Is Transexuality a Neurosis?

[Cognisant]

I think the trans rights/acceptance movement is a follow on from the gay rights/acceptance movement in that for the longest time mainstream society was in denial about gay people, they were told that they were just sexual deviants and it's all in their head, that they just need to stop being gay, and there are people who still hold this position even to the present day.

Soo, yeah, put the torches and pitchforks down and try to hear me out.

I get it, I really do, I consider the treatment of Alan Turing one of the greatest tragedies of all time not just in the sense that something bad happened to someone (an understatement I know) but rather that humanity as a whole is poorer for it, the man was a genius and had he been recognized and celebrated as such the world today could have been better off.

But just because it turned out that homosexuality is in fact real and an inherent part of some people's physiology and thus psychology, doesn't mean that transsexuality is necessarily the same. It's certainly similar and it's certainly understandable that there's a stigma against questioning the validity of it, because we don't want to go repeating the mistakes of the past. We don't want to risk being the people who gaslight trans people when we're so appalled and ashamed of the people who gas-lit gay people.

But there's also the possibility that transsexuality is different, that it is a neurosis that needs to be treated rather than enabled, if nothing else we need to seriously consider if hormone treatments and gender reassignment surgery is actually helping people because if not by allowing and perhaps even encouraging it we could be causing incredible harm.

Hence I feel there is a need for a discussion, and to anyone who is trans and reading this I sincerely apologize this discussion is no doubt causing, it's not intended to be a personal attack but I can totally see how it could be received as such.

Now what I see as the crux of the issue is how can someone be in the wrong body?

I understand homosexuality as a minor form of intersexuality, some people for whatever reason don't develop fully into either a male or female or some parts go one way or the other, so a gay person is someone for whom that part of their brain that tells them what they're attracted to didn't develop the same as their body did.

What I don't understand is how someone can instinctively feel that they're in the wrong body? It's like if someone who was blind from birth talked about how they miss watching sunsets, but they've never watched a sunset, how can someone miss something they've never known? How can the only body they've ever known feel wrong and foreign to them?

I have read about trans people talking about their experiences with hormones and hormone suppressants and what really baffled me was a trans woman (i.e. born male) talking about his experiences with testosterone suppressants and how he dislikes how testosterone affects his mind. I absolutely understand that, from personal experiences as a male teenager testosterone is a hell of a drug and it fucks with you mercilessly, but what I don't understand is why is he taking testosterone suppressants when if it's a matter of estrogen/testosterone imbalance wouldn't it make more sense to do the opposite?

Although I don't really think a estrogen/testosterone imbalance is the issue, there's plenty of masculine women and feminine men around who aren't trans or even gay.

Finally as a parallel to transexuality there's furries and transhumanists like myself and I have absolutely no doubt that as genetic engineering and cybernetics develops there's going to be some kind of trans-neurosis that gets officially defined and treated as such. I think having the option to change gender or species or even become something else altogether is a great option to have but if someone is doing it to fix a lack of self acceptance I think that's attempting to run away from a problem you can never really escape from.

Furthermore the technology just isn't there yet, sure there's hormone treatments and cosmetic surgery and simple bionics available, and the technology is getting better all the time, but I still wouldn't recommend any of it especially to a young person grappling with matters of personal identity.

 

[Hadoblado]

My understanding is that "enabling" is the current best "treatment".

I don't agree with your takes here, but I don't think they're *that* bad. There're probably a lot of people who would get mad over your wording and assumptions but I have no such stake and so I'm not gonna bother.

This thread is probably going to turn into cancer though. Good luck.

 

[washti]

*sends lazy cancer*

 

[Cognisant]

My understanding is that "enabling" is the current best "treatment".

Based on?

I know it's a bit unfair to announce transexuality could be a neurosis and then put the onus on others to prove why it isn't, but we're literally talking about cosmetic surgery and hormone treatments, I think it's fair to demand that such extreme measures require equally extreme justification.

*sends lazy cancer*

Thank you for your invaluable contribution.

 

[washti]

You're welcome. Sweet dying.

 

[Cognisant]

Do you insult me because you think I won't listen to reason?
Or is it the only retort you have?

 

[Cognisant]

I think transexuality is basically the same as a fursona, it's a crisis of self actualization, I'm sure we can all relate to that we all took the MBTI test to find out who we are even though it doesn't really tell you that. We all have things we identify with, be it a genre of music, a personal style, a sports team, a philosophy, we all seek out things that help us define who we are and we want it to be something fairly unique to us, something special so we can ourselves believe we are in some small way special.

Who am I, what am I about? I'm hardly shy about it and I can definitely see how it relates to my own struggles with personal hardship and depression, for a long time having a project to work on that meant more to me than myself was enough to keep me going.

I don't have a problem with trans people being trans, I do have a problem with woke culture but I see that as a separate matter, rather my interest in this is based on genuine concern because from my perspective (based on limited knowledge and experience) the normalisation of these extreme medical procedures is genuinely alarming.

 

[Puffy]

I think the issue is that transsexual people are very accustomed to being neuroticised or talked about as if something's wrong with them. And also that it's the experience of being neurotised that seems to be a major cause of the distress transgender people experience -- i.e. that other people don't perceive or accept them as they perceive themselves to be.

