Transgender question

[AwesomeHatMan]

(Snip)

Hi CrystalShadow,

I'm confused why you say "that's reductionism bordering on the absurd...". If one intends to define something they need to set the definition for it. That's how defining something works. The two definitions are the ones I have encountered in my experience. You may say that there is no definition or that the definition is so complex it can't be explained, in which case there is no point to using the words male or female (Note: in this paragraph these words are referring to sex). In the androgen insensitivity syndrome case, yeah they maybe pretty much females and for all intents and purposes physiologically, they may as well be considered female if we were talking about a characteristic (say body fat%, but I don't know if that's a good example). The male with androgen insensitivity syndrome would have female characteristics but because of whatever definition we set they are still male. That's it. This does not imply how the person should act, feel or be treated. The definition only means what the definition means. So the individual would be a male with androgen insensitivity syndrome who therefore presents female characteristics. Whether it's useful to categorise this male with other males for other purposes (such as saying average body fat%s for males) is irrelevant, words only mean what we choose them to mean and if we need new definitions we make new definitions. As I said earlier the IOC or gyms or governments can come up with all sorts of rules that need not apply to these definitions.

If you are referring to me with "people find that kind of completely abstract ethereal kind of reasoning so appealing they try and use it to override everything else" I struggle to see where I tried to override everything else or what reasoning I tried to apply. You were debating what the definition for sex in humans was, I did my best to give it to you then asked how it was meant to relate to the thread.

If you were to respond I would like you to explain why it matters not just restate that it matters. I would also appreciate if you, after typing out what you had to say, rethought the message you were trying to convey and then review and edit what you were about to post as I struggle to see what I was supposed to take from next paragraphs you posted.

If RubyT's question is so poor that it is not worth answering constructively then you should not be on this thread. The question does make sense and I believe it is a reasonable one. I potentially would have said either "What do you think caused you to be transgender?" or "What is it exactly that you feel that makes you transgender/want to switch sex and how do you believe sexes differ" rather than how he worded it but what was said seems fine. I also find you are being disrespectful.

I agree that nobody chooses to be dysphoric (or their sexual orientation, race or species for that matter). Some others do believe that. However I do not (nor do I think RubyT) believe that.

I agree if you do not want to be reasonable with a response then no response would be a good choice.

Best Wishes

 

[AwesomeHatMan]

(NOTE: THIS HAS BEEN EDITED BY AWESOMEHATMAN TO FORM SECTIONS FOR EASIER READING)

you will find that most people do let their sex rule their thoughts and actions. Women who don't act feminine are called "tomboys" at best and treated like lesbians when they're not at worst. And if you're not manly, you MUST be gay. Whether it's a social structure or mere sexual dimorphism is up for debate since every culture we know of except possibly some remote tribal cultures separates roles along lines of sex.

sexual identity is a brain issue. During development, the genitals form after the brain. No one fully understands why or how, but the brain can in rare cases match in chemistry the "wrong" set of genitals since those don't form until later.

As for how one "knows" that one is transgender, unfortunately there is no safe or humane test for this other than the perception of the individual.

They're forced to act as something that feels completely antithetical to what they are, no it isn't normal, because literally everyone else does not feel this way. It's something you feel even before puberty, which then raises its own issues.

All this being said, actual study of transgenderism has been slow and hobbled by cultural and religious biases getting in the way of legitimate research. When I was still religious, I was shamed into hiding my feelings and opinions, and indoctrinated into believing trans people were just sick freaks with a fetish and, therefore, so was I. But discarding that shell and being free of a girlfriend who (aside from the "allowing premarital sex" thing) was insanely fundamentalist has allowed me to stop denying my nature.

Hi Nieroshai,

Thank you for responding. I too do not have a degree in development psychology, so do not despair. I feel like you said what you wanted to say well. I know I don't have a PhD in everything, I doubt anyone else does as well so I hope you do not feel disheartened from giving your insight. I broke up your post into sections and then replied to each section.

So, in my opinion at least, this is just sexism and the expectation that males/females will accept societally defined gender roles. It seems to be common consensus that this is wrong. Females may be more maternal due to physiology and hormones etc. but the idea that men must be masculine and women must be feminine is an idea that people are trying to progress out of.

