Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

One really funny thing about how the brain works, is that a lot of mental issues can stem from hormonal issues caused by one's biology.

Possibly, but chopping up the body shouldn't be the right way to fix that. Check the chromosomes for true sex, then issue hormone therapy to better align towards the correct (genetic) sex, Finish up with psychological counseling.

So, going by that logic, women with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome should undergo psychological counseling, as they do have a Y chromosome.

I don't see why not.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
I can take a blood sample from anyone and discover their true sex. Of course, there are legitimate problems with the sex chromosomes, but they are abnormalities.

Appart from, thats not true. Biology is not a simple matter of chromosomes and DNA. As reserch is showing now it is the expression of these genes that matter, and the expression of genes is a matter of many many factors. In gender there is no black and white and no difinitive tests. Biology almost never gives black and white answers.

There are some that argue being gay is a matter of psycology, some biology. Personaly I say who gives a dam who you sleep with.

I can see the argument with trans people that it is alot of dangerous surgery to undergo when we don't know for sure the underlieing cause, but then so are many other forms of plastic surgery. Most reconstructive surgery is not vital, but just to make people feel better about there bodys. Burns victims for example, are at one end of the scale. They normaly have no need for the surgery. We still do boob jobs, vaginoplasty, nose jobs, face lifts etc.

Also, before undergoing sex change surgery people have to undergo a MASSIVE amount of psycological testing, counseling etc. It is not a matter of turn up at the hospital, go "I want tittys" or "I want a cock" and a few cuts and allot of cash later, bam. It is a very very long process with alot of safeguards, support, etc.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

One really funny thing about how the brain works, is that a lot of mental issues can stem from hormonal issues caused by one's biology.

Possibly, but chopping up the body shouldn't be the right way to fix that. Check the chromosomes for true sex, then issue hormone therapy to better align towards the correct (genetic) sex, Finish up with psychological counseling.

So, going by that logic, women with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome should undergo psychological counseling, as they do have a Y chromosome.

I don't see why not.

So despite the fact that the only exception a woman with CAIS may experience in her life is that she would not have a period and would be unable to have children, and despite the fact that outside of that, both physiologically and psychologically, they are clearly female, they should undergo psychological counseling for the sole purpose that they have a Y chromosome?

I have nothing against people actually changing their gender...I believe however surgery should be avoided at all costs if not life threatening (even if burn victims) unless there is a non-invasive treatment, which is why re-balancing the hormones is a much more noble goal than mutilation.

So despite the fact that the only exception a woman with CAIS may experience in her life is that she would not have a period and would be unable to have children, and despite the fact that outside of that, both physiologically and psychologically, they are clearly female, they should undergo psychological counseling for the sole purpose that they have a Y chromosome?

Anyone born with a abnormality should get psychological help to cope with it. It just obviously wouldn't be as a big a session as more serious conditions.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
I have nothing against people actually changing their gender...I believe however surgery should be avoided at all costs if not life threatening (even if burn victims) unless there is a non-invasive treatment, which is why re-balancing the hormones is a much more noble goal than mutilation.

So despite the fact that the only exception a woman with CAIS may experience in her life is that she would not have a period and would be unable to have children, and despite the fact that outside of that, both physiologically and psychologically, they are clearly female, they should undergo psychological counseling for the sole purpose that they have a Y chromosome?

Anyone born with a abnormality should get psychological help to cope with it. It just obviously wouldn't be as a big a session as more serious conditions.

The thing is, post natally, not a lot can be done through hormones to actually change one's orientation or identification.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
I have nothing against people actually changing their gender...I believe however surgery should be avoided at all costs if not life threatening (even if burn victims) unless there is a non-invasive treatment, which is why re-balancing the hormones is a much more noble goal than mutilation.

So despite the fact that the only exception a woman with CAIS may experience in her life is that she would not have a period and would be unable to have children, and despite the fact that outside of that, both physiologically and psychologically, they are clearly female, they should undergo psychological counseling for the sole purpose that they have a Y chromosome?

Anyone born with a abnormality should get psychological help to cope with it. It just obviously wouldn't be as a big a session as more serious conditions.

What is this.. I don't even...


You are aware that every human on this planet has some form of abnormality right? I'd better go drag myself to the shrink now because I was born with gakky feet.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Thanks Sig, you had to go and make me agree with Peregrine

I made two people happy with a single post then - I'm awesome!

