Transgender and You: A guide to interacting the the trans public

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

RhombusHatesYou:
If you get caught in a recursive loop and disappear up your own arse I'm not pulling you out this time. My climbing gear hasn't worked properly since.

I just wanted to set up a recursive loop to derail the thread and see if the mods counted that as low content.

thaluikhain:

RhombusHatesYou:
If you get caught in a recursive loop and disappear up your own arse I'm not pulling you out this time. My climbing gear hasn't worked properly since.

I just wanted to set up a recursive loop to derail the thread and see if the mods counted that as low content.

But if it's recursive it has infinite content!

Shadowstar38:

Telling someone what race you are would only make a difference to a hardcore racist.

That's complete and utter crap. A lot of people who aren't "hardcore" won't enter mixed relationships, and such relationships are still largely taboo in modern American society. In fact, it's still taboo enough that hiding one's ethnicity could readily be equated to hiding one's "true" sex, because us mix breeds "know" about the high chance of rejection.

Don't tell me it's a bad comparison for reasons that are untrue. You don't like the comparison because it's inconvenient.

RhombusHatesYou:

thaluikhain:

RhombusHatesYou:
If you get caught in a recursive loop and disappear up your own arse I'm not pulling you out this time. My climbing gear hasn't worked properly since.

I just wanted to set up a recursive loop to derail the thread and see if the mods counted that as low content.

But if it's recursive it has infinite content!

So do a hypothetical infinite series of cat pictures or repetition of "Ha" and the mods don't like hose either.

Zachary Amaranth:

Shadowstar38:

Telling someone what race you are would only make a difference to a hardcore racist.

That's complete and utter crap. A lot of people who aren't "hardcore" won't enter mixed relationships, and such relationships are still largely taboo in modern American society. In fact, it's still taboo enough that hiding one's ethnicity could readily be equated to hiding one's "true" sex, because us mix breeds "know" about the high chance of rejection.

Don't tell me it's a bad comparison for reasons that are untrue. You don't like the comparison because it's inconvenient.

Seems like if I didn't like it for that reason, I would have just, you know, said so...moving on.

I don't like it because you're equating something that's much less damning to hide to something which is largely underhanded. There's no excuse for hiding your sex from someone you're trying to get with. (And if personal safety is really an issue, you can find out how they feel about transsexuals without outing yourself).

thaluikhain:

RhombusHatesYou:

thaluikhain:

I just wanted to set up a recursive loop to derail the thread and see if the mods counted that as low content.

But if it's recursive it has infinite content!

So do a hypothetical infinite series of cat pictures or repetition of "Ha" and the mods don't like hose either.

Maybe when I have some free time. I'm currently running several experiments on homeless people.

Bentusi16:
You know, as much as I don't like bigotry, I get really, really, REALLY nervous when people start parading out what seriously sound like 'thoughtcrime' principals.

Saying "don't be a dick" to people is not equatable to thought crime.

People should be allowed to hate.

As someone who supports the rights of the Klan and the WBC to protest, I agree. However comma, I will still readily insist people not be dicks. I don't honestly see how the two are remotely equated. They can tell me I'm going to tell and that I'm less than human for not being fully white and that this country is evil for supporting homosexuality, and I can tell them they shouldn't. It's a two-way street. I won't try and stop them unless they cross the line from speech into action, or something like terrorist threats (which are not free speech). I'm surprised WBC gets away with some of its stunts, as it's been reported to have had members of its flock lay hands on people and physically obstruct funeral processions, and that should be illegal.

But I support their right to protest. Just as long as I still have the right to call them out on it.

RhombusHatesYou:

Maybe when I have some free time. I'm currently running several experiments on homeless people.

Are you hiring? I'm between mad science experiments and could use some extra income. I'm willing to start at "flunky" level.

Captcha: stop asking me how I eat mashed potatoes. I haven't changed in the last...Six minutes.

Shadowstar38:

Seems like if I didn't like it for that reason, I would have just, you know, said so...moving on.

Have you ever lived in human society? I'm just curious. Between thinking interraciality and biraciality are only issues to "hardcore racists" and not understanding the justification principle, I'm starting to wonder.

I don't like it because you're equating something that's much less damning to hide to something which is largely underhanded. There's no excuse for hiding your sex from someone you're trying to get with. (And if personal safety is really an issue, you can find out how they feel about transsexuals without outing yourself).

