|
Keep discussion objective and civil.
Blindly spewing uninformed non-sense will lead to moderation action. |
United States42250 Posts
On December 06 2012 05:03 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 04:57 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:20 iamahydralisk wrote:On December 06 2012 03:44 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:34 sunprince wrote:On December 06 2012 03:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:12 NicolBolas wrote:
Why does it matter what it is called? What matters is that there is a distinction between "mental sexual state" and "physical sexual state". As my comparison to furries alluded, the idea that there even is such a thing as a "mental sexual state" is as ridiculous as claiming there is a "mental species state". Actually there is already a word for it: imagination. Do you deny that it's possible for someone to mentally feel like a member of a different species? And if there happen to be enough people who have that mental condition, wouldn't it make sense to have a name for it? You can invent whatever words you want, for whatever reason you want. If it catches in in common speech it might even make it into a dictionary. I don't like when people try to redefine an existing word, contrary to how it is used in speech, and then go around smugly "correcting" people who use the word properly (the same way it always has been). as someone who's experienced strong gender dysphoria and is a linguistics major... please, stop posting in this thread. you're completely and demonstrably wrong on all fronts. the reason I even bring up my major is because you're not even arguing about the topic at hand anymore. you're arguing about the direction of the english language in a thread about transsexuals. it's great that you're old fashioned when it comes to language and you apparently think that any sort of change in lexicon is a "degradation" of the language, but given the subject of this thread, we reeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaally don't care. If you want to debate about how words should keep their original meanings, then great, make a new thread. also, if you're just using this "blah blah I don't like it when new things happen in my language" argument as a front to cover for your "gender and sex are exactly the same thing comment," then guess what, you're demonstrably wrong there, like pretty much every poster has shown you. In our current language usage, gender and sex are two distinctly different things, even if they're used interchangeably in conversation. You constantly repeating that "they're the same thing" with no factual backing whatsoever doesn't change that. It doesn't even matter if they meant exactly the same thing at some point in time (which is debatable). The important thing is that they don't mean the same thing NOW means your entire argument is invalid. I have no problem with language changing over time. For example "gay" obviously has changed meaning and I wouldn't use the word gay in its historical sense. But the word gender has not changed. It's used the same as it always has been. The people clamoring for the acceptance of this new definition are a small minority of people in Western nations. These people often see it as a badge of pride to tell the majority of people they are wrong and only this new fabricated definition that has not caught on and probably never will is the truly correct one. User was warned for this post I was warned for this post, the reasoning given being: Insisting that gender and sex are the same thing because the words used to be used interchangeably is flat out idiotic. You're degrading the entire topic by starting and then continuing an argument based on linguistics for the sake of linguistics at the expense of communication.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation,
KwarK Of course the warning is patently false. My argument has never hinged on linguistics, it is people arguing that gender is something different who have to fall back to linguistics to justify their claims. Gender and sex are the same thing because they are the same concept. The idea that there is a "mental sex" is utterly hogwash unsupported by any scientific evidence. The reason this devolved to linguistics is because people who try and claim there is some separate "mental sex" have no evidence and can only claim that linguistics or history support them. KwarK is apparently letting his personal bias cloud his moderation on this issue. Also arguing with a mod on an account with 27 posts will probably get you banned or even nuked.
Arguing with a mod about gender issues certainly won't, provided you are civil. Arguing with a mod about moderation issues anywhere outside of the website feedback forum after an explicit warning not to will absolutely get you banned, he was warned for that exact offence. Arguing with a mod generally is fine though. I just wanted to address this before anyone got the wrong idea and the topic devolved further, if anyone has anything more to add then please PM me or take it to website feedback. Thank you.