My point is: Peregrine's post is just a perfect example of hypocrits at work. You feel offended when people do not happily embrace any sort of life style and claim that they are intolerant but at the same time, are unwilling to tolerate those people's opinions...which is a textbook definition of hypocrisy.

I am fine with them living how they want, it's their very own choice and if they want to get some boobs, sure, why not, as long as I'm not paying for it. It's their choice after all.

You cannot, however, force me to think that one should praise them for finding their "true gender", because I don't believe in that transgender stuff. They need psychological, not surgical help, and by happily praising their choice to go visit Dr. Boob, you automatically despite those who actively seek (and find!) psychological help with their issue.

Sigvatr...hypocrisy abounds when it to comes to this issue.

There are many people who want to make themselves feel like good people by accepting just about anything.

GG

Hey, if it's not hurting anyone why not?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


How is that?

If I congratulate a batsman's performance in cricket, I am not despising people who prefer to play football.

The analogy doesn't fit imo. The thing is that "transgender" issues come up, very rarely, but they do exist, and in media and public belief, the right way is to just slap some boobs on and pretend you're a female (or vice versa). At the same time, what should those people think that do not want to follow that way and look for constructive aka psychological help? According to the general belief, they should perceive their way as wrong as "all other" (not the case, just perspective / subjective perception at that point) do sth. else.

You seem to have a very skewed and uneducated perception of how transition works, Gender Identity Disorder (or Gender Dyspohria as the upcoming DSM-V will refer to it) is a recognized medical condition and is treated as such. After intense psychological counseling, individuals suffering the condition are referred to an endocrinologist and started on hormone replacement therapy, this process takes a few years, and psych care is ongoing through out the procedure for transitioning men and women. This process can include a number of minor plastic surgeries as part of the process ranging from tracheal shaves, breast augmentation, mastectomies, facial feminization or masculization... it depends on the individual as much as anything else. At such a time as an individual can afford it and they are judged medically and psychologically ready, an individual can opt for sex reassignment surgery. After that some therapy will be ongoing but for the most part this disorder is "cured" as the individual's sex and gender are now in proper alignment.

 generalgrog wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Thanks Sig, you had to go and make me agree with Peregrine

I made two people happy with a single post then - I'm awesome!

My point is: Peregrine's post is just a perfect example of hypocrits at work. You feel offended when people do not happily embrace any sort of life style and claim that they are intolerant but at the same time, are unwilling to tolerate those people's opinions...which is a textbook definition of hypocrisy.

I am fine with them living how they want, it's their very own choice and if they want to get some boobs, sure, why not, as long as I'm not paying for it. It's their choice after all.

You cannot, however, force me to think that one should praise them for finding their "true gender", because I don't believe in that transgender stuff. They need psychological, not surgical help, and by happily praising their choice to go visit Dr. Boob, you automatically despite those who actively seek (and find!) psychological help with their issue.

Sigvatr...hypocrisy abounds when it to comes to this issue.

There are many people who want to make themselves feel like good people by accepting just about anything.

GG

So by that then, I take it you seek to make yourself feel like a good person by accepting no one that strays out of your very slender world view? If that is indeed the plan I must say well done!

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


How is that?

If I congratulate a batsman's performance in cricket, I am not despising people who prefer to play football.

The analogy doesn't fit imo. The thing is that "transgender" issues come up, very rarely, but they do exist, and in media and public belief, the right way is to just slap some boobs on and pretend you're a female (or vice versa). At the same time, what should those people think that do not want to follow that way and look for constructive aka psychological help? According to the general belief, they should perceive their way as wrong as "all other" (not the case, just perspective / subjective perception at that point) do sth. else.

That's a straw man argument.

People suffering gender identity confusion have a number of means available for dealing with it. You are trying to say there is only one way, imposed by society, which is clearly wrong given how contentious the issue actually is.

 generalgrog wrote:


Sigvatr...hypocrisy abounds when it to comes to this issue.

There are many people who want to make themselves feel like good people by accepting just about anything.

GG

Explain the hypocrisy sunshine.

Because I find someone who has for years come into the OT to bleat about how Christians are a persecuted minority in America and Christians need moar rights and oh, it's like the lions in the Colosseum all over again and won't someone think of the children! ad nauseum but who then jumps gleefully into a thread like this to, well, persecute a tiny minority of vulnerable people in society to be a giant gakking HYPOCRITE.