It's not underhanded. The only reason you think this deception is bad and the other is not is because one prejudice is still considered "okay" and the other is not.

By the way, it's not "hiding your sex." Sorry.

Finally, how someone feels about transsexuals in theory and in practice can be and often is quite different, so that's not really a way to measure your safety. Once again, this is the sort of understanding you should be able to pick up merely by being around and observing people. Perhaps in a theoretical world where these are reliable practices it might be an issue. But in a theoretical woorld where things are so practical, I have trouble believing anyone would actually buy into the "she's a liar because she doesn't say she's a dude!" mentality.

Zachary Amaranth:

Shadowstar38:

Seems like if I didn't like it for that reason, I would have just, you know, said so...moving on.

Have you ever lived in human society? I'm just curious. Between thinking interraciality and biraciality are only issues to "hardcore racists" and not understanding the justification principle, I'm starting to wonder.

Apparently there's a problem with discussions of racism focusing on the most obviously evil racists, and we end up with this "You must set fire to this many crosses to count" line drawn somewhere, with most racist people on the not-evil side.

Zachary Amaranth:

Have you ever lived in human society? I'm just curious.

Unless you believe I'm kind of A.I., yes I do. =P

It's not underhanded. The only reason you think this deception is bad and the other is not is because one prejudice is still considered "okay" and the other is not.

Not wanting to date a woman that was born male is not discrimination. If someone broke off a relationship because their partner has a black grandfather, I'd say they're stupid. Breaking up because their partner lied about being trans, well that's a reasonable concern.

By the way, it's not "hiding your sex." Sorry.

Pick whatever phrase you want to apply to it. It's still hiding something one who'd like to know about before forming a relationship.

It's not. If I hypothetically want a heterosexual relationship with a woman, I would not have to worry about homosexual males hitting on me because they know my limit. I.e, I don't date men. A Mtf TS, knowing this, would have to tell me straight up that they are transsexual because, as you've seen from this thread, not everyone will agree that they are really a female or not. So them and their potential partner need to be on the same page.

If you tell them right away and they reject you, well you probably should be going out with a more accepting person and you aren't wasting anyone's time.

Well not everyone with dark skin is "black". I mean you can even say that you are African-american, but then when they see you in real life and see that you have white skin, sadly colourism exists in the world . I just think as much of a distinction as there is of gender/sex, there is on of race. To make distinctions on race does make one "racist". But being racist isn't bad really, its just a horribly loaded term that white people get called to shut down arguments. Being racist just means you judge people on race. And i guess it ultimately depends on the judgement.

Either way, you make a good point that people dont see transgender women as women, and therefore that could cause alot of confusion. But i mean, when you think about the situation, the onus should be on you to state your dislike, considering the situation you both would put yourselves in while dating. If a trans women were to disclose her trans status, she has the chance of getting assaulted/raped/killed. It happens more than you would think, and that can be a big factor in trans peoples stealth and lack of disclosure. But for you to disclose your distaste of trans women, i mean i guess you could be labeled as trans-phobic, but whats worse scaring someone to death because they dont know you well enough, or being thought of as trans-phobic? I mean id say trans-phobic would be the best course, since most people dont care if someone is trans-phobic or not, sadly.

Just seems like a unnecessary burden on the trans person, who i think would have a hard time in ANY relationship.

Shadowstar38:
Not wanting to date a woman that was born male is not discrimination. If someone broke off a relationship because their partner has a black grandfather, I'd say they're stupid. Breaking up because their partner lied about being trans, well that's a reasonable concern.

Question: Is simply not mentioning that you are trans considered lying?

I also find it strange that people are attracted to trans* people, until they figure out that this person is trans*. Doesn't the attraction count for anything at all?

Rosiv:

Either way, you make a good point that people dont see transgender women as women, and therefore that could cause alot of confusion. But i mean, when you think about the situation, the onus should be on you to state your dislike, considering the situation you both would put yourselves in while dating. If a trans women were to disclose her trans status, she has the chance of getting assaulted/raped/killed. It happens more than you would think, and that can be a big factor in trans peoples stealth and lack of disclosure. But for you to disclose your distaste of trans women, i mean i guess you could be labeled as trans-phobic, but whats worse scaring someone to death because they dont know you well enough, or being thought of as trans-phobic? I mean id say trans-phobic would be the best course, since most people dont care if someone is trans-phobic or not, sadly.