I agree sexual identity is a brain issue (off-topic but isn't every personality or emotional issue really a brain issue when you get down to it). I would say the brain is constantly forming or at least until say 25 but I get what you mean... in terms of the brain structure vs dysphoria that thing which MarsAtlas was talking about, my response is still the same, we don't know about causality of these two characteristics yet (as far as I'm aware). But I am aware that one can experience dysphoria.

I believe this perception is what people are referring to as the source of knowing that one is dysphoric

I believe people shouldn't be forced in such a way (going back to the sexism thing from earlier).

I honestly regret that cultural and religious biases have harmed people such as yourself and I believe the world would be better off without these biases.

What I had meant to try and ask in my previous post was "What is it about the other sex which makes dysphoric individuals think that they should be of that sex?". From what you said it interpret your answer as being because they want to accept the other sex's gender roles (Note: This contrasts with how I interpreted the post by MarsAtlas)... whereas I believe gender roles shouldn't exist and as a follow-on effect dysphoria due to desired gender roles would not occur.

Best wishes

 

[AwesomeHatMan]

(SNIP)

Hi IMissedThatOne,

I am not an expert either. Nothing wrong with quick research.

It is horrible to hear again, even though I already knew, that some dysphoric individuals were more or less tortured in the name of therapy. I hope you know I do not endorse this and know that this disgusts me. I justed wanted to emphasise that just because therapy has been tried before it does not mean there is not basis for therapy. The reason it may not have had an effect maybe because it was performed incorrectly (not to say I know how therapy should be performed should even a method exist).

I am glad to hear you are open to questions and others' thinking.

I believe that dysphoria arises from the beliefs about gender roles of those surrounding the child becoming ingrained and later clashes of the child's personality with the expected behaviours of their sex causes dysphoria. As such, changing the environment the child is raised in by instead having the parents teach the child to reject gender roles would mean that dysphoria would not occur. This idea is kind of like preventative therapy except it is more that one is removing the child's belief in gender roles rather than adding acceptance of their sex if you know what I'm trying to say. However if what I interpreted MarsAtlas saying is true then sexual identity is not necessarily caused by exposure to gender roles in which case I just don't know.

Once again I am not an expert nor do I have the data I would like on this either.

Best wishes

 

[Nieroshai]

I would say, as clearly as I can, that I am choosing to change my sex because it does not match how my brain works. It is not simply that I wish I was female; it is that for my entire life a penis has forced me into pretending to be something that ill-suits me. It's a matter of how the brain works, and how things work during fetal development.

This I can concur with, but I think it's dangerous to assume that there is some normality of psychology to begin with. All humans are walking bags of neuroses. I knew a few trans people who couldn't give voice to the existential chasm between someone assuming they were a boy because 'X' when they couldn't see such qualities in themselves. (EDIT for clarity) It wasn't just a case of 'this, this right here. Brain fits.' ... it was more, 'this works well.'

By making it a purely essentialist reasoning kind of excludes the nature that identity is espoused self-expresion. Something that you can forge either now or later. That doesn't make it so much of a 'choice', but rather the pursuit to finding 'what fits' ... I know that kind of sounds the same, but I think there is a natural dichotomy between cognition and intuition. That trans identity can arise through an exploration of either.

The last thing we want to do is derail treatment because there is a cast iron template to gender identity and its treatment, and some doctor subjectively decides that a patient doesn't fit ... I know there is psychological criterion to follow. But like most psychoanalysis, it's a range of criterion, and not all of them are relative.

For this reason, it's also not so difficult to see trans identity can arise through a various range of feelings and rationalisations on different things. If we start shoehorning people both inside or outside some cast iron template, then we're missing the point of identity as self-expression in the first place.

Sure, people can choose to act as whatever they wish, and even believe that they're otherkin, but I'm a rationalist; I will not discuss something I cannot quantify. I have another post up somewhere on this thread that explains more, but I don't deal in subjectivity because it's too plastic to debate honestly.

 

[Nieroshai]

(NOTE: THIS HAS BEEN EDITED BY AWESOMEHATMAN TO FORM SECTIONS FOR EASIER READING)

you will find that most people do let their sex rule their thoughts and actions. Women who don't act feminine are called "tomboys" at best and treated like lesbians when they're not at worst. And if you're not manly, you MUST be gay. Whether it's a social structure or mere sexual dimorphism is up for debate since every culture we know of except possibly some remote tribal cultures separates roles along lines of sex.

sexual identity is a brain issue. During development, the genitals form after the brain. No one fully understands why or how, but the brain can in rare cases match in chemistry the "wrong" set of genitals since those don't form until later.

