going to a dinner with a bunch of guys and afterwards my spouse said to me, "Did it occur to you that you were the only person at the table with a dick?" No, it hadn't occurred to me because most of them were years into treatment and totally looked like their gender identity.
I see you didn't answer the question there. Would you have switched gender pronouns if you found out someone you thought was one gender was assigned the opposite one at birth?
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Lightknight said:
Ultimately at some point you've got to ask yourself, what is this to you? Someone in the world is walking around with one more or one less dick. In what way are you or anyone you know personally impacted? Lower surgery technology isn't even really there right now so a lot don't even pursue it and just stick with upper surgery depending on the degree of dysphoria they have. Upper surgery is there and is relatively cheap to pursue and does have the greatest impact on individual happiness.
But you've got to understand that this isn't simple dislike of the body they were given. This isn't like some non-trans female looking at the mirror and not liking her cheek bones or breast size. It's dislike to the point of being a full-blown disorder that can frequently cause extreme depression that greatly impacts their lives (or even lead to the end of it). In order for medical doctors to justify this kind of intensive surgery there must be an established medical need for it. Otherwise they're just doing harm.
Think of it this way, for a small segment of the population, using pronouns that do not match their gender is like insulting them and they're already going through enough. Does it really cost you so much to be mindful of what the medical field calls a condition? Even if you personally think it's a mental condition rather than a biological one, what good is you misgendering them? It only hurts their feelings and what else?
I think that if someone goes as far as suffering all those symptoms, the answer is not a surgery that - amont the other things - may remove one's ability to reproduce, it's accepting themselves for what they are. You may reply that this is what they are doing, but if they are going to change their body to match their deside I think they are doing it wrong. And the fact that they choose to have their feelings hurt by a plainly verifiable statement is just one more symptom of their self-rejection.
I can understand this position, but please understand something important here. Transition from HRT and gender reassignment surgeries. like facial feminization surgery, to genital reconstruction surgeries. Those are the only currently viable way to address gender dysphoria. The option for people to "accept themselves" as you consider it is called "conversion therapy", not only does it not work, it greatly increases the chance the person experiencing gender dysphoria might attempt suicide, and succeed as a consequence. Accepting one's self means accepting when one is transgender, again this is about personality and personal identity, which is not something that's dictated by a person's reproductive organs. Are we clear on this fact now?
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
NOTE:
This is an intriguing topic, but I just received a warning because a moderator decided that someone could be offended by what I wrote, and this apparently warrants such reprisal. Just a heads up - I might not be able continue this discussion because of such dubious policies.
It might help if you looked outside your own perspective, because as a trans person I can tell you your statements do actually come off as offensive.
I left that last part outside the spoilers for a reason, because this is a very sensitive topic, especially because there are trans people active in this thread. Emanuele Cirachi, I apologize if I've come off as overly harsh, but this situation is sensitive especially considering the people who are participating.
Well, first things first, I'm terribly sorry to hear what you had to deal with.
And touche on the rant I suppose. I'm not a lady who can make long stories, useally keeping it short.
No worries. Mostly just having fun on the latter bit.
I've got more comfortable talking about my experiences on here because of how many people insist this sort of thing doesn't happen in the West. And...yeah.
I didn't come out as transgender until 2 years ago, but was dealing with an identity crisis beforehand which made me fail my course in college. Which is probably a good thing because I knew a guy who thought that anything not straight and such was unnatural, up to the point of bullying someone for being gay.
I'm going to be frank here, if it weren't for the 2 people I am very close with, I would've ended it a few years ago.
I've lost a few friends aswell just due to suddenly losing contact, but that honestly doesn't bother me. Weren't as close with them.
I have been technically out since the 90s. And it nearly killed me several times, so I just sort of stopped talking about it and everything's fine and dandy. Well, except for the level of anxiety I have and the fact that it's only been recently that I've started taking steps regarding it, half my life later. Because really, this is no way to live.
And yeah, I don't think I would have survived without a couple of close friends who knew anyway. Before that point, I had attempted suicide several times.
God, I'm just a ball of sunshine today.
Then again, this is my resting face:
Now I'm still dealing with moodswings I dont have control over, which either means that I am irritated really fast, not thinking of the consequences and pretty much lashing out for the slighest of reasons, or a kind but not exactly a social person. Kinda tiring and awhile ago I unintentionally lashed out to my boyfriend which made me feel bad.
And that's not even talking about the terrible self image I'm dealing with with thanks to the fact that I dont have the lady parts yet. Broke down quite a few times due to it.