|
On December 06 2012 05:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 05:03 Klondikebar wrote:On December 06 2012 04:57 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:20 iamahydralisk wrote:On December 06 2012 03:44 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:34 sunprince wrote:On December 06 2012 03:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:12 NicolBolas wrote:
Why does it matter what it is called? What matters is that there is a distinction between "mental sexual state" and "physical sexual state". As my comparison to furries alluded, the idea that there even is such a thing as a "mental sexual state" is as ridiculous as claiming there is a "mental species state". Actually there is already a word for it: imagination. Do you deny that it's possible for someone to mentally feel like a member of a different species? And if there happen to be enough people who have that mental condition, wouldn't it make sense to have a name for it? You can invent whatever words you want, for whatever reason you want. If it catches in in common speech it might even make it into a dictionary. I don't like when people try to redefine an existing word, contrary to how it is used in speech, and then go around smugly "correcting" people who use the word properly (the same way it always has been). as someone who's experienced strong gender dysphoria and is a linguistics major... please, stop posting in this thread. you're completely and demonstrably wrong on all fronts. the reason I even bring up my major is because you're not even arguing about the topic at hand anymore. you're arguing about the direction of the english language in a thread about transsexuals. it's great that you're old fashioned when it comes to language and you apparently think that any sort of change in lexicon is a "degradation" of the language, but given the subject of this thread, we reeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaally don't care. If you want to debate about how words should keep their original meanings, then great, make a new thread. also, if you're just using this "blah blah I don't like it when new things happen in my language" argument as a front to cover for your "gender and sex are exactly the same thing comment," then guess what, you're demonstrably wrong there, like pretty much every poster has shown you. In our current language usage, gender and sex are two distinctly different things, even if they're used interchangeably in conversation. You constantly repeating that "they're the same thing" with no factual backing whatsoever doesn't change that. It doesn't even matter if they meant exactly the same thing at some point in time (which is debatable). The important thing is that they don't mean the same thing NOW means your entire argument is invalid. I have no problem with language changing over time. For example "gay" obviously has changed meaning and I wouldn't use the word gay in its historical sense. But the word gender has not changed. It's used the same as it always has been. The people clamoring for the acceptance of this new definition are a small minority of people in Western nations. These people often see it as a badge of pride to tell the majority of people they are wrong and only this new fabricated definition that has not caught on and probably never will is the truly correct one. User was warned for this post I was warned for this post, the reasoning given being: Insisting that gender and sex are the same thing because the words used to be used interchangeably is flat out idiotic. You're degrading the entire topic by starting and then continuing an argument based on linguistics for the sake of linguistics at the expense of communication.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation,
KwarK Of course the warning is patently false. My argument has never hinged on linguistics, it is people arguing that gender is something different who have to fall back to linguistics to justify their claims. Gender and sex are the same thing because they are the same concept. The idea that there is a "mental sex" is utterly hogwash unsupported by any scientific evidence. The reason this devolved to linguistics is because people who try and claim there is some separate "mental sex" have no evidence and can only claim that linguistics or history support them. KwarK is apparently letting his personal bias cloud his moderation on this issue. Also arguing with a mod on an account with 27 posts will probably get you banned or even nuked. Arguing with a mod about gender issues certainly won't, provided you are civil. Arguing with a mod about moderation issues anywhere outside of the website feedback forum after an explicit warning not to will absolutely get you banned, he was warned for that exact offence. Arguing with a mod generally is fine though. I just wanted to address this before anyone got the wrong idea and the topic devolved further, if anyone has anything more to add then please PM me or take it to website feedback. Thank you.
Edited out for lack of reading comprehension.
|
On December 05 2012 21:22 Lynda wrote:
In retrospect I vividly remember having female self-images as a kid (I didn't see them as "self-images" back then), and due to all the shame I tried to repress them. I didn't ever really feel like I was a male, rather I was feeling impersonal, genderless, dissociated from my body due to having to bury or externalize my self-image onto others (which always led to disappointment since I couldn't live through them). Female pronouns and terms always felt "right" to me (no other way to describe it) while male ones felt wrong, inaccurate. I didn't choose to feel that way about them. I had very long phases of denial and trying to work against it, but I couldn't change my intrinsic, subconscious feelings.
I always secretly identified more with female characters from books/movies, with songs about girls, etc. despite being really ashamed of it. I didn't know why I did it, but I used to pray to God every night as a kid wanting to become a girl; I was unaware of sexual stuff so I thought that was like the most innocent thing to wish for, so I was really depressed every morning. I thought every boy desperately wanted to be a girl (how could have I known, it was obviously not a question that one could ask from others) but they just accepted their fate. So I tried too, but it never worked, it just kept worsening.