As for how one "knows" that one is transgender, unfortunately there is no safe or humane test for this other than the perception of the individual.

They're forced to act as something that feels completely antithetical to what they are, no it isn't normal, because literally everyone else does not feel this way. It's something you feel even before puberty, which then raises its own issues.

All this being said, actual study of transgenderism has been slow and hobbled by cultural and religious biases getting in the way of legitimate research. When I was still religious, I was shamed into hiding my feelings and opinions, and indoctrinated into believing trans people were just sick freaks with a fetish and, therefore, so was I. But discarding that shell and being free of a girlfriend who (aside from the "allowing premarital sex" thing) was insanely fundamentalist has allowed me to stop denying my nature.

Hi Nieroshai,

Thank you for responding. I too do not have a degree in development psychology, so do not despair. I feel like you said what you wanted to say well. I know I don't have a PhD in everything, I doubt anyone else does as well so I hope you do not feel disheartened from giving your insight. I broke up your post into sections and then replied to each section.

So, in my opinion at least, this is just sexism and the expectation that males/females will accept societally defined gender roles. It seems to be common consensus that this is wrong. Females may be more maternal due to physiology and hormones etc. but the idea that men must be masculine and women must be feminine is an idea that people are trying to progress out of.

I agree sexual identity is a brain issue (off-topic but isn't every personality or emotional issue really a brain issue when you get down to it). I would say the brain is constantly forming or at least until say 25 but I get what you mean... in terms of the brain structure vs dysphoria that thing which MarsAtlas was talking about, my response is still the same, we don't know about causality of these two characteristics yet (as far as I'm aware). But I am aware that one can experience dysphoria.

I believe this perception is what people are referring to as the source of knowing that one is dysphoric

I believe people shouldn't be forced in such a way (going back to the sexism thing from earlier).

I honestly regret that cultural and religious biases have harmed people such as yourself and I believe the world would be better off without these biases.

What I had meant to try and ask in my previous post was "What is it about the other sex which makes dysphoric individuals think that they should be of that sex?". From what you said it interpret your answer as being because they want to accept the other sex's gender roles (Note: This contrasts with how I interpreted the post by MarsAtlas)... whereas I believe gender roles shouldn't exist and as a follow-on effect dysphoria due to desired gender roles would not occur.

Best wishes

I will disagree on this. Sexism isn't the pure source of gender roles. We are a sexually dimorphic species, and this is visible worldwide and has informed culture, not vice versa. Sexism is a complicated subject, and things that aren't even sexist are sexist. Listening to a lot of people, being gay is sexist and being transgender is sexist because of an acknowledgement that dimorphism exists not just in the body but in the brain. Simply put, if you insist on bandying about a nebulous label like sexism, we very well may be done here. I'm not saying that it's a desire to fit societal gender roles. First of all, our bodies do not feel natural to us at all. This is what you'd categorize as definite dysphoria. The desire to alter one's body in this situation is less of whim-based customization and more of a normatization of body to mind. However, there's also where we come to terms with what I could otherwise be doing if I wasn't as I currently am. Without the prejudices that exist BECAUSE the gender binary is a very real thing borne from the nature of a vast majority of our species, I cannot act as what I am without consequence. If I change my body, however, I have no such inhibition. I will say again: there is such a thing as a transvestite. That is a person who, while completely set in their natural sex and gender, chooses to dress and act as female, whether for entertainment or privilege. It is completely different from someone who wants to physically become what they have reason to believe they should have been in the first place. In addition, you get into the brain constantly forming and this is true, but by the time you're born most of the formative work is done and all that's left is refinement. It's a leap of logic to liken a preferred gender to, say, a favorite color just because both are claimed to be mental constructs. One goes far beyond likes, dislikes, and the human habit of customization. Even if I did not have to worry about the people around me, however, I would still want to be physically female. Regardless of anyone's opinions, statements, and actions. If women wore overalls and drove stakes for a living and men stayed home with the kids, I'd still feel a need to be female. It has nothing to do with what's worn over the body and everything to do with what one does with their body.
I'm aware I've gone on for a huge amount of words. I'm not very good at being concise.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Sure, people can choose to act as whatever they wish, and even believe that they're otherkin, but I'm a rationalist; I will not discuss something I cannot quantify. I have another post up somewhere on this thread that explains more, but I don't deal in subjectivity because it's too plastic to debate honestly.