Just seems like a unnecessary burden on the trans person, who i think would have a hard time in ANY relationship.

I don't think anyone would think to make their feelings about transsexuals known right away, because it's not a common occurance they deal with. Even with me knowing transsexuals exist, if I see someone that looks convincingly like a female, my brain is hardwired to think they are a cis female by default. Just in normal day life, the chances of me running into a trans person are pretty low.

But yeah. That would be a safer alternative.

MorRioghain:

Shadowstar38:
Not wanting to date a woman that was born male is not discrimination. If someone broke off a relationship because their partner has a black grandfather, I'd say they're stupid. Breaking up because their partner lied about being trans, well that's a reasonable concern.

Question: Is simply not mentioning that you are trans considered lying?

I'd say no. It only needs to be said if it's relevant to the situation.

I also find it strange that people are attracted to trans* people, until they figure out that this person is trans*. Doesn't the attraction count for anything at all?

It should. But some straight people are so uptight about being straight anything aside the norm automatically makes them uncomfortable. The implication is, you're attracted to someone who was the same sex as you at some point, so you MUST be gay.

Shadowstar38:

Rosiv:

I also find it strange that people are attracted to trans* people, until they figure out that this person is trans*. Doesn't the attraction count for anything at all?

It should. But some straight people are so uptight about being straight anything aside the norm automatically makes them uncomfortable. The implication is, you're attracted to someone who was the same sex as you at some point, so you MUST be gay.

i'd say there's a bit more to it than that. i, as bisexual female, wouldn't date a transperson (reasons detailed in the other ongoing thread :D ). not that i'd have anything against them, and i will fight tooth and nail for their right to be treated equally and the rights to any treatment to ease the suffering that comes with their unique condition.
but i'm not attracted to them in a way that i require to enter an intimate relationship with them. close friendship? no question. relationship? no, sorry.

MorRioghain:

Shadowstar38:
Not wanting to date a woman that was born male is not discrimination. If someone broke off a relationship because their partner has a black grandfather, I'd say they're stupid. Breaking up because their partner lied about being trans, well that's a reasonable concern.

Question: Is simply not mentioning that you are trans considered lying?

I'd say no. It only needs to be said if it's relevant to the situation.

i agree with that part, no transperson should be required to wear a sign around their neck or otherwise be forced to make their status known to anyone they don't wish to.
however, when sexuality comes into play, things get a bit more complicated and i'd argue that sexual contact is one exception to this rule.
(lawful) sex is founded on the principle of consent. an individual that has sex with someone else by forcing them, threatening them, tricking them, intoxicating them and so on is absolute human scum for sure and a criminal very likely, depending on the exact circumstances and the laws of where it happens. an individual and that individual alone has the choice of who to have sex with. take that choice away from her or him with violence, trickery, deception or something else, and in my opinion you deserve to have your face smashed by the victims friends and relatives, doesn't matter if you are white or black, trans or nontrans, female or male. that act is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. a person giving consent to sex that wouldn't have given consent if he'd known about the partners biological sex would rightfully feel violated, regardles if you agree with the motives of their decision to not like transpeople or not. the choice should be only theirs.

I've been reading up on gender dysphoria.

Apparently some - perhaps even the majority of transgender people resent the idea of gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder being classified as a mental disorder.

I was honestly rather baffled by this. Mostly because a genuine, neurological or psychological disorder would be the strongest evidence to support the need for medical intervention - in this case, anything from psychiatric support to hormone therapy to surgery.

I didn't want to make another separate thread when quite a few already exist, so I was wondering if I could ask, in this thread;

Do you feel gender dysphoria should be classified as a genuine medical disorder?

If so, what kind of disorder do you think it should be categorised as? A mental disorder, or perhaps a neurological disorder, or something else altogether?

Does this differ from what you believe gender dysphoria actually is - say, do you believe it might be psychological, but would prefer it be categorised as something else?

If not, do you accept - or indeed even care - that this would, almost certainly, make it much harder for someone with gender dysphoria to receive support and/or treatment?

Zachary Amaranth:

Shadowstar38:

Telling someone what race you are would only make a difference to a hardcore racist.

That's complete and utter crap. A lot of people who aren't "hardcore" won't enter mixed relationships, and such relationships are still largely taboo in modern American society. In fact, it's still taboo enough that hiding one's ethnicity could readily be equated to hiding one's "true" sex, because us mix breeds "know" about the high chance of rejection.