And what is female self-images? I've asked this so many times, but noone have been able to answer me. Based on what you just wrote, about you relating more to girls, it's not about your gender self image, it's about you relating more to female stereotypes, and this is extremely common. I can personally relate more to girls in some ways (not in all ways), but that doesn't change my concept of gender. There's a great variance in ppl of the same sex. Not all men looks like and thinks like Sean Connery. He's much more traditionally masculine than me, because of hormonal levels and probably also because my brain have more traditionally feminine traits than his. I don't question my sex though. I consider Sean Connery to be more manly than me, but being manly is a neutral word for me. I'm ok with being who I am. That's not to say that I didn't envy ppl like him before, especially in my teens, but thanks to finding other male role models that are more like me, I've grown up and realized that we're all different, and that there are different ways of being attractive. Anyway, given by the great variance in our species, and the prominent and restricting stereotypes, it would be strange if ppl wasn't confused by their sex.
On December 06 2012 02:36 shinosai wrote:
As far as the "natural characteristics of their biology," well, since we have people that are physically male as far as their bodies are concerned, and transition into female bodies, we have a lot of information on the differences between male and female biology. These differences have been empirically studied. They include, psychologically: Intenser experiences of emotions, increased sense of smell, easier to cry, etc. Unfortunately for you, they did not include the sudden elimination of the ability to do mathematics or someone's personal preferences in gender specific activities.
Before, you said that it was impossible to explain what it felt like to be the female gender, and now you just said that they have more intense emotions, and have easier to cry. That's pretty specific I have to say. You know what, those are typical stereotypes of the female sex, and they are also stereotypes of men who are more effeminate. And this also fits the other post I quoted above.
To me it seems like you are mixing up your so called mental gender (that supposedly only transgenders can understand), and the sociological gender (which is obvious to all of us), and that's what I've been saying all along.
|
Before, you said that it was impossible to explain what it felt like to be the female gender, and now you just said that they have more intense emotions, and have easier to cry. That's pretty specific I have to say. You know what, those are typical stereotypes of the female sex, and they are also stereotypes of men who are more effeminate. And this also fits the other post I quoted above.
To me it seems like you are mixing up your so called mental gender (that supposedly only transgenders can understand), and the sociological gender (which is obvious to all of us), and that's what I've been saying all along.
Well, yes, you've made it very clear that you think we're simply mentally confused.
But, in any case: There are very real psychological and physical changes associated with estrogen vs testosterone. Being easier to cry and having intense emotions are not stereotypes - you will feel these if you take estrogen. The interesting part is that you will also have a feeling that these psychological and physical changes are "correct" as a transsexual - but if you were simply a regular guy, these psychological changes would be extremely distressing to you.
Seriously, though, if you want to know what it feels like to be in the wrong body and experience a disconnect between gender identity and sex, it's not hard. Just go get yourself some hormone replacement therapy. (But first you're going to have to spend a lot of money and time convincing medical professionals that you actually need it, good luck with that)
|
On December 06 2012 05:40 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 21:22 Lynda wrote:
In retrospect I vividly remember having female self-images as a kid (I didn't see them as "self-images" back then), and due to all the shame I tried to repress them. I didn't ever really feel like I was a male, rather I was feeling impersonal, genderless, dissociated from my body due to having to bury or externalize my self-image onto others (which always led to disappointment since I couldn't live through them). Female pronouns and terms always felt "right" to me (no other way to describe it) while male ones felt wrong, inaccurate. I didn't choose to feel that way about them. I had very long phases of denial and trying to work against it, but I couldn't change my intrinsic, subconscious feelings.
I always secretly identified more with female characters from books/movies, with songs about girls, etc. despite being really ashamed of it. I didn't know why I did it, but I used to pray to God every night as a kid wanting to become a girl; I was unaware of sexual stuff so I thought that was like the most innocent thing to wish for, so I was really depressed every morning. I thought every boy desperately wanted to be a girl (how could have I known, it was obviously not a question that one could ask from others) but they just accepted their fate. So I tried too, but it never worked, it just kept worsening.