For example, if I met someone diagnosed with Borderline disorder they could deny that they have Borderline. But chances are unless they were misdiagnosed they're going to be experiencing some form of ongoing emotional distress. Being stigmatised for being labelled as neurotic is just a part of their problems (that would exist regardless.) Whereas if I met a transgender person who was happy in themselves and their identity, they're not neurotic. The idea of them being neurotic only exists when I call their idea of happiness neurotic. What's more their main problem only seems to exist because I am labelling them as neurotic.

I imagine this is what Hado means in saying that 'enabling' is the current best 'treatment.' This aspect of transsexuality, and homosexuality too, makes it stand out to me from other behaviours we would conventionally label as disorders.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

My criterion for qualifying a person as homophobic or transphobic is very simple. If you don't feel comfortable; around gay or trans people and if you don't feel comfortable in a society where there is trans marriage and trans adoption, where trans people are making out in front of you, when you are operated by a trans surgeon, where trans children are playing with or dating your children, then you are transphobic.

Now there are degrees to transphobia, most people are passively transphobic where they wouldn't do anything physically, but they would make comments like "Isn't it weird?" "Should they be allowed to do X?" and would deny any legislation allowing for equal rights to trans people.

Every transphobic person discusses trans people as if there was a problem that needed to be solved. Let them rule themselves as they see fit. It's not your role to dictate norms. It's completely unacceptable that you would discuss setting discriminatory policies or treating a free individual against their will as if they had homicidal tendencies and had to be forcefully kept in an asylum.

@Cognisant I would expect more flexibility out of a transhumanist. Can't cyborgs build their bodies however they want and even make themselves sexual hermaphrodites if they want to? Or do you want cyborgs to strictly appear male and female?

Alan Turing is a popular example, but nobody seems to care that gay people are opressed in present times. In the progressive west people still discriminate gays, don't want to be their friends, view them as different from themselves and other hetero people and at the same time they say that gays have the same rights and freedoms as they do.

I personally know two trans people and I'm good friends with them. They told me they were trans as a sign of trust and It's one of the most closely guarded secrets I have. They have to keep it a secret because the risk that society would destroy them is too great.

They are not happy people. The amount of hate, ostracism, intolerance they had to go through has made them bitter and fatalistic. One of them lost their job after their jealous ex had sent an email to their boss explaining that they are trans. That was enough for said boss to fire them and spread the news to their colleagues and completely humiliate them. Even though they had to go through an insane amount of hardship and intolerance they firmly believe in their identity to be the right one for them. They are both highly qualified intellectuals and non-violent heroes on par with Alan Turing, but without the spotlight that he got.

A lot of the anxiety and neurosis issues trans people are dealing with is caused by others. This is not much different from people who try to escape religion and are met with hatred, abuse and lack of support from their religious family which leads to them developing a religious trauma syndrome.

Even in the most progressive countries coming out as trans is not a safe thing. People hate oddity and one can't expect to keep the same friends and colleagues or be accepted. For what though? For a minor detail of their sexual characteristic and orientation? That's nobody's business to know or care what they have in their pants, it's not like you are their partner to care about their junk.

 

[washti]

Both, Cog. Your post is wordage which can be summed up as 'trans are sicko lets cure them. hormones and sex change bad tho. cure them for neurosis'

I think u are bored and looking for dopamine here. Go press some pants for the job it will help you. Gettit?

I insult you. Ugger Aussie.

 

[Puffy]

Can I just take a moment from the cancer spread to say that Darth Maul avatar fits your posts so perfectly, washti. You're the only person I've ever met who can take the film The Phantom Menace and somehow make it work. 10/10 avatar choice.

 

[Daddy]

Nobody really knows. Like you said, there are feminine men and masculine women that are straight or gay or bi, so why does someone feel the need to change sex? Incongruity with their gender and congruity with the opposite gender.

Now does that mean it's more a mental condition of their mind's own doing or they are/were the wrong gender (brain is misgendered by hormones at birth)? And is there really a concrete difference? Maybe not. Take a trans person and make them live their entire life, without any other human contact; now they would not even know the opposite gender existed. Would they still think they are trans? I don't think they'd have any point of reference for reaching that conclusion. So it's a complicated problem not just specific to the individual's own mind.

So there's pretty much two main competing theories with say MTF transgender. One is that they are very feminine men that are homosexual and would be much happier relating and living as a female in society. The other is more masculine, but has some incongruities, often more sexual, but also emotional that makes them feel they are the wrong gender. Either one could not change sex and potentially end up living their lives relatively adjusted anyway and there are examples of this as well. So then it becomes, which one is the correct answer? Well perhaps, they are both correct, just different ways of coming to terms with incongruities in gender. Maybe it just depends if it works for you or not; are you more authentic and genuine changing gender? Then whether gender really exists in a pure sense or whether they are truly the opposite gender doesn't really matter at that point.

So then is it an identity crisis or neurosis as you say? Well it wouldn't be any moreso than the fixation on the million other identities people use to define and influence their life and decisions, all the way down from your job to your hobbies to the things you buy and wear to the beliefs you have about yourself and the world to the confidence you've built up (or lack) and everything in between. But for some reason, it's easy to recognize and criticize transgenders when most people don't even recognize or question their own identity illusions and how that affects them or how they have built a life around them and how much happiness or suffering these identities bring them. Maybe they don't realize they are looking in a sort of metaphysical mirror and it bothers them.