Don't tell me it's a bad comparison for reasons that are untrue. You don't like the comparison because it's inconvenient.

In what part of America do you live? It's not "taboo" like that where I live. Especially if it's dilute enough where you need to ask. Like I know plenty of white people for which black skin is a turn off, but they wouldn't give half a fuck if someone they were dating was a quarter black because it's all about the aesthetics of what they like in a partner.

And sorry, I'd expect any girl who I was going to enter a serious relationship with to be willing to tell me about her past.

The Lyre:
I've been reading up on gender dysphoria.

Apparently some - perhaps even the majority of transgender people resent the idea of gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder being classified as a mental disorder.

I was honestly rather baffled by this. Mostly because a genuine, neurological or psychological disorder would be the strongest evidence to support the need for medical intervention - in this case, anything from psychiatric support to hormone therapy to surgery.

I didn't want to make another separate thread when quite a few already exist, so I was wondering if I could ask, in this thread;

Do you feel gender dysphoria should be classified as a genuine medical disorder?

If so, what kind of disorder do you think it should be categorised as? A mental disorder, or perhaps a neurological disorder, or something else altogether?

Does this differ from what you believe gender dysphoria actually is - say, do you believe it might be psychological, but would prefer it be categorised as something else?

If not, do you accept - or indeed even care - that this would, almost certainly, make it much harder for someone with gender dysphoria to receive support and/or treatment?

Well there is a lot of stigma attached to mental disorders. Trans* people are already viewed as crazy, delusional and so on. Having gender dysphoria classified as a mental disorder doesn't really help our case here. It helps undermine people's acceptance of us as normal and for who we really are.

Having it completely removed as a medical condition would indeed be pretty bad for people who rely on insurance and the like to get treatment.

Kathinka:
however, when sexuality comes into play, things get a bit more complicated and i'd argue that sexual contact is one exception to this rule.
(lawful) sex is founded on the principle of consent. an individual that has sex with someone else by forcing them, threatening them, tricking them, intoxicating them and so on is absolute human scum for sure and a criminal very likely, depending on the exact circumstances and the laws of where it happens. an individual and that individual alone has the choice of who to have sex with. take that choice away from her or him with violence, trickery, deception or something else, and in my opinion you deserve to have your face smashed by the victims friends and relatives, doesn't matter if you are white or black, trans or nontrans, female or male. that act is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. a person giving consent to sex that wouldn't have given consent if he'd known about the partners biological sex would rightfully feel violated, regardles if you agree with the motives of their decision to not like transpeople or not. the choice should be only theirs.

But wouldn't you agree that if you have a specific hangup about something that isn't visible that you are the one who should inform your partner of your hangup? That it is your burden to ask whether or not they fit this category?

MorRioghain:

But wouldn't you agree that if you have a specific hangup about something that isn't visible that you are the one who should inform your partner of your hangup? That it is your burden to ask whether or not they fit this category?

well, that's a valid point, but in this case i'd politely disagree. to take the example to the extreme, if someone wants to sleep only with blue eyed left handed girls of vietnamese descent, then you are of course right, that person will have make sure he picks the ones he want in that ridiculous example.
in the topic of the thread however, i would say it's the other way arround. it's a fair and instant assumption that a person looking like a girl is indeed a biological girl. transsexualism is pretty damn rare, so that assumption is pretty justified, unless one is informed of the opposite.

The Lyre:
I've been reading up on gender dysphoria.

Apparently some - perhaps even the majority of transgender people resent the idea of gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder being classified as a mental disorder.

I was honestly rather baffled by this. Mostly because a genuine, neurological or psychological disorder would be the strongest evidence to support the need for medical intervention - in this case, anything from psychiatric support to hormone therapy to surgery.

I didn't want to make another separate thread when quite a few already exist, so I was wondering if I could ask, in this thread;

Do you feel gender dysphoria should be classified as a genuine medical disorder?

If so, what kind of disorder do you think it should be categorised as? A mental disorder, or perhaps a neurological disorder, or something else altogether?

Does this differ from what you believe gender dysphoria actually is - say, do you believe it might be psychological, but would prefer it be categorised as something else?

If not, do you accept - or indeed even care - that this would, almost certainly, make it much harder for someone with gender dysphoria to receive support and/or treatment?