And what is female self-images? I've asked this so many times, but noone have been able to answer me. Based on what you just wrote, about you relating more to girls, it's not about your gender self image, it's about you relating more to female stereotypes, and this is extremely common. I can personally relate more to girls in some ways (not in all ways), but that doesn't change my concept of gender. There's a great variance in ppl of the same sex. Not all men looks like and thinks like Sean Connery. He's much more traditionally masculine than me, because of hormonal levels and probably also because my brain have more traditionally feminine traits than his. I don't question my sex though. I consider Sean Connery to be more manly than me, but being manly is a neutral word for me. I'm ok with being who I am. That's not to say that I didn't envy ppl like him before, especially in my teens, but thanks to finding other male role models that are more like me, I've grown up and realized that we're all different, and that there are different ways of being attractive. Anyway, given by the great variance in our species, and the prominent and restricting stereotypes, it would be strange if ppl wasn't confused by their sex.
Whenever I didn't pay very close attention to my thoughts/imagination like when daydreaming, I always saw myself with a female body. It's not about relating more to girls, if it was just that, then I'd be an effeminate guy, and I tried to be that, but I don't want a male body, I fail to identify with male pronouns and terms the same way as with female pronouns and terms, I desperately desire a female body without being able to argue why other than because I feel this way, I've felt this way my entire life. I didn't choose to be this way, but I am, due to a birth defect. Physiologically, it'd make sense that a male body is supposed to have a neuroanatomy that accepts that body, so when the neuroanatomy doesn't match it, it expects a body image that is compatible with that neuroanatomy, hence female self-images, identifying with a female body, etc.
I've never really ever felt truly happy in my life whenever I didn't feel fully dissociated from my body (but how can I ask other people to also see me dissociatedly from my body?) and rather imagined myself with a female body (how can I ever actually express myself like that without actually transitioning to a female body?).
|
On December 06 2012 05:40 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 21:22 Lynda wrote:
In retrospect I vividly remember having female self-images as a kid (I didn't see them as "self-images" back then), and due to all the shame I tried to repress them. I didn't ever really feel like I was a male, rather I was feeling impersonal, genderless, dissociated from my body due to having to bury or externalize my self-image onto others (which always led to disappointment since I couldn't live through them). Female pronouns and terms always felt "right" to me (no other way to describe it) while male ones felt wrong, inaccurate. I didn't choose to feel that way about them. I had very long phases of denial and trying to work against it, but I couldn't change my intrinsic, subconscious feelings.
I always secretly identified more with female characters from books/movies, with songs about girls, etc. despite being really ashamed of it. I didn't know why I did it, but I used to pray to God every night as a kid wanting to become a girl; I was unaware of sexual stuff so I thought that was like the most innocent thing to wish for, so I was really depressed every morning. I thought every boy desperately wanted to be a girl (how could have I known, it was obviously not a question that one could ask from others) but they just accepted their fate. So I tried too, but it never worked, it just kept worsening.
And what is female self-images? I've asked this so many times, but noone have been able to answer me. Based on what you just wrote, about you relating more to girls, it's not about your gender self image, it's about you relating more to female stereotypes, and this is extremely common. I can personally relate more to girls in some ways (not in all ways), but that doesn't change my concept of gender. There's a great variance in ppl of the same sex. Not all men looks like and thinks like Sean Connery. He's much more traditionally masculine than me, because of hormonal levels and probably also because my brain have more traditionally feminine traits than his. I don't question my sex though. I consider Sean Connery to be more manly than me, but being manly is a neutral word for me. I'm ok with being who I am. That's not to say that I didn't envy ppl like him before, especially in my teens, but thanks to finding other male role models that are more like me, I've grown up and realized that we're all different, and that there are different ways of being attractive. Anyway, given by the great variance in our species, and the prominent and restricting stereotypes, it would be strange if ppl wasn't confused by their sex. Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 02:36 shinosai wrote:
As far as the "natural characteristics of their biology," well, since we have people that are physically male as far as their bodies are concerned, and transition into female bodies, we have a lot of information on the differences between male and female biology. These differences have been empirically studied. They include, psychologically: Intenser experiences of emotions, increased sense of smell, easier to cry, etc. Unfortunately for you, they did not include the sudden elimination of the ability to do mathematics or someone's personal preferences in gender specific activities. Before, you said that it was impossible to explain what it felt like to be the female gender, and now you just said that they have more intense emotions, and have easier to cry. That's pretty specific I have to say. You know what, those are typical stereotypes of the female sex, and they are also stereotypes of men who are more effeminate. And this also fits the other post I quoted above. To me it seems like you are mixing up your so called mental gender (that supposedly only transgenders can understand), and the sociological gender (which is obvious to all of us), and that's what I've been saying all along.