What does rationalism have to do with science? I'm a rationalist. Also, you're talking abut the right to self-identity and self authentication. I could argue self authentication, ala Simone de Beauvoir, should be treated as objective in and of itself, given that expression of self need no real explanation for its existence.

By trying to frame this into a purely scientific, quantifiable 'specimen' (for lack of a better), you are in turn making the subject entirely subjective. Because you try to labour for an answer to something that, in a moral perspective (and thus, social) should never have to be questioned about its nature. There is no universal man or woman, pretending as such is what makes it subjective. Treating people as individuals capable of individual thought and agency, and having rightful ownership of their expression ... well that's an objective truth.

 

[IMissedThatOne]

(SNIP)

Hi IMissedThatOne,

I am not an expert either. Nothing wrong with quick research.

It is horrible to hear again, even though I already knew, that some dysphoric individuals were more or less tortured in the name of therapy. I hope you know I do not endorse this and know that this disgusts me. I justed wanted to emphasise that just because therapy has been tried before it does not mean there is not basis for therapy. The reason it may not have had an effect maybe because it was performed incorrectly (not to say I know how therapy should be performed should even a method exist).

I am glad to hear you are open to questions and others' thinking.

I believe that dysphoria arises from the beliefs about gender roles of those surrounding the child becoming ingrained and later clashes of the child's personality with the expected behaviours of their sex causes dysphoria. As such, changing the environment the child is raised in by instead having the parents teach the child to reject gender roles would mean that dysphoria would not occur. This idea is kind of like preventative therapy except it is more that one is removing the child's belief in gender roles rather than adding acceptance of their sex if you know what I'm trying to say. However if what I interpreted MarsAtlas saying is true then sexual identity is not necessarily caused by exposure to gender roles in which case I just don't know.






Once again I am not an expert nor do I have the data I would like on this either.

Best wishes

Unforunatley I have no insight in what therapy (and how well) was performed on the transgender community. I atleast think it's fair to say that if the mordern day psychiatrics and other researchers do not see any more benefit in trying to alter a person gender
identity why even try it again? The transgender phenomina has been know since the beginning o the last century ( in medical literature; try to look for magnus hirschfeld if you're interested) and since then no real good psychotherpeutic treament has been found while gender reassigment and transitioning have become international standard ( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15532739.2011.700873#.VPws3uHcg34 ). Why is that? Afterall a commitee has to decide what becomes a standard procedure and what not. I can however not tell what evidence exactley made them change their minds since I don't have any professional experience in that field.



Gender Roles: My problem with that theory is that it leaves a lot of questions open. You see a lot of people reject traditionel gender roles for lots of reasons but they don't necessarily want any intervention into their body or would call themselves transgender. There are very masculine butch women or very feminine man. There are people who are transvestites but never claim to be the other gender but just enjoy wearing clothing that is not considered to be appropriate for their sex. And then your average person might not like things that conform with the social gender norms. All of them were raised in the strict gender role enviroment.

My point is the effect of enforced gender roles on the individual seems to vary but what makes a person not only reject behavior or clothing that is imposed on them but also the sex characteristics of their body. (Sorry I don't trying to imply that every trans person rejects them but some do)

When and why does the conciousness arise that you're feeling your in the wrong gendered body when for most people this thought never even crosses their mind in their entire life?

I again do not have the answers. I'll tried to do a quick research again. This is one of the most recent reviews of literature dealing with the one of the origins of gender identity. Study: http://aace.metapress.com/content/2k70161258g45656/

In case you don't want to read it I'll qoute the conclusion.

"Conclusion
Current data suggest a biological etiology for transgender identity. Studies of DSD
patients and neuroanatomical studies provide the strongest evidence for the organic basis of
transgender identity. Sample sizes of the majority of studies to date on this subject are small, and
conclusions must be interpreted with caution. Further research is required to assign specific
biological mechanisms for gender identity"

You see the best thing I can give you is. There seems to be an underlying biological predisposition but exactly how an individual becomes gender dyshphoric is still unknown.