Ruddy good point; I suppose in that regard Transfolk are verging on trying to have their cake and eat it - they didn't "choose" to be trans, but at the same time they don't want it classified as a disorder (after all, disorders are generally seen as something undesirable that should be eradicated if possible). There's kind of an analogue here to the Fat Acceptance activists who campaign til they're red(der) in the face about how health comes in all sizes and how obesity should be accepted as a valid lifestyle, and yet are more than happy to take the free disability scooters in stores.

The Lyre:
I've been reading up on gender dysphoria.

Apparently some - perhaps even the majority of transgender people resent the idea of gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder being classified as a mental disorder.

I was honestly rather baffled by this. Mostly because a genuine, neurological or psychological disorder would be the strongest evidence to support the need for medical intervention - in this case, anything from psychiatric support to hormone therapy to surgery.

I didn't want to make another separate thread when quite a few already exist, so I was wondering if I could ask, in this thread;

Do you feel gender dysphoria should be classified as a genuine medical disorder?

If so, what kind of disorder do you think it should be categorised as? A mental disorder, or perhaps a neurological disorder, or something else altogether?

Does this differ from what you believe gender dysphoria actually is - say, do you believe it might be psychological, but would prefer it be categorised as something else?

If not, do you accept - or indeed even care - that this would, almost certainly, make it much harder for someone with gender dysphoria to receive support and/or treatment?

It was changed to not be listed as one because it was found to be offensive to trans-people.
Either way, with all the stigma against trans-people being called "crazy", a
mental disorders Diagnostic would doing nothing but added extra fuel to that fire.

And i mean, the causes are also unknown really for transgenderism, so it be really
a moot point to give it a hard category.

Batou667:

Ruddy good point; I suppose in that regard Transfolk are verging on trying to have their cake and eat it

I'm not quite going that far - I don't think it's a conscious decision to play the system or anything, but I do think there's a disconnect here.

If you need treatment, if you need therapy or surgery to treat something, then that means you currently have a disorder that you need to be fixed.

If you don't have a disorder, then you can't really ask for surgery as a medical procedure and claim it on insurance as such - if you're seeking surgery or hormone therapy for something that isn't a pressing medical disorder, that would instead make it cosmetic treatment.

But transgender people clearly view gender dysphoria as more than a simple cosmetic issue - hence why I'm surprised that they wouldn't want to be seen as having a disorder.

Rosiv:

And i mean, the causes are also unknown really for transgenderism, so it be really
a moot point to give it a hard category.

Well, as I said above, there are some serious practical reasons for categorising it as a disorder.

It needs to be clear to all practitioners that this is treatment they need to function in their everyday lives, rather than just them wanting to change how they look.

Not only could this cause problems with receiving financial aid/insurance for the operation - details depending on your country of origin of course - but it could cause serious problems for transgender people.

If you tell doctors that gender dysphoria is not a disorder, then when a person goes to their doctor with concerns regarding that problem, they're unlikely to be taken as seriously as if they were told that gender dysphoria is a serious medical condition.

It was changed because, yes part was the trans community outcry, but there's obviously other "medical" reasons why it was changed. The DSM doesn't change stuff "just because". For me, surgery would CURE my GD... i would longer be tortured by the mind/body incongruence.

to me, it's a birth defect, not a mental "disorder".

MorRioghain:

Shadowstar38:
Not wanting to date a woman that was born male is not discrimination. If someone broke off a relationship because their partner has a black grandfather, I'd say they're stupid. Breaking up because their partner lied about being trans, well that's a reasonable concern.

Question: Is simply not mentioning that you are trans considered lying?

I also find it strange that people are attracted to trans* people, until they figure out that this person is trans*. Doesn't the attraction count for anything at all?

Not really. Attraction is subject to change and something we have very little control over. If someone stops being attractive to you for whatever reason it's not anyone's fault. It's just the way you are.

The Lyre:

Apparently some - perhaps even the majority of transgender people resent the idea of gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder being classified as a mental disorder.

I'm not surprised in the least. Anything having to do with the words "mental disorder" has a strong stigma attached to it in our society, to the point of using it as a derogatory insult, so we'll fight against it and equivocate to distance ourselves from it. I wonder how many people on depression medication would acknowledge that they have a mental disorder.