I dunno if maybe this has been brought up before, but how do YOU know which gender you identify with? If you're a guy then you know you're a guy no matter how many feminine things you like because thats what you are its the same for transgendered individuals, but their gender that they identify with is not the one that they were assigned at birth. Its something you kind of just know.
|
On December 06 2012 05:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 05:03 Klondikebar wrote:On December 06 2012 04:57 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 04:20 iamahydralisk wrote:On December 06 2012 03:44 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:34 sunprince wrote:On December 06 2012 03:28 mortonm wrote:On December 06 2012 03:12 NicolBolas wrote:
Why does it matter what it is called? What matters is that there is a distinction between "mental sexual state" and "physical sexual state". As my comparison to furries alluded, the idea that there even is such a thing as a "mental sexual state" is as ridiculous as claiming there is a "mental species state". Actually there is already a word for it: imagination. Do you deny that it's possible for someone to mentally feel like a member of a different species? And if there happen to be enough people who have that mental condition, wouldn't it make sense to have a name for it? You can invent whatever words you want, for whatever reason you want. If it catches in in common speech it might even make it into a dictionary. I don't like when people try to redefine an existing word, contrary to how it is used in speech, and then go around smugly "correcting" people who use the word properly (the same way it always has been). as someone who's experienced strong gender dysphoria and is a linguistics major... please, stop posting in this thread. you're completely and demonstrably wrong on all fronts. the reason I even bring up my major is because you're not even arguing about the topic at hand anymore. you're arguing about the direction of the english language in a thread about transsexuals. it's great that you're old fashioned when it comes to language and you apparently think that any sort of change in lexicon is a "degradation" of the language, but given the subject of this thread, we reeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaally don't care. If you want to debate about how words should keep their original meanings, then great, make a new thread. also, if you're just using this "blah blah I don't like it when new things happen in my language" argument as a front to cover for your "gender and sex are exactly the same thing comment," then guess what, you're demonstrably wrong there, like pretty much every poster has shown you. In our current language usage, gender and sex are two distinctly different things, even if they're used interchangeably in conversation. You constantly repeating that "they're the same thing" with no factual backing whatsoever doesn't change that. It doesn't even matter if they meant exactly the same thing at some point in time (which is debatable). The important thing is that they don't mean the same thing NOW means your entire argument is invalid. I have no problem with language changing over time. For example "gay" obviously has changed meaning and I wouldn't use the word gay in its historical sense. But the word gender has not changed. It's used the same as it always has been. The people clamoring for the acceptance of this new definition are a small minority of people in Western nations. These people often see it as a badge of pride to tell the majority of people they are wrong and only this new fabricated definition that has not caught on and probably never will is the truly correct one. User was warned for this post I was warned for this post, the reasoning given being: Insisting that gender and sex are the same thing because the words used to be used interchangeably is flat out idiotic. You're degrading the entire topic by starting and then continuing an argument based on linguistics for the sake of linguistics at the expense of communication.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation,
KwarK Of course the warning is patently false. My argument has never hinged on linguistics, it is people arguing that gender is something different who have to fall back to linguistics to justify their claims. Gender and sex are the same thing because they are the same concept. The idea that there is a "mental sex" is utterly hogwash unsupported by any scientific evidence. The reason this devolved to linguistics is because people who try and claim there is some separate "mental sex" have no evidence and can only claim that linguistics or history support them. KwarK is apparently letting his personal bias cloud his moderation on this issue. Also arguing with a mod on an account with 27 posts will probably get you banned or even nuked. Arguing with a mod about gender issues certainly won't, provided you are civil. Arguing with a mod about moderation issues anywhere outside of the website feedback forum after an explicit warning not to will absolutely get you banned, he was warned for that exact offence. Arguing with a mod generally is fine though. I just wanted to address this before anyone got the wrong idea and the topic devolved further, if anyone has anything more to add then please PM me or take it to website feedback. Thank you.
Did you not issue him that warning? It does seem to be on the basis of you disagreeing with his argument.