As for the regressive left, I call it this way because some of the changes they tout as progress are exactly the opposite of it - it's merely accomodating people's every whim and inclinations even when those might be egocentric and self-serving, it's being culturally populist. And I completely disagree with this notion.
Except the changes in question are for a group of people who have an overwhelming body of medical, psych and scientific literature backing them up. This is not a slight whim. It's reality. It's reality for a minority you seem to be accusing of being self-centered for not entertaining your views. I'm actually sort of curious as to how you can claim everyone else is in the wrong here.
Silvanus said:
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
Not both, just in sex - assuming you mean gender as sexual orientation.
I do not mean gender as sexual orientation. The two are unrelated.
Emanuele Ciriachi said:
What I'd seen & read generally seemed to present SRS as the approach with the greatest success rate, in terms of those measures I mentioned (which is not to say it's necessary). If I'm mistaken, I'll cop to it. I may be.
SRS has long been pushed as a way to normalise transfolk. Which seems to be more for society than for us. This in itself is a problem because SRS does carry risks and many transfolk actually don't want it. Still more can't afford it, or have medical conditions that make it inadvisable. I remember the point at which "non-op" actually started becoming a (relatively) common thing, and it's really not all that long ago. It's like it didn't even occur to anyone before that not everyone would want the exact same thing. Or want to risk their health, lives, or sex lives over it.
KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime said:
*glances at my keyboard* That's a hell of a typo considering how far apart the X and Y keys are. Granted, I've managed worse.
SRS has long been pushed as a way to normalise transfolk. Which seems to be more for society than for us. This in itself is a problem because SRS does carry risks and many transfolk actually don't want it. Still more can't afford it, or have medical conditions that make it inadvisable. I remember the point at which "non-op" actually started becoming a (relatively) common thing, and it's really not all that long ago. It's like it didn't even occur to anyone before that not everyone would want the exact same thing. Or want to risk their health, lives, or sex lives over it.
No worries. Mostly just having fun on the latter bit.
I've got more comfortable talking about my experiences on here because of how many people insist this sort of thing doesn't happen in the West. And...yeah.
Pretty much why I'd love to have some proper self defense one way or another.
Laws on weaponry is so strict that even pepperspray is forbidden however, and my steeltoed boots are in a grey area.
Something Amyss said:
I have been technically out since the 90s. And it nearly killed me several times, so I just sort of stopped talking about it and everything's fine and dandy. Well, except for the level of anxiety I have and the fact that it's only been recently that I've started taking steps regarding it, half my life later. Because really, this is no way to live.
And yeah, I don't think I would have survived without a couple of close friends who knew anyway. Before that point, I had attempted suicide several times.
Don't be.
While I'm still dealing with alot of things (which will probably change for the better when I receive HRT), the few who I do care about support me through thick and thin.
Anyway. I don't mind sharing my experience further, but it does feel like we are derailing the topic at hand.
You know, I thought I had a bunch bookmarked. And now I wish a friend of mine hadn't deleted her YouTube channel and gone dark, because she had a ton of resources. Many of which I may have cribbed. >.<
Poetic Nova said:
Anyway. I don't mind sharing my experience further, but it does feel like we are derailing the topic at hand.
Kind of hard to tell. The minute anything trans (or LGBT, etc) comes up, the thread is pretty much going to be a cluster of various topics. It's sort of an insta-derail in itself, since you're guaranteed to have people who come out of the gates talking about how [proper pronoun] is really [other pronoun], people questioning why this is news, people defending hatred, etc. Generically, "trans" becomes the topic.
Anyway, if you want, you can always hit me up via PM. I don't bite. Ask anyone. Except Steve.
Kind of hard to tell. The minute anything trans (or LGBT, etc) comes up, the thread is pretty much going to be a cluster of various topics. It's sort of an insta-derail in itself, since you're guaranteed to have people who come out of the gates talking about how [proper pronoun] is really [other pronoun], people questioning why this is news, people defending hatred, etc. Generically, "trans" becomes the topic.
Anyway, if you want, you can always hit me up via PM. I don't bite. Ask anyone. Except Steve.
Any thread that contains the any one of the following words: trans, gender, feminism, or/and censorship is going to get derailed anymore. A certain big commotion on the internet made absolutely certain of that. I'm the OP here and I'm totally fine with derail, since pretty much all that can be said about Lilly Wachowski coming out as trans has already been said.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