Beautiful Tragedy:
It was changed because, yes part was the trans community outcry, but there's obviously other "medical" reasons why it was changed. The DSM doesn't change stuff "just because". For me, surgery would CURE my GD... i would longer be tortured by the mind/body incongruence.

to me, it's a birth defect, not a mental "disorder".

But that would mean it's a serious medical disorder that requires treatment for you to live a happy life.

A birth defect is still a disorder that, in an ideal world, would be treated to help anyone suffering from it.

I think there's a serious misunderstanding here about what the word disorder means - it genuinely just means ailment, or illness. Is it purely just because of the stigma attached to that word? To my knowledge the DSM 5 has simply changed the term to gender dysphoria - and if it's in the DSM, the Manual of Mental Disorders, then all that's really changed is that one word.

If the trans community just didn't like disorder attached to the end, then they did get what they wanted.

But if they wanted people to stop treating gender dysphoria as a mental disorder, well...nothing has really changed there.

I'd like to restate however that I don't think that is a bad thing - being categorised as a genuine disorder is the only way to get the treatment viewed as something other than a purely cosmetic procedure.

LetalisK:
I'm not surprised in the least. Anything having to do with the words "mental disorder" has a strong stigma attached to it in our society, to the point of using it as a derogatory insult, so we'll fight against it and equivocate to distance ourselves from it. I wonder how many people on depression medication would acknowledge that they have a mental disorder.

I was diagnosed with depression when I was 13.

That diagnosis has since been changed time and time again, from child to adult services, from autism - or maybe asperger's - to non-specific psychotic disorder to schizophrenia and back to unspecific psychosis.

I can tell you first hand that without a diagnosis of a serious disorder, you don't get serious treatment.

I have a freaking mental disorder, and I'd be kidding myself if I said otherwise. That doesn't mean I walk around announcing it to strangers, but if I'm talking to my doctor? Hell yes I have a mental disorder - the waiting lists are bad enough for people with a diagnosis.

It was also declassified as a "mental" ailment, just like homosexuality was.

It IS indeed a double edged sword though, because now, insurance companies can choose NOT to assist in anything (therapy, hrt assistance, etc)

Beautiful Tragedy:
It was also declassified as a "mental" ailment, just like homosexuality was.

It IS indeed a double edged sword though, because now, insurance companies can choose NOT to assist in anything (therapy, hrt assistance, etc)

To be frank, I think that's a pretty huge price your community has paid.

I'm not saying the alternative was rainbows and sunshine, but at least it was far easier to get the treatment.

The Lyre:

Beautiful Tragedy:
It was also declassified as a "mental" ailment, just like homosexuality was.

It IS indeed a double edged sword though, because now, insurance companies can choose NOT to assist in anything (therapy, hrt assistance, etc)

To be frank, I think that's a pretty huge price your community has paid.

I'm not saying the alternative was rainbows and sunshine, but at least it was far easier to get the treatment.

I know.. actually i read somewhere the WHO is going to make a decision as well about the treatment course... i could be wrong but i thought there was one more "thing" hanging over this issue.

Jux:

mrblakemiller:
So that's what it comes down to for me. Asking me to call you "ze" because you feel differently from the last male-presenting or anatomically-female person I met is like insisting I call you "Sir." I don't care all that much that you "need" it to feel good. I'm tempted to respond, "Okay, I'll call you 'ze'. By the by, when you addres me from now on, it's Admiral Miller."

If you are an Admiral in some countries naval forces, it would be perfectly acceptable for you to request that.

Jux, I ask that you don't attempt to judge my capacity for compassion just because of the words I choose to use and not use. If nothing else, it's just a bad metric for compassion. Wait to see if I feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the ones in hospitals and prisons; that's a better metric.

Or if I must, I'll just say that as much as a trans person "needs" me to use new pronouns in order to feel happy is exactly how much I "need" to not use them in order to myself be happy.

Obviously, we think differently about which parts of this question are big deals and which aren't, and we probably won't change our minds, so let me just distill everything into one question that I really think answers it all:

Noting the quoted stuff above, I'll tell you that I haven't left the US in 24 years, and I have never been a part of this or any other military. If I ask you to call me "Admiral," would you, Jux, do it?

Well most of us are polite to everyone regardless, and the ones who aren't, will not be regardless. I will admit it, I am not comfortable near them. It's like changing poltical parties, its very awkward.

mrblakemiller:
Jux, I ask that you don't attempt to judge my capacity for compassion just because of the words I choose to use and not use. If nothing else, it's just a bad metric for compassion. Wait to see if I feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the ones in hospitals and prisons; that's a better metric.