The warning looks like a very clear threat to stop making arguments you disagree with, KwarK.
Insisting that gender and sex are the same thing because the words used to be used interchangeably is flat out idiotic. You're degrading the entire topic by starting and then continuing an argument based on linguistics for the sake of linguistics at the expense of communication.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation,
KwarK
Maybe he faked that warning text, in which case I apologize.
I don't see you anywhere in this thread actually rebut his arguments, just that "warning" (threat) to stop saying things you disagree with.
EDIT: You say arguing about gender issues won't be punished, but gender issue arguments are the basis of the warning he was complaining about. If you hadn't issued a threat to stop disagreeing, he wouldn't have any complaint about moderation.
You are being disingenuous.
In particular:
Thanks in advance for your cooperation,
How could he have cooperated? What does cooperation mean in this case? It seems like a very clear threat, and "cooperation" means shutting up and not disagreeing anymore.
User was banned for seeing a guy banned for disputing moderation in a topic rather than website feedback after a specific warning to not to do that and then deciding the correct route was to criticise it in the same topic rather than website feedback.
|
|
|
On December 06 2012 05:40 ninini wrote:
And what is female self-images? I've asked this so many times, but noone have been able to answer me. Based on what you just wrote, about you relating more to girls, it's not about your gender self image, it's about you relating more to female stereotypes, and this is extremely common.
You're discounting all trans women who are androgynous or butch, and don't identify with female stereotypes.
|
United States42250 Posts
I have a question for the trans posters here if they don't mind answering as I am genuinely curious.
If a transgender individual were raised in total isolation and kept ignorant of the existence of other humans of other shapes then do you think they would still feel wrong about their body? Would the lack of the challenge issued by another seeking to impose them into an incorrect category prevent them from realising there was an issue? Likewise would the lack of awareness that things could be in any way different to the way that they are in any way alter the perception of the body?
I guess it comes down to whether or not they would still believe there was something wrong while having no idea that anything other than things as they are existed or if instead they would simply believe that a penis was associated with a strong sense of a female gender or the other way around.
|
On December 06 2012 04:55 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 04:52 Olinim wrote:On December 06 2012 04:32 Klondikebar wrote:On December 06 2012 04:30 rQvicious wrote:
A man is gay and wants to be a women; he becomes a women. But instead of sleeping with men he sleeps with women. What is he? Plot twist: The man was a straight woman the whole time. Directed by M Night Shamapoop Edit: The entire point of the thread is to point out that the person was a woman the whole time, they just changed their body to match their gender. If they were "gay" with male sex that means they are attracted to men...so when they changed their sex they should still be attracted to men. Then what even is the meaning of a "woman"? If it's not simply biological sex, nor the characteristics typically attributed to it, what is it? If mentally feeling like a woman(whatever that means) makes you one then what is it? A desire to have female genitalia? I don't quite understand the "sense" of being male or female. http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/files/2012/02/Genderbread-Person.jpgAgain the genderbread person explains this distinction. But, anyways, look, you can't understand the "sense" of being a man or a woman because of your cissexual privilege. You have never had anyone question the fact that you are a guy, because your sex and your gender are in alignment.
I've had long hair for a decade and a half, so, yes. Yes, I have had people misidentify me, and even on rare occasion continue to insist that I am female even after I correct them. However, when I assert that I'm male, the vast majority of people understand what I'm claiming -- a simple, verifiable fact of physique.
On December 06 2012 04:21 Cutlery wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 04:00 TheToaster wrote:On December 06 2012 03:20 shinosai wrote:On December 06 2012 03:19 TheToaster wrote:
The human soul has no gender. Transgenders that argue they need to fulfill some sort of gaping hole in their self persona are completely ignorant of this fact. Changing your outward appearance has nothing to do with your true inner self. That activity simply feeds cultural norms which define gender based on societal practices. For example when a woman dresses in almost unclad attire to seem more sexually attractive. This isn't something a man would do, because dressing in unclad attire would be weird for a man. In that sense, transgenders are actually inhibiting themselves by acting like these cultural norms actually define someone's gender. When in fact gender is really an outward illusion. Again, you are merely conflating gender expression with gender identity. I'm not the one who conflates them, it's transgenders who conflate them. They feel the need to dress up as who they feel inside, when that simply has nothing to do with who they are as a person. This reinforces the notion that one must follow the societal illusions of gender roles to actually become the gender they want to be, when in fact they don't. It's a pointless struggle created by transgenders themselves. As for the rest of your outward body, I'm pretty sure you like your dick. And if you ever were to have a vagina in a dream for instance, I'm pretty sure you would be relieved when you wake up, checking what's between your legs.
What? Why would I hate dreaming about having a vagina and not a penis? That sounds pleasant enough -- and bonus points if I get to use it.
I'm happy to dream of being non-human. Why in the heck would non-male horrify me?
But hey, gender doesn't matter RIGHT? Maybe you would be just fine with a different sex organ all together.
Changing my body around would be a tad awkward, as I've inhabited it for a long time and am quite accustomed to its various properties. There'd need to be a big advantage to make up for the effort of adapting.
But, if I can swap to be some kind of female superhero? Fuck yes.
It seemingly isn't a part of how you feel on the inside at all.
Of course it's part of how I feel; it's wired to my brain. Plus, the testicles produce hormones.
Hey, just chop it off all together.
It's functional. Why would I get rid of it?
|
On December 06 2012 05:40 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 21:22 Lynda wrote:
In retrospect I vividly remember having female self-images as a kid (I didn't see them as "self-images" back then), and due to all the shame I tried to repress them. I didn't ever really feel like I was a male, rather I was feeling impersonal, genderless, dissociated from my body due to having to bury or externalize my self-image onto others (which always led to disappointment since I couldn't live through them). Female pronouns and terms always felt "right" to me (no other way to describe it) while male ones felt wrong, inaccurate. I didn't choose to feel that way about them. I had very long phases of denial and trying to work against it, but I couldn't change my intrinsic, subconscious feelings.
I always secretly identified more with female characters from books/movies, with songs about girls, etc. despite being really ashamed of it. I didn't know why I did it, but I used to pray to God every night as a kid wanting to become a girl; I was unaware of sexual stuff so I thought that was like the most innocent thing to wish for, so I was really depressed every morning. I thought every boy desperately wanted to be a girl (how could have I known, it was obviously not a question that one could ask from others) but they just accepted their fate. So I tried too, but it never worked, it just kept worsening.
And what is female self-images? I've asked this so many times, but noone have been able to answer me.
The problem is that you are conditioning your acceptance of gender dysphoria on:
1) The ability of others to describe how they feel to you.
2) Your ability to understand those descriptions.
#1 is difficult because describing feelings about anything abstract is difficult. It leads to misunderstandings (like this one). Entire books have been written that attempt to explain what gender dysphoria feels like.
#2 is difficult for any concept that someone else doesn't experience. We all interpret everything we read and here through our own perspective. You don't experience gender dysphoria, so you generally try to interpret it based on things you know, which lead to this misunderstanding.
The problem is with your question itself; you're asking the wrong thing. You shouldn't condition your acceptance of gender dysphoria based on the ability of others to describe it. You should condition it based on the available facts. The question you should be asking is this: what is the available evidence around gender dysphoria?
Psychologists have determined that gender dysphoria is real. There are numerous papers about the concept and other concepts relating to gender.
So the question I have for you is this: do you accept the majority opinion of most of the people who have done research into the field? Or do you not?
|
On December 06 2012 06:25 KwarK wrote:
I have a question for the trans posters here if they don't mind answering as I am genuinely curious.
If a transgender individual were raised in total isolation and kept ignorant of the existence of other humans of other shapes then do you think they would still feel wrong about their body? Would the lack of the challenge issued by another seeking to impose them into an incorrect category prevent them from realising there was an issue? Likewise would the lack of awareness that things could be in any way different to the way that they are in any way alter the perception of the body?
I guess it comes down to whether or not they would still believe there was something wrong while having no idea that anything other than things as they are existed or if instead they would simply believe that a penis was associated with a strong sense of a female gender or the other way around.