In the end, I truly believe the obsession over transgenders is analogous to the pot calling the kettle black. They've failed to recognize their own human nature, but have no problem recognizing, analyzing, doubting, questioning, and critiquing it in transgenders. It shows a surprising lack of self-awareness, reflection, and introspection on what it means to be human. Dave Chappelle had a show about a transgender. There was a line by his transgender "friend" - ‘I don’t need you to understand me. I just need you to believe that I’m having a human experience.’ Thus to call it a neurosis is like a neurotic person calling another neurotic person neurotic because they have a different, harder to understand, and easier to pick on neurosis. Yet we all are neurotic; it's a strange everlasting human feature between our subconscious and conscious mind. And I'm extremely skeptical that identity should be treated as a mental illness or neurosis when every human mind needs and has some kind of identity to be who they are, whether it relates to neurosis or not.

I know that's not a perfect or scientific answer and it just leaves a lot of questions and pondering with no concrete or linear conclusions, but that's just the nature of identity. Maybe science can start to learn more, but regardless, it'll still come down to issues with identity, whether that was mostly given to you at birth, created environmentally, created willfully in an existential sense, or all the above. And science can't solve the observer effect in human psychology that defines and manifests identity and everything related to it. So science is probably theoretically limited with this anyway.

 

[Hadoblado]

Based on?

I know it's a bit unfair to announce transexuality could be a neurosis and then put the onus on others to prove why it isn't, but we're literally talking about cosmetic surgery and hormone treatments, I think it's fair to demand that such extreme measures require equally extreme justification.

Correct, it is unfair. If you establish your position that more harm is caused by the current treatment and acceptance than is mitigated, I will bother to substantiate my position that more harm is mitigated than is caused.

ATM, the level of your justification warrants me gesturing vaguely and saying "if doctors do it then it's probably good right?".

So for example:

• What proportion of people detransition?
• Does the suicide rate go up or down following transition?
• What is the self-reported satisfaction pre and post-transition?
• Is support for one's gender identity result in long-term harm or health?

 

[Cognisant]

@Daddy
Have I actually criticized trans people?

I've labelled the phenomenon a possible neurosis, that's not a criticism that's a acknowledgement that surgery in particular is objectively harmful, even if you're conducting surgery to save someone's life you're still cutting into them and you're trying to cause minimal harm whilst achieving some goal that results in a net benefit for the patient.

I'm not convinced that gender reassignment and hormone treatments are actually helping people, I'm not criticizing trans people and this knee-jerk REEEEEE-action people are having is exactly why I'm concerned about it.

Is this actually based on science?
Or are people too afraid of the backlash to question it?

ATM, the level of your justification warrants me gesturing vaguely and saying "if doctors do it then it's probably good right?".

Were we talking about lobotomies would you be so blasé?
That used to be a practiced medical procedure.

What about ADHD medication, do you think that's not over-prescribed?

So for example:

• What proportion of people detransition?
• Does the suicide rate go up or down following transition?
• What is the self-reported satisfaction pre and post-transition?
• Is support for one's gender identity result in long-term harm or health?

I'm looking for studies and the results I'm finding are frustratingly all over the place and it doesn't help that different studies have different definitions for (for example) what constitutes detransitioning.

@Cognisant I would expect more flexibility out of a transhumanist. Can't cyborgs build their bodies however they want and even make themselves sexual hermaphrodites if they want to? Or do you want cyborgs to strictly appear male and female?

Suppose I wanted to cut off my perfectly healthy arm to replace it with an inferior prosthetic based solely on a desire to actualize my identity, would you be supportive or concerned? Again if we had the technology to make this safe and reversible it would be a non-issue, but we don't, that's why as a transhumanist I am concerned.

I wonder how many times I'm going to have to keep reiterating my position before people realize I'm not just an intolerant douchebag...

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Say that I wanted to become a man or woman just because I felt like it. A whim, like going to college or moving across the state for some benign reason. Would I have a neurosis? Is detachment from my current fleshy composition really so condemnable? Or is it that striving towards a culturally constructed idyllic archetype that does it for you?

If I happen to regret moving to another state or quitting my job or going to college, I don't think you're neurotic either. You just made a decision you regret like anyone else, except you gambled with your "natural" biology.

I think that healthcare just needs to meet the "need" and develop specialization towards identifying who is most likely to want to transition.

A river stream flows towards the sea. If it doesn't create dysfunction, why try to force it to go in a different direction?

 

[Hadoblado]

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PDF-Trans-well-being.pdf

A one-page summary of a 56 study review.

• 52/56 studies found positive results of transitioning.
• Zero studies concluded overall harm.
• Regret about transitioning occurs in .3-3.8% of participants, and was associated with a lack of social support (e.g. lack of "enabling").

 

[Cognisant]

Say that I wanted to become a man or woman just because I felt like it. A whim, like going to college or moving across the state for some benign reason. Would I have a neurosis?

False equivalence, you don't need surgery or potentially life shortening hormone treatments to move interstate, if you're going to argue in bad faith at least try to be less transparent about it.

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PDF-Trans-well-being.pdf

A one-page summary of a 56 study review.

• 52/56 studies found positive results of transitioning.
• Zero studies concluded overall harm.
• Regret about transitioning occurs in .3-3.8% of participants, and was associated with a lack of social support (e.g. lack of "enabling").

Well, fair enough.

 

[Daddy]

@Daddy
Have I actually criticized trans people?