It's not about what words you will or won't use, it's about your reasoning behind why you choose your words. You can't hide behind good things that you do to deflect criticism for the negative, that's not how it works.

mrblakemiller:
Or if I must, I'll just say that as much as a trans person "needs" me to use new pronouns in order to feel happy is exactly how much I "need" to not use them in order to myself be happy.

You display a startling lack of empathy here. I would imagine that addressing a trans (or gender queer, as this seems to be where you have the biggest problem) person as the correct pronoun is more about acceptance and affirmation of their identity, something I imagine to be quite the struggle, than a superficial feeling of happiness. That you would trivialize it to such a degree is why I said you lacked compassion.

mrblakemiller:
Obviously, we think differently about which parts of this question are big deals and which aren't, and we probably won't change our minds, so let me just distill everything into one question that I really think answers it all:

Noting the quoted stuff above, I'll tell you that I haven't left the US in 24 years, and I have never been a part of this or any other military. If I ask you to call me "Admiral," would you, Jux, do it?

I see no reason not to Admiral! ;)

mrblakemiller:

Or if I must, I'll just say that as much as a trans person "needs" me to use new pronouns in order to feel happy is exactly how much I "need" to not use them in order to myself be happy.

Don't you think that's a pretty false parallel?

I'm sure you'd readily admit that it means a lot more to them than it does to you. These are people, very often, going through intense personal stress, very much tied up with their gender and identity. You, on the other hand, are just somebody who kinda doesn't want to use certain words, because reasons.

Jux:

mrblakemiller:
Or if I must, I'll just say that as much as a trans person "needs" me to use new pronouns in order to feel happy is exactly how much I "need" to not use them in order to myself be happy.

You display a startling lack of empathy here. I would imagine that addressing a trans (or gender queer, as this seems to be where you have the biggest problem) person as the correct pronoun is more about acceptance and affirmation of their identity, something I imagine to be quite the struggle, than a superficial feeling of happiness. That you would trivialize it to such a degree is why I said you lacked compassion.

Well, first of all, it shouldn't at all surprise you that you don't see much compassion looking at typed words on a computer screen. There's no way to tell how much thinking and wrestling with a topic a person did before he wrote the words down.

In the end, I believe it's bad for people to tie their identity up with their gender/sex/anatomical status, and even worse for them to bind their happiness to other people affirming it. So I will accept them all the day long: break bread, let them in my house, care for them. What I won't do is affirm their decision, tell them it's perfectly okay to feel terrible that others disagree abou the number of genders, etc. That's why I won't use those new pronouns--it's a tacit acceptance, a silent way of saying, "Yeah, go ahead and make your gender dysphoria the most important thing about you." Can't do it. I doubt you'll see any nobility in that idea, but that's okay, because I don't draw a correlation between being right and being popular.

I wish the best for you, Jux, for all trans people, and for everyone, everywhere. In the end, I'm just trying to do what I think is right, and I hope you don't begrudge me that ideal, as I won't begrudge it in anyone else. Farewell.

Beautiful Tragedy:
It IS indeed a double edged sword though, because now, insurance companies can choose NOT to assist in anything (therapy, hrt assistance, etc)

Yep, until there's enough research to have GD (or whatever new name surfaces in the future) classified under another medical specialisation, there'll be no ability to give an official diagnosis... which means that even in a Universal Healthcare system treatment/procedures are going to be much, much harder to gain access to. I would call that an own goal.

Oh yeah, this:

The DSM doesn't change stuff "just because".

Although looking at the changes between DSM IV and DSM V people can be forgiven for thinking so. Most of the people I know in the field think DSM V is bloody terrible, especially when it comes to child and adolescent psych.

Proto Taco:

Helmholtz Watson:

Or the other possibility is that it isn't the body that is deformed or in need of repair, but in fact it is the brain that is "deformed" and in need of repair. It's like a person who has Clinical lycanthropy or Species dysphoria saying that their body is "deformed" and refusing to consider the possibility that its there brain that is "deformed".

You bring up an interesting point here in your final statement. Indeed you could make the argument that the brain is the deformed factor but that perception doesn't really hold up upon examination.