As a little extra I found this study of twins who were reared apart but both were
gender dyshphoric:
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2010to2014/2014-identical.html
There also seems to be some genetic factors playing a role since the prevelance of gender dsyphoria is much higher in monozygotic twins:
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2010to2014/2013-transsexuality.html

But here is the thing I agree on. An strict enforement of gender norms when child is somewhat gender variant only seems to worsen the problem and might cause psyhological stress.

One a positive note however: I think the recent development of being more and more open to transgender identities might atleast somewhat help. You see back in the past the only way to be the opposite sex (in the social gender role) was to get the surgery ( not really true there were people who lived without surgery by just passing well, but atleast in a lot of minds of people just finding out about transgenerism), so individuals who just wanted to live as a woman might have gotten the surgery or other interventions because they felt it was the only way. Nowadays they have more options.

 

[funnydude6556]

From what I've heard from transgendered people they feel like they've always been a certain gender, like a guy who has always felt like a girl. In their mind they've always been a girl. Personally I feel if someone wants to change something about themselves to feel good then that's up to them and we shouldn't stand in the way of their happiness just to keep this idea of normal that we've built in our minds.

 

[Lilani]

I've known a couple of people who are,

Um ... ok. Maybe.

Look, I think people make more of this than it merits. Really.

My friend and I both left the service, both nuke submariners, if you know what that means.

It was more a 'he got it sorted, and then he was a she, and she was the same person', if that makes any sense at all to you.

She wasn't broken before, she wasn't broken after, just happier....this is maybe '98-ish, before the buzzwords?

Make more of what than it merits, being transgender? And why so hostile? If you've got a different idea of what transgenderism/gender identity disorder is (not a name that came from tumblr, that's what the APA calls it [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder]) I'd be happy to discuss it with you, but not if everything you say is going to be so patronizing and flippant.

 

[Nieroshai]

Sure, people can choose to act as whatever they wish, and even believe that they're otherkin, but I'm a rationalist; I will not discuss something I cannot quantify. I have another post up somewhere on this thread that explains more, but I don't deal in subjectivity because it's too plastic to debate honestly.

What does rationalism have to do with science? I'm a rationalist. Also, you're talking abut the right to self-identity and self authentication. I could argue self authentication, ala Simone de Beauvoir, should be treated as objective in and of itself, given that expression of self need no real explanation for its existence.

By trying to frame this into a purely scientific, quantifiable 'specimen' (for lack of a better), you are in turn making the subject entirely subjective. Because you try to labour for an answer to something that, in a moral perspective (and thus, social) should never have to be questioned about its nature. There is no universal man or woman, pretending as such is what makes it subjective. Treating people as individuals capable of individual thought and agency, and having rightful ownership of their expression ... well that's an objective truth.

What...? Rationality has EVERYTHING to do with science! Observability, patterns, and evidence are FOUNDATIONAL to science! You're turning this into philosophy, and disguising said philosophy as objective truth. Objectivity is based on evidence and proof and studies, not "opinions" and "rights."

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

What...? Rationality has EVERYTHING to do with science! Observability, patterns, and evidence are FOUNDATIONAL to science! You're turning this into philosophy, and disguising said philosophy as objective truth. Objectivity is based on evidence and proof and studies, not "opinions" and "rights."

You're mixing up terms. What you're describing is empiricism.

Rationalism does not preclude science, it's just that you're describing two very different things.

Also, if you can prove to me how anything spoken is not merely an extension of the ego then you'd bring a welcome quiet to thousands of years of philosophy, psychology and science.

It seems childish to pretend that human rights does not extend into the nature of a topic concerning self-identity. To ignore it is to be derailing the subject alltogether.

 

[Pinkilicious]

Well, for all outward appearances, how is it different? I mean, I'm actually asking. I'm not talking about that condition that you can have your chromosomes backwards, but what is the actual difference between one person believing they are a woman trapped in a man's body, and another person believing they are a wolf trapped in a man's body?

how is being gay any different from people who want to have sex with dogs?

That is a paraphilia, and has nothing to do with sexual preference. You can be into paraphilia long enough that it BECOMES your preference (ie zoosexual), but it is not something that is ingrained. Of course, how one gets the paraphilia in the first place likely goes into nature vs nurture but that is a separate argument.
Also, I ctrl f'd, and see nothing from Transsexual.org, thank you, thank you one and all! I just wanted to say that.