I've labelled the phenomenon a possible neurosis, that's not a criticism that's a acknowledgement that surgery in particular is objectively harmful, even if you're conducting surgery to save someone's life you're still cutting into them and you're trying to cause minimal harm whilst achieving some goal that results in a net benefit for the patient.

I'm not convinced that gender reassignment and hormone treatments are actually helping people, I'm not criticizing trans people and this knee-jerk REEEEEE-action people are having is exactly why I'm concerned about it.

Is this actually based on science?
Or are people too afraid of the backlash to question it?

I was probably unclear, but I wasn't exactly talking about you. It was more of a "collective you" I was referring to. As someone that struggled/struggles with gender issues and still deals with it, it's extremely frustrating that so many people always have the same tired arguments. I just needed to get that out. But like for example, you just said that

"I know it's a bit unfair to announce transexuality could be a neurosis and then put the onus on others to prove why it isn't, but we're literally talking about cosmetic surgery and hormone treatments, I think it's fair to demand that such extreme measures require equally extreme justification."

But it's like, from my point of view, if someone wants that and it makes them feel better about themselves, why do they have to justify it? Sure it's extreme and it can lower your life expectancy and even create potential medical problems. But people get cosmetic surgeries all the time and they don't have to justify anything, except with their checkbook and a willingness to accept the risks. It just seems like because it's about Gender and most people don't have an issue with that, it makes them doubt the whole thing. And suddenly, everyone is seeking some kind of answer or explanation, but it's probably not that simple, is all. I'm not sure how that's a REEE because those are my honest thoughts without trying to be knee-jerk. I guess I hit a nerve?

But I actually don't care if you think it's a neurosis or mental illness or whatever (and I don't think you care if I care either lol), I just needed to make my point and I think I've made it at this point. I'm really just sharing my personal thoughts on the matter anyway to clear my head on all the static noise of the argumentum because I've actually had to a put a lot of painful thought into this and I did not transition, but instead adopted adrogyny. It is what it is, I'll shut up now. Anyway,

 

[EndogenousRebel]

False equivalence, you don't need surgery or potentially life shortening hormone treatments to move interstate, if you're going to argue in bad faith at least try to be less transparent about it.

I have the goodest faith. I am currently taking life shortening medication because some official doctor told me it was worth it. Granted I suppose that is for a neurosis I already have.

Cosmetic , bariatric, x surgery. Many require life long lifestyle changes with diet and such. I see unfulfilled needs people have and don't see the need for the label neurosis in the modern sense of what nuerosis means.

But hey if hypothetically you want to say that these people who get Botox, boob enhancements, gastric bypass, as neurotic, I'm totally fine with that. You just are going to load some of that into your messages with others.

To say there is something special about certain therapies that means they fall out that preview without giving a reason why is what is bad faith.

So I'll do you one more. Is it possible i don't follow my diet because I'm not neurotic???????

 

[Cognisant]

But it's like, from my point of view, if someone wants that and it makes them feel better about themselves, why do they have to justify it?

True but I make an exception for mental health, say if I've got a gambling addiction the fact that I have that addiction means that I'm not going to see it that way, likewise if someone's crawling about on the floor adamantly insisting that they're a cat and that they want to be treated as a cat it wouldn't be reasonable to expect them to seek out the kind of help they're clearly in desperate need of.
This is why interventions happen.

I'm not sure how that's a REEE because those are my honest thoughts without trying to be knee-jerk. I guess I hit a nerve?

No you've actually been really reasonable, but consider washti's reaction and Hado's warning that this thread is going to turn into cancer. To me if something so sacrosanct that nobody's allowed to talk about it that's an indication that something bullshitty is going on, it indicates a lack of objectivity, which seems to be common regarding this matter.

But I actually don't care if you think it's a neurosis or mental illness or whatever (and I don't think you care if I care either lol), I just needed to make my point and I think I've made it at this point. I'm really just sharing my personal thoughts on the matter anyway to clear my head on all the static noise of the argumentum because I've actually had to a put a lot of painful thought into this and I did not transition, but instead adopted adrogyny. It is what it is, I'll shut up now. Anyway,

I think you've done an excellent job of being rational and if nothing else you've won my respect.

 

[Cognisant]

But hey if hypothetically you want to say that these people who get Botox, boob enhancements, gastric bypass, as neurotic, I'm totally fine with that. You just are going to load some of that into your messages with others.

To say there is something special about certain therapies that means they fall out that preview without giving a reason why is what is bad faith.

So I'll do you one more. Is it possible i don't follow my diet because I'm not neurotic???????

The double negative isn't parsing right so in my own words I agree that cosmetic surgery is a sign of neurosis, the more severe the surgery the more severe the neurosis.

It's not an insult, the whole transhumanism thing I'm all about is very clearly a neurosis but a benign one, unless I started fantasizing about self mutilation in which case it would be a very severe neurosis.

 

[Puffy]

It looks like Hado provided you what you were asking for. Regardless of whether transsexualism is defined as a neurosis or not, how has that effected your view on transitioning and being supportive of it as a potential path of treatment? Pulling a ‘woke people are being unscientific, show me the science’ and then just skirting over the science when it appears to not support your thinking feels a bit cheeky.

 

[Cognisant]

Do you presume that I would?

I don't consider Hado's evidence absolutely conclusive but it did address my concerns and that has changed my mind, at least as to whether the available treatments lead to worthwhile beneficial outcomes.