No, what I am saying is that it always seems to be a one sided approach to transsexuality and that it seems to get special treatment that people with Clinical lycanthropy or Species dysphoria would not get, ie the assumption that it is the body that is wrong and not the mind that is wrong. You seem to have missed this point entirely and instead fixated on my choice of words to describe the brain.

Proto Taco:
Deformation is literally defined as something being 'misshapen' or 'disfigured'. Now, when we consider that in a trans individual the brain is neither damaged nor mal-developed and all cognitive difficulty stems from being bathed in the incorrect mix of hormones, it becomes evident that the brain is not 'deformed' it simply requires the opposite of what the body it resides in is capable of providing.

It seems like the solution still relies on "changing" the brain and not the body. Granted, as you described it, it isn't that the shape of the brain is malformed, but that the brain was "bathed in the incorrect mix of hormones". From this information presented to me, it would appear that science should attempt to correct the "hormonal bathing" of the brain so that it matches the body.

Proto Taco:
Additionally when you consider that the brain is regarded as the center of a person's consciousness by science and medicine, it becomes an ethical matter when you begin to suggest severely altering brain structure in favor of preserving societal norms.

You see, now we just went from discussing science("hormonal bathing") to some Western/European culture, ethics, and opinions. So while you can make that argument about an individuals identity being at the center of the brain based on your beliefs-and therefore should not be altered, this view is inconsistent with reality given the fact that we already attempt to alter a persons brain/ways of thinking when we give medication to people with depression, schizophrenia, ADD, Anxiety disorders, ect. in an effort to change [1] "the center of a person's consciousness".

Proto Taco:
In terms of practical intervention the brain is in fact much more difficult to alter or repair than the body is. Indeed the brain's plasticity is such that it is likely additional harm will come to the patient if you pursue this as an avenue of treatment. Even within psychiatric medicine, taking steps to alter the brain itself is always considered a last resort.

"Because it's hard", that's it? That is a rather poor reason to not try to focus on the brain for a change and not the body. Seeing as how we started off as a primitive species, I'm sure many steps in scientific progress were considered hard or difficult at the time, but it didn't stop us from being able to create cars, planes, computers, satellites, batteries, refrigerators, artificial hearts, ect, so it seems like a rather poor excuse to use when asked why don't we try to develop solutions that focus on the brain rather than the body. I'll give you that current technology and medical knowledge isn't what it could be, but that shouldn't mean that we should just give up on countering the brain "bathing" in the wrong hormones. What it should mean is that we know that we still have some research to do so that we can better understand the brain and how to prevent/counter the brain "bathing" in the wrong hormones.

Proto Taco:
Couple that with the fact that the vast majority of trans patients report almost immediate alleviation of the majority of their symptoms upon starting hormone replacement therapy and it becomes obvious that the treatment for trans individuals is both easy and cost effective without resorting to more expensive treatments that would prove much more detrimental to the patient's health.

Again, you seem to want to only focus on "cures" that target the body and totatlly ignore the idea that the brain is the problem and that there is research that should be done to find out how to "rebath" the brain in the, for a lack of better words, in "proper" hormones.

Proto Taco:
In the situation of HRT, treatment of gender dysphoria becomes no different than any other problem you might address with your common care physician; an unhealthy condition exists the physician is able to prescribe medication to treat it.

I repeat, you seem to want to only focus on solutions that target the body, and completely ignore solutions that target the brain because "it's to hard to understand the brain!"-which is only the case as long as you refuse to do research that would alter the hormones that the brain "bathes" in.

Proto Taco:
Now if you don't like how trans people express themselves and find it offensive they don't adhere to your idea of what 'normal' and 'healthy' gender expression is, sadly that's your problem.

Not really, considering I don't have to agree that a man that gets genital surgery is a women and that person can't force me to address them as a women when I choose to use pronouns.

(Though like I said in my first post, this conversation should NOT be interpreted as me saying that I would be violent towards a transsexual person nor would I deny them housing, loans, entrance to college, a job, ect.)

[1] Obviously medication doesn't cure a person of having a mental illness, hence the reason why I said that the medication was an "effort" as opposed to calling medication a "cure" for mental illness. Though it should be noted, the absence of a "cure" for mental illness doesn't stem from opposition towards trying to find a cure(because in the past, they damn well tried extreme ways to find cures for mental illness), but from a "lack" of ability to find it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked