Gendered nouns, nonstandard and otherwise

[vyor]

This part of your post is both unnecessary, and demeaning to other debaters. I sincerely hope it was a joke, because it makes any argument you make carry less weight.

That said, calling people "crazies" is not OK. Is it really that hard to say "people arguing for..."? Because if you're going to sling insults at other people, you can go right back to whatever hole you crawled out off.

Click to shrink...

It was very obviously a joke. I even included a smiley FFS!

 

[pepperjack]

It was very obviously a joke. I even included a smiley FFS!

Click to shrink...

Meh. When we have a previous poster sincerely suggesting that proponents of non-standard pronouns are mentally ill, it kinda ruins the joke.

 

[vyor]

Meh. When we have a previous poster sincerely suggesting that proponents of non-standard pronouns are mentally ill, it kinda ruins the joke.

Click to shrink...

Seriously? What the hell? I mean sure, I think it's stupid, but it would only be crazy if it caused them to be unable to interact normally with the rest of humanity.

 

[Vanathor]

Seriously? What the hell? I mean sure, I think it's stupid, but it would only be crazy if it caused them to be unable to interact normally with the rest of humanity.

Click to shrink...

That would be me

And that is misrepresenting what I said. What I said was either the people who use them are trying to seek attention and make themselves appear as something special (most of what we see on tumblr, basically, with this these folks) or the people who sincerely believe this shit have a mental illness of some sort, given their brains by all accounts are abnormal and don't function the way they should that they feel the need to refer to themselves with special-snowflake pronouns.

 

[vyor]

That would be me

And that is misrepresenting what I said. What I said was either the people who use them are trying to seek attention and make themselves appear as something special (most of what we see on tumblr, basically, with this these folks) or the people who sincerely believe this shit have a mental illness of some sort, given their brains by all accounts are abnormal and don't function the way they should that they feel the need to refer to themselves with special-snowflake pronouns.

Click to shrink...

Both of those are rather extreme. You do know it;s possible to subconsciously need attention and that it can manifest as a variety of things right?

 

[Xilph]

And that is misrepresenting what I said. What I said was either the people who use them are trying to seek attention and make themselves appear as something special (most of what we see on tumblr, basically, with this these folks) or the people who sincerely believe this shit have a mental illness of some sort, given their brains by all accounts are abnormal and don't function the way they should that they feel the need to refer to themselves with special-snowflake pronouns.

Click to shrink...

You forgot option three, transgenders that don't identify with he or she, although transgenderism is inherently linked to mental illness as stuff like gender dysphoria is a thing. Of course just that isn't enough, you need to take the even smaller portion of that group that happens to also fall into the group of people who hate the singular "they" for whatever reason, of course it's generally flawed for various reasons such as those same people generally don't pick on other similar cases such as the singular "you", "thou" was the singular form of "you" before it was dropped for making "you" both singular and plural for reference. So yeah, the intersection of people who don't fit into "he" or "she" and have issues with it and the people who don't like the singular "they" so don't feel it works as a singular gender neutral pronoun, and neither of those are mental illnesses as while gender dysphoria is it doesn't inherently affect their views of language.

 

[Vanathor]

You forgot option three, transgenders that don't identify with he or she, although transgenderism is inherently linked to mental illness as stuff like gender dysphoria is a thing. Of course just that isn't enough, you need to take the even smaller portion of that group that happens to also fall into the group of people who hate the singular "they" for whatever reason, of course it's generally flawed for various reasons such as those same people generally don't pick on other similar cases such as the singular "you", "thou" was the singular form of "you" before it was dropped for making "you" both singular and plural for reference. So yeah, the intersection of people who don't fit into "he" or "she" and have issues with it and the people who don't like the singular "they" so don't feel it works as a singular gender neutral pronoun, and neither of those are mental illnesses as while gender dysphoria is it doesn't inherently affect their views of language.

Click to shrink...

Gender dysphoria is a form of mental illness. It's just one where its simpler to treat (so far) by modifying the body with a cocktail of hormones, drugs, and surgery, then it is be dealt with via psyche meds.

 

[Valette-Serafina]

Gender dysphoria is a form of mental illness. It's just one where its simpler to treat (so far) by modifying the body with a cocktail of hormones, drugs, and surgery, then it is be dealt with via psyche meds.

Click to shrink...

...You have a very strange view of "simple".

I suppose that's not quite fair: You did say "simpler" rather than "simple". Likewise, it's possible you don't mean for your words have a certain tone.

I don't view gender dysphoria as an issue of the mind: It's a problem of the body. The mind is fine. The body is wrong, and needs to be fixed.
Do you disagree?

 

[Vanathor]

I don't view gender dysphoria as an issue of the mind: It's a problem of the body. The mind is fine. The body is wrong, and needs to be fixed.
Do you disagree?

Click to shrink...

Fundamentally its a problem with the mind. Something in that person's head is fundamentally flawed and broken, and makes them see themselves as being of the opposite sex/gender as their birth identity. But that ultimately is not meaningful. Both the body and mind should ultimately be malleable. The mind is software - program it. The body is hardware - feel free to swap in new parts.

Both of these solutions are equally valid for an individual to choose and undergo*,

Right now we can only do one, so we do only do one. But in the future? That will probably change. The end-goal is to give the people involved as much latitude and breadth of choice as we can in how they choose to deal with it.

*With the underlining assumption being you have the technological capability to do both.

 

[Plotvitalnpc]

Fundamentally its a problem with the mind. Something in that person's head is fundamentally flawed and broken, and makes them see themselves as being of the opposite sex/gender as their birth identity. But that ultimately is not meaningful. Both the body and mind should ultimately be malleable. The mind is software - program it. The body is hardware - feel free to swap in new parts.

Both of these solutions are equally valid for an individual to choose and undergo*,

Right now we can only do one, so we do only do one. But in the future? That will probably change. The end-goal is to give the people involved as much latitude and breadth of choice as we can in how they choose to deal with it.

*With the underlining assumption being you have the technological capability to do both.

Click to shrink...

From a purely biological standpoint, that's the case.
I'm an advocate of "You are a brain, you have a body.", though. Regardless of the biological order of events and the ways the mind is puppeted to meet the needs of the body, when it comes to identity the body should always be altered to meet the needs of the body, rather than the reverse.

 

[Vanathor]

From a purely biological standpoint, that's the case.
I'm an advocate of "You are a brain, you have a body.", though. Regardless of the biological order of events and the ways the mind is puppeted to meet the needs of the body, when it comes to identity the body should always be altered to meet the needs of the body, rather than the reverse.

Click to shrink...

I disagree. By this logic, schizophrenics who believe themselves to be ponies straight MLP:FiM are just as valid as anyone else, when in any reasonable world, they have mental problems that need to be treated - not helping them surgically alter themselves to become a sapient equine

Now obviously this is a humorous example, but the fundamental principals are the same.

Now, if in the future, we have body-engineering abilities to let them live out that fantasy for real, sure. But at which point it simply becomes a choice to make, and for the moment we are doing what is easier/saner.

 

[vyor]

From a purely biological standpoint, that's the case.
I'm an advocate of "You are a brain, you have a body.", though. Regardless of the biological order of events and the ways the mind is puppeted to meet the needs of the body, when it comes to identity the body should always be altered to meet the needs of the body, rather than the reverse.

Click to shrink...

Programming can be inherently flawed though. We usually try removing those flaws*.



*this goes for both humans and machines. A computer is nothing without an OS, but an OS can run on anything.

 

[Plotvitalnpc]

I disagree. By this logic, schizophrenics who believe themselves to be ponies straight MLP:FiM are just as valid as anyone else, when in any reasonable world, they have mental problems that need to be treated - not helping them surgically alter themselves to become a sapient equine

Now obviously this is a humorous example, but the fundamental principals are the same.

Click to shrink...

Admittedly, I realized that side of what I was saying after posting it and considered addressing it, but I always consider the possibility that someone's already read the thing important enough to hesitate in editing.

 

[Valette-Serafina]

Fundamentally its a problem with the mind. Something in that person's head is fundamentally flawed and broken, and makes them see themselves as being of the opposite sex/gender as their birth identity.

Click to shrink...

You are of course aware that that is both incredibly offensive, and very debatable.

But that ultimately is not meaningful. Both the body and mind should ultimately be malleable. The mind is software - program it. The body is hardware - feel free to swap in new parts.

Both of these solutions are equally valid for an individual to choose and undergo*,

Right now we can only do one, so we do only do one. But in the future? That will probably change. The end-goal is to give the people involved as much latitude and breadth of choice as we can in how they choose to deal with it.

*With the underlining assumption being you have the technological capability to do both.

Click to shrink...

As for this part, there are parts of my mind that I'd like to be able to alter.
Mind before body, however: I am my mind. Altering parts of me should be something I do on my own behalf, for my own benefit. Not for social pressure.

Arguing that transfolk should alter their minds to stop being trans runs far too close to the "Have you tried not being gay" nonsense, and that is the argument you make when you describe it as a mental illness.

I disagree. By this logic, schizophrenics who believe themselves to be ponies straight MLP:FiM are just as valid as anyone else, when in any reasonable world, they have mental problems that need to be treated - not helping them surgically alter themselves to become a sapient equine

Click to shrink...

Why not?

Now, if in the future, we have body-engineering abilities to let them live out that fantasy for real, sure. But at which point it simply becomes a choice to make, and for the moment we are doing what is easier/saner.

Click to shrink...

Ah, technical issues.
You paint it as a rational issue, though. What exactly is insane about desiring a non-human body? What makes human bodies superior? Hands are useful, but other than that?

Programming can be inherently flawed though. We usually try removing those flaws*.

*this goes for both humans and machines. A computer is nothing without an OS, but an OS can run on anything.

Click to shrink...

What is and is not a flaw is debatable. Human memory is certainly one flawed aspect of the human mind, but human self-identity is something far more complex.

 

[vyor]

You are of course aware that that is both incredibly offensive, and very debatable.

As for this part, there are parts of my mind that I'd like to be able to alter.
Mind before body, however: I am my mind. Altering parts of me should be something I do on my own behalf, for my own benefit. Not for social pressure.

Arguing that transfolk should alter their minds to stop being trans runs far too close to the "Have you tried not being gay" nonsense, and that is the argument you make when you describe it as a mental illness.
Why not?

Ah, technical issues.
You paint it as a rational issue, though. What exactly is insane about desiring a non-human body? What makes human bodies superior? Hands are useful, but other than that?

What is and is not a flaw is debatable. Human memory is certainly one flawed aspect of the human mind, but human self-identity is something far more complex.

Click to shrink...

I would like to see you trying to show how denying objective reality isn't a sing of larger mental issues.

 

[Vanathor]

You are of course aware that that is both incredibly offensive, and very debatable.

Click to shrink...

I don't particularly care if I give offense. You (general you - not specifically you) have a right to your opinions, but a right to not be offended is not one of them. If people don't like it? They can go live in a hugbox for the rest of their lives, and stay away from the real world that gets them so, so upset.

As for debatable - only insofar as politically correct obsessed people try to divorce the clinical definition of gender dysphoria and how its used from being a mental disorder, because it hurts their feelings when other people (wrongly) use it as an insult.*

Or to put it another way:

*To the point that several sites like WebMD have started to fold to this political pressure, due to activism from the LGBT community's lobbying effort, amongst others. Which is a whole other kettle of fish to begin with, that is wrong.**

**Medical treatment and science in general should not bend because of politics or social movements. That leads to bad, bad places.

Arguing that transfolk should alter their minds to stop being trans runs far too close to the "Have you tried not being gay" nonsense, and that is the argument you make when you describe it as a mental illness.

Click to shrink...

No. This is a terrible analogy. It would be more accurate to say, if we had the ability to medically change people's sexual preferences in a safe and effective manner, and gave them the choice - but not mandate- to do so. We can't do that now, but we will be able to eventually. You can't 'pray the gay away' but we are getting to the point where you can change around neurochemistry to a sufficient degree to let people be whatever. Now whether or not that person wants to is another matter. But the point stands they should have the option.

Why not?

Click to shrink...

Because its impractical, not reasonable, and not something that at the present state should be done for obvious reasons*

*Don't ignore my qualifier in the previous post, or be obtuse on why we society does not say 'yes you can be Twilight Sparkle' right now in the present.

You paint it as a rational issue, though. What exactly is insane about desiring a non-human body? What makes human bodies superior? Hands are useful, but other than that?

Click to shrink...

Because the human body is innately built for a specific framework mentally, as dictated by natural selection and the evolutionary process. The definition of insane is 'in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction'.

Generally speaking, if your cookoo enough to believe you are a pony, you have sufficient delusions about yourself and the world around you, you meet the criteria.

 

[Valette-Serafina]

I would like to see you trying to show how denying objective reality isn't a sing of larger mental issues.

Click to shrink...

Objective reality? Your assumption is in error. What part of being transgender is objectively delusional?

I don't particularly care if I give offense. You (general you - not specifically you) have a right to your opinions, but a right to not be offended is not one of them. If people don't like it? They can go live in a hugbox for the rest of their lives, and stay away from the real world that gets them so, so upset.

Click to shrink...

And fuck you too, but that's beside the point.

As for debatable - only insofar as politically correct obsessed people try to divorce the clinical definition of gender dysphoria and how its used from being a mental disorder, because it hurts their feelings when other people (wrongly) use it as an insult.*

Click to shrink...

Mm.
Now, here's the thing: Doctors have historically displayed cultural bias. Homosexually was once considered a mental disorder, for example.
When you say that being genderqueer is a mental disorder, you are saying that it's wrong, with the strong implication that everyone should just be happy with their biological sex.

Is that what you want to say?

Or to put it another way:

Click to shrink...

Ah, a gif. Clearly, this proves your point.[/sarc]

Let me be clear. That is not for you to decide.

*To the point that several sites like WebMD have started to fold to this political pressure, due to activism from the LGBT community's lobbying effort, amongst others. Which is a whole other kettle of fish to begin with, that is wrong.**

**Medical treatment and science in general should not bend because of politics or social movements. That leads to bad, bad places.

Click to shrink...

Yes, feminine hysteria is clearly something that still requires treatment.[/sarc]

The medical community has been wrong before. It will be wrong in the future.
It's quite capable of being wrong right now.

No. This is a terrible analogy. It would be more accurate to say, if we had the ability to medically change people's sexual preferences in a safe and effective manner, and gave them the choice - but not mandate- to do so. We can't do that now, but we will be able to eventually. You can't 'pray the gay away' but we are getting to the point where you can change around neurochemistry to a sufficient degree to let people be whatever. Now whether or not that person wants to is another matter. But the point stands they should have the option.

Click to shrink...

Yes.
Classifying something as a mental disorder, however, creates a kind of pressure to treat the mind rather than the problem.

Because its impractical, not reasonable, and not something that at the present state should be done for obvious reasons*

*Don't ignore my qualifier in the previous post, or be obtuse on why we society does not say 'yes you can be Twilight Sparkle' right now in the present.

Click to shrink...

A limitation on current technology only makes something impractical, not insane. I am aware that it cannot be done. You have yet to show why it should not be done.

Because the human body is innately built for a specific framework mentally, as dictated by natural selection and the evolutionary process.

Click to shrink...

And natural selection is superior to unnatural selection because?

The definition of insane is 'in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction'.

Click to shrink...

And what is normal behaviour? Normal perception? Normal social interaction?
Those are all things that change over time.

Generally speaking, if your cookoo enough to believe you are a pony, you have sufficient delusions about yourself and the world around you, you meet the criteria.

Click to shrink...

Ah. Actual delusions. I had made the assumption that the hypothetical individual was aware that their body did not match their identity.

That's a different condition, and not relevant to this discussion.

 

[Vanathor]

When you say that being genderqueer is a mental disorder, you are saying that it's wrong, with the strong implication that everyone should just be happy with their biological sex.

Is that what you want to say?

Click to shrink...

Don't put words in my mouth, ever. If you can't handle that don't debate. Genderqueerism is not a mental disorder in and of itself. What makes it one, is the overall harm that is caused by the symptoms it creates and because it originates from the mind. . That is why gender dysphoria is a problem. Now how you deal with that is up to the person. Whether that means (again assuming the technological capability exists) changing the body to match the mind, or changing the mind to match the body, that is up to the individual. I have not made a single moral value judgment on it.

Yes, feminine hysteria is clearly something that still requires treatment.[/sarc]

The medical community has been wrong before. It will be wrong in the future.
It's quite capable of being wrong right now.

Click to shrink...

This does not however prove they are wrong now, nor does your disapproval , or the disapproval of the LGBT community's lobbying arm mean they are now. The science should be allowed to bare out wherever it goes, and politics should stay the hell out.

Yes.
Classifying something as a mental disorder, however, creates a kind of pressure to treat the mind rather than the problem.

Click to shrink...

No it doesn't. Clinical definitions are as such, because they are not meant to be used by the average layperson throwing them around like this. The fact that people do is irrelevant to the actual research at hand. All you are doing is forcing the medical community to develop new words that mean the same thing as the old ones, until the social justice brigade jump on those too, starting the cycle anew.

A limitation on current technology only makes something impractical, not insane. I am aware that it cannot be done. You have yet to show why it should not be done.

Click to shrink...

For better or worse, the majority determine the 'norm' and right now the world around you does not bare out for making it workable or sane. Until that happens you are going to be treated as crazy for wanting to be Twilight.

And what is normal behavior? Normal perception? Normal social interaction?
Those are all things that change over time.

Click to shrink...

Sure they change, but they change slowly. Slow enough to the point that it makes this whole line of questioning irrelevant to the argument at hand, and right now you are just trying to distract from the direct argument.

 

[Xilph]

The definition of insane is 'in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction'.

Click to shrink...

That definition sounds utterly ridiculous just as an aside, mainly in that it's ridiculously broad as tons of perfectly ordinary things adversely affect your ability to function normally. Things like tiredness or strong emotions prevent people from functioning normally via impairing the brain, any form of drug pretty much as well from sugar to alcohol to caffeine to marijuana could be easily argued to bestow either insanity or a temporary form.

So yeah, poor definition that makes insanity the norm and doesn't even have any required relation to mental effects, for example blindness totally removes someone's ability to perceive or socially interact but can be purely physical with no mental issues required.

 

[vyor]

Objective reality? Your assumption is in error. What part of being transgender is objectively delusional?

Click to shrink...

They identify as something they are not. Nothing wrong with it, but it is very obviously wrong.

 

[Vanathor]

That definition sounds utterly ridiculous just as an aside, mainly in that it's ridiculously broad as tons of perfectly ordinary things adversely affect your ability to function normally. Things like tiredness or strong emotions prevent people from functioning normally via impairing the brain, any form of drug pretty much as well from sugar to alcohol to caffeine to marijuana could be easily argued to bestow either insanity or a temporary form.

So yeah, poor definition that makes insanity the norm and doesn't even have any required relation to mental effects, for example blindness totally removes someone's ability to perceive or socially interact but can be purely physical with no mental issues required.

Click to shrink...

Don't take it up with me, take it up with the Oxford Dictionary.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/insane

And yes, under that definition people have gotten off for crimes for some of the things you just listed. So evidently, people smarter and more educated then you and I agree with it

 

[Valette-Serafina]

Don't put words in my mouth, ever. If you can't handle that don't debate.

Click to shrink...

...

I don't particularly care if I give offense. You (general you - not specifically you) have a right to your opinions, but a right to not be offended is not one of them. If people don't like it? They can go live in a hugbox for the rest of their lives, and stay away from the real world that gets them so, so upset.

Click to shrink...

Your hypocrisy aside, you seem to have taken issue with an interpretation of your own words.
I asked a question, after telling you how your words can be taken.
Shall I assume that you don't want to say that? If so, then be more careful about giving offence.

Genderqueerism is not a mental disorder in and of itself. What makes it one, is the overall harm that is caused by the symptoms it creates and because it originates from the mind.

Click to shrink...

Recognition of everything comes from the mind. All problems become problems there.
The problem in this case is physical, and the harm it causes is mental.

That is why gender dysphoria is a problem. Now how you deal with that is up to the person. Whether that means (again assuming the technological capability exists) changing the body to match the mind, or changing the mind to match the body, that is up to the individual. I have not made a single moral value judgment on it.

Click to shrink...

But the words you use have connotations.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt, but that doesn't mean that your words suddenly become harmless.

This does not however prove they are wrong now, nor does your disapproval , or the disapproval of the LGBT community's lobbying arm mean they are now. The science should be allowed to bare out wherever it goes, and politics should stay the hell out.

Click to shrink...

You say that as if science isn't capable of making its own politics.

No it doesn't. Clinical definitions are as such, because they are not meant to be used by the average layperson throwing them around like this. The fact that people do is irrelevant to the actual research at hand. All you are doing is forcing the medical community to develop new words that mean the same thing as the old ones, until the social justice brigade jump on those too, starting the cycle anew.

Click to shrink...

Perhaps. At the same time, nothing exists in a vacuum. There are connotations to terminology.

For better or worse, the majority determine the 'norm' and right now the world around you does not bare out for making it workable or sane. Until that happens you are going to be treated as crazy for wanting to be Twilight.

Click to shrink...

Social disapproval is not the same as irrationality.

Sure they change, but they change slowly. Slow enough to the point that it makes this whole line of questioning irrelevant to the argument at hand, and right now you are just trying to distract from the argument at hand.

Click to shrink...

Your definition of insanity is inconsistent. It varies wildly in different environments. It is not an internal factor.

Overall, it's meaningless as a judgement of someone's thought process.

They identify as something they are not. Nothing wrong with it, but it is very obviously wrong.

Click to shrink...

That was a very bad argument.
To start with, your fundamental premise is wrong. And you've got nothing else.

 

[vyor]

That was a very bad argument.
To start with, your fundamental premise is wrong. And you've got nothing else.

Click to shrink...

That... doesn't refute my point. You can't just say "No! You!" and expect to be taken seriously.

 

[Valette-Serafina]

That... doesn't refute my point. You can't just say "No! You!" and expect to be taken seriously.

Click to shrink...

What point? Did you mean that argument seriously?

Biology is random. It doesn't have any hold over a person's gender. Arguing that it does is something that doesn't even need to be dismissed.

 

[Xilph]

That... doesn't refute my point. You can't just say "No! You!" and expect to be taken seriously.

Click to shrink...

Nah, you're just arguing slightly different things. You're saying the mind fails to line up with the body while he is saying that the body fails to line up with the mind, that's he key difference, you're both considering the incorrect part to be different things. If you could come to an agreement with him on which is failing you'd pretty much inherently agree on whether it's a mental or physical issue.

So yeah, I think he wants you to argue that the mind should line up with the body and not the other way around to fit in with his argument.

 

[TanaNari]

I disagree. By this logic, schizophrenics who believe themselves to be ponies straight MLP:FiM are just as valid as anyone else, when in any reasonable world, they have mental problems that need to be treated - not helping them surgically alter themselves to become a sapient equine

Now obviously this is a humorous example, but the fundamental principals are the same.

Now, if in the future, we have body-engineering abilities to let them live out that fantasy for real, sure. But at which point it simply becomes a choice to make, and for the moment we are doing what is easier/saner.

Click to shrink...

Actually, a vastly more accurate and realistic comparison is between Gender Dysphoria, and the underlying disorder that causes (extreme) forms of Anorexia and other forms of self mutilation. There's a clear, obvious, neurological issue that generates a level of self hate. That level of self hate then expresses itself in a variety of ways to hate one's own physical form. Which then evolves into a belief that there's something wrong with the body itself. Believing you're really a pony, or really the incarnation of a dragon, or really a girl instead of a boy... falls into this rather broad sequence of mental illnesses.

It's probably related to legitimate (re: the real disease, not pop culture bastardization of the disease- that's a whole other discussion) Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. As based upon the fact that treatments designed to combat legitimate OCD have shown some significant progress in treating certain types of Anorexia and Bulimia, as well as a few other identity disorders.


... To my knowledge, there has never been an extensive test to see if this method would work on people with Gender Dysphoria. All honest interpretations of the data suggests it likely could and would, to the extent that it works on OCD and other Dysphroria conditions like Anorexia and addiction to plastic surgery (although the treatments are always a bit hit or miss, if we're being honest).

However, the politics of the issue make it fucking impossible to get such a study done. Because some people are obsessed with things that sound pretty, like political correctness, instead of worrying about science, knowledge, and fact.

... Speaking of which...

creates a kind of pressure to treat the mind rather than the problem.

Click to shrink...

Ah, but we *are* our minds, correct? So all problems are, inherently, problems of the mind. I'll point out to you that most individuals who, through injury or accident of birth, are missing limbs don't have the same emotional responses as GID individuals have to their biological sexes. Namely- emotionally healthy individuals eventually reach a psychological state of "acceptance", where they've come to terms with their condition and instead spend their emotional energies on living a life within their (un)natural boundaries.

Which brings us back to OCD. Because the principal symptom of legitimate, not-pop-culture, OCD is that their ability to "accept imperfection" does not manifest.

Most humans know, because we're not stupid and have basic education, that we risk dying in a car crash when we get in our car. We ignore it.

Most humans know doorknobs have germs. And ignore it.

Throwing stuff away means you have given up something you own that might be useful. Ignore that desire to accumulate resources.

Most humans know know our bodies aren't perfect. They know they need to lose a little bit of extra fat, or think this or that about their noses, and body odors, and skin tone, and acne, and so many other features. It's a very, very long list. We ignore this. For the most part... after all, our commercial media makes a lot of money off making us think about this shit, so it's force fed to us to a level that makes it impossible to completely ignore. But for the most part we ignore it.

All human beings have thoughts about what it'd be like to be a girl instead of a boy, or vice versa. Ignored.

All human beings have thoughts about doing something truly horrible. Like, driving and thinking you could easily swerve just a little and take out both yourself an and oncoming car. Cutting vegetables with a knife and thinking 'I could just stab myself with this'. This is a perfectly, absolutely, normal and healthy event- that happens for some reason behavioral experts still can't explain. Usually considered a form of Cognitive Dissonance (though it doesn't fit the actual definition of that term).

Thing is. Most of us ignore it.

Granted, this ability to ignore can cause trouble. Gambling, for example. Using cigarettes, unprotected sex, drunk driving. All of these are possible because humans are very good at ignoring risks where it suits them. Even when we really should pay attention.

...

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is when you cannot ignore it.

There's a part of the brain that has that ability to forget that there's a ~1.3% chance of dying in a car accident. That there's no doubt someone you talk to today will have scratched his balls and not bothered to wash his hands today. That they had dreams about murdering their loved ones last night. That they thought "I know I'm a straight male, but it'd be kinda fun to have a vagina".

OCD is what happens when that part of the brain doesn't work appropriately. Source of many, many forms of anxiety and related disorders. Not the only source, mind you. PTSD and phobias, for example, are different. Related to each other, but not to OCD based anxiety disorders.

A person with OCD knows they'll die if they get in a car. They know they're fat and hideous. They know they're horrible serial killers in the making. They know they're really the reincarnation of Cleopatra. And if all empirical evidence and proof disagrees with them, then the evidence is wrong.


So. Yes. When looking at the other disorders with similar features to GID (including the vastly increased risks of accidental or intentional self harm that Transgendered and OCD individuals share) GID is very, very likely to be a form of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Which, while not yet truly curable, is treatable.



PS- while we're on the subject- there are entire organizations out there arguing that anorexia is a lifestyle choice equal to any others, and not a mental illness. So. That's another lovely parallel.

 

[powerofvoid]

I think there are two pronouns being looked for here:
#1:

• One person
• Of known gender
• For whom "male" is not an entirely accurate description
• But for whom "female" is also not an entirely accurate description
• Wherein the speaker desires to be entirely clear and unambiguous, whether on the speaker's own initiative, or by the request of the person being described.

#2:

• One person
• Of unknown gender
• Wherein the speaker wishes to advertise the speaker's sensitivity towards gender issues with a deliberately neutral, but not dehumanizing, term.
• ... or is speaking to an audience that demands the appearance of sensitivity and simply does not wish to be the target of thrown tomatoes.

The nature of #2 is that it actually can't be the same word as #1, because that would not be neutral, because it implies #1 as the default in the same way that "he" implies male as a default. (at least, to a

A thing cannot be itself and the opposite of itself. This is basic logic.

Click to shrink...

A word absolutely can mean X and not-X. English is contrary like that.

That being said, I think that "he" as neutral definitely falls into "... and Zoidberg" territory.

Fundamentally its a problem with the mind. Something in that person's head is fundamentally flawed and broken, and makes them see themselves as being of the opposite sex/gender as their birth identity. But that ultimately is not meaningful. Both the body and mind should ultimately be malleable. The mind is software - program it. The body is hardware - feel free to swap in new parts.

Both of these solutions are equally valid for an individual to choose and undergo*,

Right now we can only do one, so we do only do one. But in the future? That will probably change. The end-goal is to give the people involved as much latitude and breadth of choice as we can in how they choose to deal with it.

*With the underlining assumption being you have the technological capability to do both.

Click to shrink...

This is B.D., a character from the comic strip Doonesbury:

As you can see, he only has one leg.

What's not unambiguously shown here is that he is not comfortable with having only one leg.

In our world, and in the world of Doonesbury, we can give him a prosthetic leg, but we don't have a way of making him comfortable with having only one leg. (i.e., some treatment after which he wouldn't experience a desire to have two legs, and he would be perfectly comfortable hopping around on one leg or riding in a wheelchair or whatever)

If both were options, though, do you feel that both options are valid, or that only one is? If only one, which one?

 

[TanaNari]

but we don't have a way of making him comfortable with having only one leg

Click to shrink...

For the most part, we do: time. The human brain can, and if healthy does, adapt to far worse situations than missing a limb. That being said, a prosthetic limb is both useful to the living quality of the individual (all else being equal, more options means better quality of life) and generally happier for the society as a whole, as human instinct makes us uncomfortable around people with significant physical or mental damage.

 

[vyor]

What point? Did you mean that argument seriously?

Biology is random. It doesn't have any hold over a person's gender. Arguing that it does is something that doesn't even need to be dismissed.

Click to shrink...

...

The brain is controlled by biology. You can't dispute that, it's basic science. Considering that the brain heavily, heavily influences personality, if not outright controls it, you are arguing from a viewpoint that is simply wrong. Biology is very much not random, what is random is nurture, and since you can't pray out the problem(example) then it is controlled by biology.

And if you want to refute brain=personality? Then you're an idiot. Here are some facts so you can educate yourself and hopefully stop being one:
http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-23/news/mn-44736_1_suicide-attempt
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...njury-the-dark-side-personality-change-part-i
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/diffe...ge-often-brain-injurys-hidden-toll-8C11152322
http://www.nasponline.org/publications/cq/39/7/traumatic-brain-injury.aspx
http://www.brainline.org/content/multimedia.php?id=1428

 

[pepperjack]

vyor, if you're confused by a person's response, please consider that one or both of you might be communicating poorly before you start using phrases like "simply wrong" and "then you're an idiot."

In this case, I strongly suspect that each of you was thinking of something different when using the word "biology," and assuming that the other was also using it in that way.