I still have reservations, I don't really understand what makes someone transgender, whether it's a physiological or entirely psychological phenomenon, and the manner and intensity of push-back I've received, though not entirely unjustified, still makes me wary of a lack of objectivity.

I'm not entirely convinced that gender reassignment should be encouraged but I'm not going to be a dick about it, a beneficial outcome achieved through less than ideal means is still better than a lack of a beneficial outcome.

 

[Puffy]

Not at all, I ask as you come across like you perceive wokism to solely be an irrational mob that have no interest in objectivity or truth. So I'm curious how coming across material suggesting that what's being advocated is supported by what we know currently effects your perception.

 

[Hadoblado]

I think you're right that there's a lack of objectivity. People are very teamsportsy about this topic. I think it's best to ignore what people say and just read studies.

The way people perceive gender seems... experienced rather than abstract. When I talk to people online I will assign them a gender based on their posts without even realising it or intending to. This is remarkably stupid for someone who's explicitly against gender roles, but the brain do be like that.

When people become supportive of trans rights, it's usually either abnormally high cognitive decoupling or an experience of empathy more profound than the experience of gender. In this way, gendereded programming is similar to religious programming.

 

[Cognisant]

Not at all, I ask as you come across like you perceive wokism to solely be an irrational mob that have no interest in objectivity or truth. So I'm curious how coming across material suggesting that what's being advocated is supported by what we know currently effects your perception.

I still think they're an irrational mob, I mean even if I think transgenderism is a neurosis there's still transgender people and I don't want them to be persecuted, I don't want anyone to be persecuted and if someone has a neurosis that leads them to self mutilation I want them to get the help they need because... I dunno I'm not a complete misanthropic asshole?

Point is my position on wokism isn't a binary thing, I'm not absolutely for or against it indeed I don't think anyone is totally for or against anything, unless they're an irrational idiot or a Sith. Indeed one of my fundamental criticisms of wokism is that it is part of their ideology that you must be either absolutely for or against them, it's all about creating polarities and forcing people to choose sides.

Are you saying that because I don't hate and persecute transgender I must therefore abide woke nonsense? Or that if I don't abide woke nonsense I must therefore by necessity hate and persecute transgender people? There's a word for that kind of mental trap, it's called fascism.
"Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State." - Mussolini

When people become supportive of trans rights, it's usually either abnormally high cognitive decoupling or an experience of empathy more profound than the experience of gender. In this way, gendereded programming is similar to religious programming.

Hey as long as mentally ill people aren't mutilating themselves because a sociopolitical movement made it fashionable, y'know like religion and circumcision which is bad enough when they do it to boys but did you know they do it to girls too? They chop the clit right off, to encourage chastity I think.

Furthermore this is something that bugs me, is gender an arbitrary social construct or not, because a woke person will tell you it is but then there's transgender people who apparently think it's so important they're at risk of becoming depressed and killing themselves if they're not accepted as the gender they identify as.
Please explain this to me.

 

[Puffy]

Hey Cog, I'm at work so just writing quick responses. I think you're too accustomed to placing me in the antagonist's seat in respect to you, which I can appreciate as I've probably been that way before and you've also received some hostile responses here. So I get why you'd group me that way.

My point is it feels like you've entered this discussion expecting it to be a cog vs woke team play-off. Where maybe it's more nuanced than that. Maybe some of the people you see as woke have informed opinions on the topic. If the summation of the evidence base is that supporting transgender people with transitioning leads to better outcomes, then maybe that's a reasonable position to have.

 

[Hadoblado]

It's both afaik. Basically, whenever you ask whether something is nature or nurture, it's always both. But I'm not an expert, I've just never come across anything that wasn't both unless it's part of the literal definition.

So, sex = biological = strictly nature. Gender? Well... There's certainly a large social component, but isolating your social identity from your biology isn't easy. There's a high correlation between which sex you are assigned and what gender you identify as. How are you going to design a study that isolates this sort of causality? You can't afail.

I think the important thing is recognising that there is a difference between sex and gender. One is entirely biological, one isn't. If someone equates the two, that's fine I guess, but if they're insistent this will be a huge barrier for them understanding what everyone else is talking about.

TBH, most feminists probably don't know, I reckon they just parrot what they've been told. I literally had to convince someone the other day that differences in strength are not just social constructs, but are largely due to physiological differences. They didn't believe me until I showed them the difference in performance between Olympic athletes of each gender. They're not stupid either, people are just selective about what assumptions they question.

 

[Cognisant]

My point is it feels like you've entered this discussion expecting it to be a cog vs woke team play-off.

I did, and it's been great fun

Where maybe it's more nuanced than that. Maybe some of the people you see as woke have informed opinions on the topic. If the summation of the evidence base is that supporting transgender people with transitioning leads to better outcomes, then maybe that's a reasonable position to have.

I will concede to superior evidence immediately but I still need to integrate that into my framework, I still don't really understand the nature/mechanism of transgenderism.

If my brain had a desktop you would see an Update Pending notification.

I think the important thing is recognising that there is a difference between sex and gender. One is entirely biological, one isn't. If someone equates the two, that's fine I guess, but if they're insistent this will be a huge barrier for them understanding what everyone else is talking about.

I don't so much equate the two as I'm gender agnostic, I don't see my sex as being part of my identity, it definitely affects my psychology and I identify with being male because I don't get a choice in the matter but if I were suddenly transplanted into a female body it would be like driving a different car, I'd still be me.

Still trapped in a FUCKING MEATBAG!!!

See that's what I don't get, they're all meatbags, male or female it's still the same shit, still fragile and impossible to repair, still soft and sticky and greasy and flaking skin and hair all the bloody time. And it hurts! The audacity of making me put up with this shit and it hurts and sometimes it hurts for no goddamn reason, just randomly hey fuck you have headache or an itchy bollock or maybe your heart skips a beat to remind you of existential terror just in case you've momentarily forgotten.

And people get upset because they've got the wrong junk in their pants!?!
I. Don't. Even.

 

[Hadoblado]

I think we're pretty alike in this regard. I don't like how much of people's identity their gender takes up. I see it similar to nationalism in that if you're identifying strongly with it you probably don't have a lot else going on for you. Gender prescriptivism in particular is the worst.

 

[Puffy]

Sure, no worries, compute away!

TBH I personally think it's a mix of nature and nurture in the overall population as well, but I wouldn't be able to discern the influence of either factor. I generally presume LGBT is nature as a default, based solely on experience of people I've known, with acknowledgement that some people can develop into LGBT as a result of circumstances (e.g. people who don't feel safe in heterosexual relationships.)

For me it's more like:

A) When I meet someone it's not possible for me to discern the influence of nature and nurture with that person, I only know how they present themselves to me

B) Rejection can have potentially damaging implications and support appears to have more beneficial outcomes

So I don't think it's really my place to decide how people I meet fall within these categories, unless I have a lot of reason for concern with that particular person. Otherwise if one of my friends told me they were transgender, I don't think the question of nature/nurture would be on my mind. I'd just want them to know that they're my friend regardless and if they ever need anyone to talk to about it that I'd be happy to listen. As I'm that persons friend and that to me seems to be in their best interest.

 

[Cognisant]

I think we're pretty alike in this regard. I don't like how much of people's identity their gender takes up. I see it similar to nationalism in that if you're identifying strongly with it you probably don't have a lot else going on for you. Gender prescriptivism in particular is the worst.

Yet you think gender reassignment surgery is a solution to gender dysphoria?

I don't see this as an either/or issue, either they need or they don't need it and medical intervention (surgery in particular) should always be the last resort because it is inherently destructive, anytime a surgeon cuts into someone they are objectively causing harm and there needs to be a solid justification for that.

Now I'm not saying it should be banned, ultimately I don't know what the individual is going through and it's their body, their choice. But it's like recommending a boob job to someone with depression or self esteem issues, it just seems really predatory and exploitative.

I dunno, I just... I don't know.

If it works I guess I can't argue with results?

I need to sleep on it.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

@Cognisant
You have a histerical tendency to blow things out of proportion. Escpecially when it comes to the things on the progressive and SJW end.

You're criticizing the least visible, least pretentious LGBT+ group and use "Furries" as comparison. Most trans people who aren't drag queen do literally everything to stay as invisible and normal as they can.

Yup, the fucking Trans Furries have come to run for presidency and destroy your traditional way of life. Like where are all these society-threatening trans people and their irrational destructive political agenda?

For all the noise that progressive make they haven't done anything to regulate or shame your cisgender normie ways. You point to examples like the movie industry where female actresses aren't portrayed like undressed sluts as your point towards the harmful influence of feminist and SJW agendas. They are over represented in the media and have no actual power, presence or influence on your life and yet people react to any LGBT or progressive news with utmost shock and proceed to find ways of defending themselves from a threat to their lives.

I can't take you seriously, you are a comedic facsimile of Cartman from south park.

Let's talk about treating cisgender males who are addicted to porn and naked women on screen. I heard that electric shock therapy is effective.

@Hadoblado @Cognisant
We're discussing neurosis and treating people like it's a well researched or well defined mental illness. Neurosis AFAIK is not recognized as a disorder. We don't even have good enough science to know what mental states are mental illness and which aren't, with our shit understanding of the human brain we can say almost nothing prescriptive other than "if it's harmful to the individual then it's probably bad". Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole "neurosis" angle is a load of bull.

You're just taking a psychological angle to rationalize and legitimize your fears.

@Cognisant I would expect more flexibility out of a transhumanist. Can't cyborgs build their bodies however they want and even make themselves sexual hermaphrodites if they want to? Or do you want cyborgs to strictly appear male and female?

Suppose I wanted to cut off my perfectly healthy arm to replace it with an inferior prosthetic based solely on a desire to actualize my identity, would you be supportive or concerned? Again if we had the technology to make this safe and reversible it would be a non-issue, but we don't, that's why as a transhumanist I am concerned.

I wonder how many times I'm going to have to keep reiterating my position before people realize I'm not just an intolerant douchebag...

First of all I don't see you overly concerned about other types of, as you suggested, 'crackpots' like the people who marry vocaloid avatars and are "fictosexual". Why are you specifically worried about the trans group? You don't strike me as a type of person to try to fix mentally ill people in general, not someone who would care.

What function does a penis serve to a person who doesn't want it? It's not like they have to follow societal expectations of using said penis for procreation. Can't they cut it out? I heard it decreases risk of prostate cancer.

Sexual organs and characteristics are derived from identity, there are trans people who don't take the surgery because it is currently imperfect, but they still act and behave like the opposite gender. That aside, what is actually inferior after undergoing sex reassignment surgery? You don't exactly have a vagina as a male. So you can only get any vagina or keep dreaming of a fully functional one in the future.

 

[Cognisant]

You're criticizing the least visible, least pretentious LGBT+ group and use "Furries" as comparison. Most trans people who aren't drag queen do literally everything to stay as invisible and normal as they can.

Yup, the fucking Trans Furries have come to run for presidency and destroy your traditional way of life. Like where are all these society-threatening trans people and their irrational destructive political agenda?

There's a parallel in that they also have an identity crisis along the lines of "I identify as", the difference being what they identify as and there's a significant overlap between the two communities.

Transgenderism is considered legitimate and being a furry is considered a mental illness, but what's the difference?

 

[Hadoblado]

I think we're pretty alike in this regard. I don't like how much of people's identity their gender takes up. I see it similar to nationalism in that if you're identifying strongly with it you probably don't have a lot else going on for you. Gender prescriptivism in particular is the worst.

Yet you think gender reassignment surgery is a solution to gender dysphoria?

I don't see this as an either/or issue, either they need or they don't need it and medical intervention (surgery in particular) should always be the last resort because it is inherently destructive, anytime a surgeon cuts into someone they are objectively causing harm and there needs to be a solid justification for that.

Now I'm not saying it should be banned, ultimately I don't know what the individual is going through and it's their body, their choice. But it's like recommending a boob job to someone with depression or self esteem issues, it just seems really predatory and exploitative.

I dunno, I just... I don't know.

If it works I guess I can't argue with results?

I need to sleep on it.

Yep. I just follow the evidence. Just because I don't care for gender identity doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't.

I agree surgery should be justified. My mother needed surgery to be able to look up after burns tightened her neck skin restricting her movement. She was on the waiting list for over 20 years, and eventually received the surgery.

To me, looking up isn't that important. But I've never been restricted from it. She is glad she got the surgery and so am I.

 

[Hadoblado]

We're discussing neurosis and treating people like it's a well researched or well defined mental illness. Neurosis AFAIK is not recognized as a disorder. We don't even have good enough science to know what mental states are mental illness and which aren't, with our shit understanding of the human brain we can say almost nothing prescriptive other than "if it's harmful to the individual then it's probably bad". Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole "neurosis" angle is a load of bull.

It's not in the DSM (and hasn't been for a while) but is in the ICD-10. I personally don't recall ever learning about neurosis during the course of my studies in psychology.

To me it doesn't matter. Cog tends to use words differently but consistently within context. I've spent a lot of time arguing with him over technical definitions, and I think it's time misspent. I'm trying to meet people where they're at a bit more in order to identify common ground from which to work, because otherwise nothing ever goes anywhere.

Let him keep the edgy language if he leaves questioning why science doesn't agree with his theory.

 

[Hadoblado]

There's a parallel in that they also have an identity crisis along the lines of "I identify as", the difference being what they identify as and there's a significant overlap between the two communities.

Transgenderism is considered legitimate and being a furry is considered a mental illness, but what's the difference?

I'm not sure I consider being a furry a mental illness?

It's a lot of things: A kink, a subculture, an identity... From what I've seen there's heavy overlap with autism and non-het sexuality, but that doesn't make it a mental illness.

YourMovieSucks.Org is a furry:

And they don't seem mentally ill to me.

 

[Cognisant]

There's people who like anthropomorphic characters, which is pretty reasonable, then there's people who find anthropomorphic characters attractive, bit odd but ok, and finally there's the "I identify as" group who take it to a whole other level.

If someone's distressed because you won't acknowledge their fursona I think that's a clear indication that they've got some serious problems.

 

[Hadoblado]

Fair enough.

I'm not going to pretend I understand the furry identity thing, and I don't know if there's any research on it.

 

[Black Rose]

trans persons have something they can otherwise be. and because gender is real having the wrong gender is physically possible. I have no idea what cog is on about fursonas.

 

[Puffy]

I don’t presume anyone is mentally ill just because I don’t understand. If someone is happy and functional the way they are by definition they’re not mentally ill. The problem is that mental illness in the people you highlight could more be down to a lack of acceptance within their tribe/community.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

You're criticizing the least visible, least pretentious LGBT+ group and use "Furries" as comparison. Most trans people who aren't drag queen do literally everything to stay as invisible and normal as they can.

Yup, the fucking Trans Furries have come to run for presidency and destroy your traditional way of life. Like where are all these society-threatening trans people and their irrational destructive political agenda?

There's a parallel in that they also have an identity crisis along the lines of "I identify as", the difference being what they identify as and there's a significant overlap between the two communities.

Transgenderism is considered legitimate and being a furry is considered a mental illness, but what's the difference?

The difference is fundamental, they're two different types of objects. If we try to describe this using types from programming.

Traditionally, people's gender can be described with two boolean values, gender and orientation. Your gender being 1 makes you female, let's say. Your orientation being 1 makes it so you're attracted to females. So 11 is a lesbian, 10 is a hetero woman, 01 hetero man and 00 is gay.

Trans people want to switch their boolean gender from one to the other, so they perform a negation operation like !gender (they move from 1 to 0, or from 0 to 1). Very importantly they fully operate within the existing gender types, they conform to traditional gender norms. The operation they're performing is actionable within the existing system.