I think in some ways the brain would at least on a subconscious level recognize what it should or shouldn't see when seeing the mirror image, but as to how that would come to the surface to a conscious level, if ever, is an entirely different thing. It would be further problematic due to the fact that many trans people only actually consciously realise that they're trans in their 30s or 40s or even later, many of them claiming that they weren't actually repressing their feelings but rather they didn't really notice / pay attention to them, and that happened in the case of trans people who lived in a society for decades. I guess many trans people might've died without ever actually realising that they were trans. So trans individuals raised in insolation would even more likely not realise that they're trans, but at least they could freely express themselves without being forced into only socially acceptable roles for their assigned sex.
Also people who wouldn't realise they're trans would not feel as much detachment from their body from the start (therefore paradoxically making it harder for them to realise they're trans), which is because gender dysphoria mainly starts from the point of realising that you're trans, until then it's a lot weaker. But once the cat is out of the box that there's a solution, time is ticking against you, and decades of repression suddenly come back to the surface with an extremely intense sense of identity, that cat never goes back in. From there onwards it exponentially worsens.
|
On December 06 2012 06:45 Lynda wrote:It would be further problematic due to the fact that many trans people only actually consciously realise that they're trans in their 30s or 40s or even later, many of them claiming that they weren't actually repressing their feelings but rather they didn't really notice / pay attention to them, and that happened in the case of trans people who lived in a society for decades.
I actually believe that this is more of a socially constructed phenomenon. Trans people are coming out earlier and earlier now that there is more awareness, acceptance, and availability of treatment.
|
On December 06 2012 06:25 KwarK wrote:
I have a question for the trans posters here if they don't mind answering as I am genuinely curious.
If a transgender individual were raised in total isolation and kept ignorant of the existence of other humans of other shapes then do you think they would still feel wrong about their body? Would the lack of the challenge issued by another seeking to impose them into an incorrect category prevent them from realising there was an issue? Likewise would the lack of awareness that things could be in any way different to the way that they are in any way alter the perception of the body?
I guess it comes down to whether or not they would still believe there was something wrong while having no idea that anything other than things as they are existed or if instead they would simply believe that a penis was associated with a strong sense of a female gender or the other way around.
To be honest, I think it's kind of silly to ask that question when there's a very good chance that absolutely no one on the chance can answer it. It's an interesting question to think about and discuss, for sure, but I don't think anyone can answer it with any significant authority.
|
Doesn't matter what this particular organization says or any other organization.
The entire world can pretend something, doesn't make it true.
In 1000 years when medical science looks back at this time and see's we were "helping" people by mutilating their genitals they are gonna think we were a bunch of idiots.
User was warned for this post
|
On December 06 2012 07:13 Zaqwert wrote:
Doesn't matter what this particular organization says or any other organization.
The entire world can pretend something, doesn't make it true.
In 1000 years when medical science looks back at this time and see's we were "helping" people by mutilating their genitals they are gonna think we were a bunch of idiots.
Nah, if they see this thread, they'll only think of you 
|
On December 06 2012 07:13 Zaqwert wrote:
Doesn't matter what this particular organization says or any other organization.
The entire world can pretend something, doesn't make it true.
In 1000 years when medical science looks back at this time and see's we were "helping" people by mutilating their genitals they are gonna think we were a bunch of idiots.
LOL, in 1000 years, gender might very well be an outdated concept.
|
Treating someone with a mental problem by physically deforming their body isn't helping them.
There are people who want to have their arms and legs removed, clearly they have mental problems, but they don't care, they want their limbs removed.
I argue it's unethical to indulge their mental issue in such a way. Treat the underlying root mental issue.
It's a lot trickier with gender confusion, as the causes are varied, but hacking off body parts via surgery to indulge someone's delusion is not compassionate or progress. We've gone from calling these people demonic which is ridiculous and stupid to another stupid extreme of refusing to acknowledge or treat them and just pretend like there is no problem.
When someone is convinced they are covered in bugs we shouldn't spray them down with bug spray to make them feel better, we need to treat their issues.
|
On December 06 2012 07:24 Crawdad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 07:13 Zaqwert wrote:
Doesn't matter what this particular organization says or any other organization.
The entire world can pretend something, doesn't make it true.
In 1000 years when medical science looks back at this time and see's we were "helping" people by mutilating their genitals they are gonna think we were a bunch of idiots. LOL, in 1000 years, gender might very well be an outdated concept.
Gender was invented by hundreds of millions of years of evolution, it's not going anywhere anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