But I can't really find the hypocrisy in tolerant people getting angry when confronted with intolerant and insulting people.

But I can't really find the hypocrisy in tolerant people getting angry when confronted with intolerant and insulting people.

Because its discrimination and also very 'thought police' like.

GeneralGrog, the only ones who are being hypocritical here are you, Sigvatr, and Sick.

Pitiful hypocrites full of hate...

Especially you. Your hate and disdain towards those who are different than you is both un-Christian, and un-Godly.

"Don't be an donkey-cave" =/= "You have to be PC and celebrate different people"

Telling people what to think is thought police though.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Telling people what to think is thought police though.

Is Dakka's Rule Number 1 a rule that is thought police?

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Telling people what to think is thought police though.

See there is your problem.

You keep on confusing "what I am thinking" with "how I am allowed to act towards others".

I agree.

Children should be left to do whatever they want, and not given any education.

 d-usa wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Telling people what to think is thought police though.

See there is your problem.

You keep on confusing "what I am thinking" with "how I am allowed to act towards others".

The important part is one affects the other. If you tell people what they can and can not act like, it will therefore affect how they feel they can think. This is ok if applied to everyone fairly. But it isn't. Thus we get special snowflake groups.

Children should be left to do whatever they want, and not given any education.

What makes your views any more right than anyone elses? Thats the problem. People should be tolerant of everyone's beliefs.

Well, Hyena, is it?

 Melissia wrote:
Well, Hyena, is it?

It is.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Well, Hyena, is it?

It is.

Why are you posting on a forum whose rules you disagree with?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Telling people what to think is thought police though.

See there is your problem.

You keep on confusing "what I am thinking" with "how I am allowed to act towards others".

The important part is one affects the other. If you tell people what they can and can not act like, it will therefore affect how they feel they can think. This is ok if applied to everyone fairly. But it isn't. Thus we get special snowflake groups.

Well, in that case you are a special snowflake as well.

Because I am thinking many things, but unlike you I know that I cannot just tell everyone what I think about you

 Melissia wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Well, Hyena, is it?

It is.

Why are you posting on a forum whose rules you disagree with?

Because protesting is honestly stupid.

Well, in that case you are a special snowflake as well.

Because I am thinking many things, but unlike you I know that I cannot just tell everyone what I think about you

I don't really care. It would be childish to be bothered by it.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Well, Hyena, is it?

It is.

Why are you posting on a forum whose rules you disagree with?

Because protesting is honestly stupid.

No, the stupid here is your argument. If you honestly believe that asking people to act with respect for others is "thought police", you probably don't have much of value to add to any discussion here nayway.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
If you tell people what they can and can not act like, it will therefore affect how they feel they can think. This is ok if applied to everyone fairly. But it isn't. Thus we get special snowflake groups.

I'm sorry, but that sounds JUST like every justification for homophobia, racism, sexism and dissability discrimination I have ever heard "Why should they be treated better than us..."

No, the stupid here is your argument. If you honestly believe that asking people to act with respect for others is "thought police", you probably don't have much of value to add to any discussion here nayway.

Except your not doing that. Your demanding respect for one group, while not giving any to the group your asking it from.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

No, the stupid here is your argument. If you honestly believe that asking people to act with respect for others is "thought police", you probably don't have much of value to add to any discussion here nayway.

Except your not doing that. Your demanding respect for one group, while not giving any to the group your asking it from.

What? Who? How? The slight is entierly in your mind... Please (And I'm sure I should not be doing this...) do explain WHAT group is not being given respect? Unless you are talking about "people who are transphobic" as a group?

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

No, the stupid here is your argument. If you honestly believe that asking people to act with respect for others is "thought police", you probably don't have much of value to add to any discussion here nayway.

Except your not doing that. Your demanding respect for one group, while not giving any to the group your asking it from.

What? Who? How? The slight is entierly in your mind... Please (And I'm sure I should not be doing this...) do explain WHAT group is not being given respect? Unless you are talking about "people who are transphobic" as a group?

Yes, I am.

"I don't agree with what you said, but I'll defend your right to say it"

Is quite honestly an honorable thing. To say a groups views are taboo from discussion is silencing the opposition and that has never ended well for humanity, no matter how good the reason.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
[snip]

So you believe that Dakka's Rule Number 1 is wrong, then?

Stop trying to change hte subject.