Sorry. I had every intention of addressing your earlier comments, but I was preparing my response to all of Shadow Wolf's comments and then people came on accusing me of all kinds of nonsense.
Okay, understood.
Anyways, as to your earlier comments, there are no officially accepted theories as to what causes gender dysphoria.
The theories I mentioned are the official accepted ones at the moment (or at least they were those mentioned in a university lecture I visited 1.5 years ago, and those that I have also encountered in other places before and since).
But, I agree that they are not proven so far, simply because there have not been enough participants in the studies yet (e.g. the study about the brain structure only included transwomen and only maybe 20 or so, if I recall it correctly - maybe other studies have been made in the meantime, though).
There are no better theories so far, though.
However, even if the theory you shared were correct, how would that prove that gender dysphoria is not a mental disorder?
Hormones altering the structure of our brains to make us "think" that we are the opposite gender would still be delusion.
Hormones altering the structure of our brains would still not change our biological sex.
You'd be a man who thinks he is a woman or a woman who thinks she is a man.
In a way it is a mental disorder (and I didn't say otherwise). I said that it's not the kind of mental disorder that could be treated with medicaments like e.g. shizophrenia can.
It's a matter of which aspect of a person you consider the deciding factor. If you say, it's their chromosomes or the genitals one was born with, then your arguments are coherent. However, I would deem it more important to consider the personality of the person.
What I don't understand is why those who suffer from these delusions demand to take hormones that would align them with their mental image of themselves and not those that might help them come to cope with their physical reality?
It has been tried, but it didn't work.
Hormones on the other hand have been proven to work.
Then about what you said in regards to my claim to having or not having a penis -
A man who has his penis cut off is still a man. He is just a mutilated man.
A woman who alters her clitoris or has some sort of prosthetic penis is still just a woman. She's just a cyborg or something.
Again, a matter of definition.
About intersex individuals - I don't think referencing significant outliers proves anything. They are genetic or hormonal abnormalities that all vary widely one from another.
Still they are a significant part of the population. I don't have numbers, but just going by what Wikipedia says there must be several percentage points of people born with genital or chromosomal abnormalities that make them neither male nor female.
Transpeople are about 0.4% of the whole population (that number is based on how many actually got their name and official gender changed by court here in Germany, the actual number is therefore probably higher).
Most likely because one of the central tenets of Christianity is that no one can come back to life without what Jesus did for us.
That comment of mine was mainly said in jest.
In Hinduism all humans are thought to possess femininity and masculinity. It is only society that forces us to choose between the two, since the atman (soul) is gender less. In Shaktism specifically the divine energy/power is thought the be inherently feminine. The creative force if you will, whilst the one doing the creating is inherently masculine. But the two must go hand in hand because neither can do their job without the other. Shiva without Shakti is shava (dead.)
Note this is probably not the best explanation, so take it as a sort of shaky translation.
Whilst females are thought to be already in tune with their femininity males are usually not so, because of social pressures to conform to masculinity. Therefore in order to properly understand the divine males must first forego the subconscious and tap into their latent femininity. It is merely a sect quirk. (Shaktism, which is often associated with Eastern Left Hand Paths, also often stresses that one must deliberately do things which are taboo in order to properly transcend into spiritual domains. Because in doing so one has to break down mental barriers that one has put up. So males tapping into their femininity also have the added bonus of going against the norm or engaging in something taboo. Which is thought to help them on their path to enlightenment.)
Can you tell me why that much stress on the feminine side? I see why it would be the case in Shaktism, but even in Shaivism, I have never heard of it encouraging females to explore their masculine side. I once read that females were not considered real treaters of the path in tantra, and, while highly honoured, only had the task of helping the males with their quest for enlightenment, even in this rather unconventional religion. They were basically assumed to already be embodiments of the goddess.
I'm a transmale, and I have quite a bit of interest in Hinduism, especially Shaivism, but what I find it is not any more adapted to my situation than other paths.
Btw, from my own impression, there do seem to be a lot more transpeople among (western) LHPers than among the general population, relatively speaking. Even without that many of them being familiar with this aspect of Shaktism. Who knows whether Shaktism includes aspects of transsexuality because of some religious theories, or whether not rather some transpeople influenced Shaktism in this way so that it would fit their needs better.