Now you're saying that people who identify as animal fursonas are like transsexuals. That's like saying that a text string = "insert your fursona" is a boolean type. Totally false, these are two different types, you can't compare string to a bool, you can't typecast string to a bool. The notion of "insert whatever gender" is totally incompatible with the pre-existing tradition of only two genders. It would be like changing 0 to "rhinoceros" where your data type can only hold 0 or 1.

A trans person wants to change the value of their boolean gender. A furry person wants to change the object type that holds the value of their gender from boolean to string and also change its value. Completely different aims, scope and extent of changes.


Okay, so you agreed that if sex reassignment gave you fully functional organs then it would be sane. It's only insane insofar as it decreases health or takes away the reproductive function.

How does that signify an underlying mental disorder? You've essentially agreed that a trans person would be sane if they did a perfect gender change, but now they're insane because there's no such technology.

So their sanity does not depend on their mental state, but on the result of the action that they perform?

So a furry would be sane if they could get access to a technology to become a new species of cat-folk that could reproduce and exist separately from humans?

Can you even logic bro?

 

[Cognisant]

I think Javascript let's you read a string as a boolean value, like if you have the variable X = "True" and ask (IF X = True) Javascript will check a list of strings that it can interpret as either True or False in the boolean sense.

@Animekitty
Masterful shitposting, truly splendid.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

@Cognisant
That's the point - humans are strongly typed. Only true and false work, but furries want "any text" to work. That's just overturning the norms and all kinds of despicable.

We know that Javascript is an untyped(weakly typed) abomination for web development that lets you do shit like this

Spoiler

Javascript in our analogy is a dumb social construct. If traditional gender is a respectable programming language compiled into machine code then fursona is a javascript interpreted by a respectable language into machine code.

Conveniently you didn't address my points Where's your logick bro?

Where logic at???

And here I am trying to autistically reason with a troll and you don't even extend the courtesy of sharing my autism, ehh.

 

[Rook]

who cares just hav fun

 

[Puffy]

Indeed. I seem to just like brain spewing whenever I visit this forum.

 

[birdsnestfern]

Live and let live. If we were brought up with predjudices, we have to try to unlearn them. People have rights to be who they are, we have no choice but to allow it.

I don't think its a neurosis, but its likely a by product of how the masculine rejects its own femininity and is now trying to balance things out by rejecting its masculinity?

Also, the hormones in everyone are being altered probably by whatever milk and dairy food we eat, due to cows being injected with hormones and antibiotics.

Copied/pasted from Carl Jung facebook page:

Jung had an instinct that what was wrong with life , what made life tear apart, made it incomplete, was because the feminine was rejected, driven insane, driven mad by a world of men.

Rejected by a masculine-dominated world.
And that time when he let himself go and when he landed deep down in what he came to call the collective unconscious, all this rejected feminine in himself confronted him.

So, to balance both masculine and feminine in anyone, we may need to do some shadow work. Note what triggers you about anything. Figure out what parts of yourselves need accepting.

 

[Cognisant]

I don't accept things, if I don't understand something I must question it, especially if it contradicts with things I think I already know, and even more adamantly if I'm being told it's something I'm not allowed to question.

I got kicked out of Sunday school when I asked the "teacher" why if god is kind and loving does she have a cancerous growth on her nose? Earnestly, I wanted to know.

Between your feelings and the truth I'm going to pick the truth every time because hurt feelings are temporary, the truth is permanent.

During my schooling years I was very good and then suddenly very bad at math because the curriculum changed from teaching how math works to learning formulas by rote, I knew the formulas worked, but I didn't want to learn them I wanted learn how they worked.

Hado has basically given me the formula for dealing with transgender and proven that it works, and I agree that it works, but I will not apply the formula myself until I understand how it works, within reason of course.

If I find a trans person about to jump of a bridge I'm not going to ask them "are you sure this isn't all in your head?" as I am no longer as brutally unwavering in my pursuit of truth as young Cog was.

But here on the internet, on a forum, with people who know me and what I'm about, I'm quite confident nobody's going to off themselves over my lack of tact.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Rejected by a masculine-dominated world.
And that time when he let himself go and when he landed deep down in what he came to call the collective unconscious, all this rejected feminine in himself confronted him.

View attachment 6337

If you're going to reject masculine domination of culture then you have to reject all religion, including hinduism. Women had no input into writing what was included in the sacred texts. Kali - a violent goddess, was certainly conceived by a male storyteller, though it is fitting that a male would depict an aggressive female as a form of unconscious, repressed anima. More likely they depicted their own mother who had a great and lasting influence over their impression of women.

Indeed. I seem to just like brain spewing whenever I visit this forum.

Even if I sound "serious" all I ever do is shitpost and have fun. Nothing I do here is serious.

Whenever I write something here then that means I want to preserve a thought that I had for myself, to remember it for later. If someone interacts with that thought then it's added value for sure .

Sometimes I want to see others reactions' to stuff, but that's purely so I get a springboard to jump my thoughts further and entertain myself with more thinking.

 

[birdsnestfern]

On the male / female - I'm just saying we each have both, our souls are neither male nor female, they are both. So if someone rejects their female side, it will cause an imbalance in society, and overly male dominated societies have that and cause an un-natural balance in things. So to fix it, we just need to recognize both are within all of us and let them develop without repressing. So for example in business, you need to combine softness with firmness in order to be effective, not overbearing. Its like a line you must walk between both. And the natural order of the world is for each opposite to try to become the other opposite, and it all dissolves into each other. Like this: