Man to Man... or Woman

[Rival]

Even if this were legitimate - what do you believe it proves?

The brains of trans people more closely resemble the brain of the gender the person claims to be. What more do you want, honestly? Do you believe that sex organs trump one's brain activity? One's inner mental experience of the self? The neurons firing in the brain that have patterns of the other gender? Should I just ignore everything that you say and call it illegitimate because it comes from your own mind? Your religion is all in your head so I guess I can just denounce that? You have no physical evidence of your god so I'll just denounce that? You have no physical evidence of your emotions so they don't exist. I guess sex is all about physical pleasure, instead of mental and emotional?

 

[eik]

And many others on this site have been trying to argue that certain "brain activity" - alone - defines a person's gender.

We should look at the totality of the person.

This argument about gender is an argument that only exists within pagan gnosticism. In order to engage with it you have to accept the premise that gender exists independently of sex. Up until 1963, when the word "gender" was redefined by feminists, no one in the whole world believed that gender existed independently of sex.

IMO it's an argument that Christians aren't called to engage in, because it requires subscribing to a fundamentally false premise that is antithetical to Christianity. Have regard to Titus 1:15 before you continue your futile and purposeless debate.

 

[Rival]

This argument about gender is an argument that only exists within pagan gnosticism.

Pagan Gnosticism? I am nothing like a Pagan. I just happen to have different views to you. I worship the One G-d, but I see His Creation differently to you, but to you this is 'Pagan Gnosticism'? Sorry, you don't just get to throw people out like that because their views aren't the same as yours and they use words differently to you.

 

[Left Coast]

Yeah - you're going to have to quote from these sources.

I'm not about to dig through them and do your job for you.

Would you like it if I claimed "The Book of John" as evidence in support of my argument?

I didnt link to a book, I linked to two articles.

Rival already quoted from the first article - the brains of trans people more closely resemble the brains of the gender they identify with, from young age.

So let's cut to the chase. Your claim was, "The idea that someone is born the wrong gender has no scientific basis."

What evidence would falsify that view? What would convince you that people have genitalia and sex chromosomes of one sex, but a brain that more closely matches the opposite sex?

 

[nPeace]

I don't care what you want to believe. I've perceived myself as male for as long as I can recall. I don't have to justify myself to you. Take it or leave it. I actually don't spend much time thinking about this stuff anymore. I transitioned over a decade ago. I'm just a guy.

What I want to believe?
It's not about what I want to believe. How about what you want to believe?
You claimed you have always known, but you have corrected yourself, and rightly so." As long as I can recall", sounds more realistic, and accurate.

Anyway, you seem upset. Are you? There is no need to be.
I decided to use a more reliable source, to research de-transitioning.
Do you have any objections to this article?
I would like to get some feedback from you, @Rival, @Shadow Wolf, @Left Coast if you don't mind.

Why do you think desistance has a higher occurrence, and why do you think the following is the case?
Direct, formal research of detransition is lacking. Professional interest in the phenomenon has been met with contention. Detransitioners (persons who detransition) have similarly experienced controversy and struggle.
Detransition is commonly associated with transition regret...

Apparently the majority of persons with these "feelings" regret the most "prized medical treatment". What are your thoughts on that?

A 2003 German study found evidence for an increase in the number of demands for detransition, blaming poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians who — contrary to international best practices — assumed that transitioning as quickly as possible should be the only correct course of action. Surgeon Miroslav Djordjevic and psychotherapist James Caspian have reported that demand for surgical reversal of the physical effects of medical transition has been on the rise.

Poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians.
Sad, actually. imo.

Would you say one's preferences are based on what they believe.

Some consider gender identity to be fixed and absolute, with some neuroscientists asserting that it develops in utero in the second-trimester brain. However, there is little to no convincing evidence to support fundamental differences between the brains of females and males. If one's ‘internal sense of being a man or a woman’ no longer refers to a ‘man’ or ‘woman’ as defined by biological sex then the definition of gender identity risks becoming circular.

Within current debates, if gender identity becomes uncoupled from both biological sex and gendered socialisation , it develops an intangible soul-like quality or ‘essence’. As a pure subjective experience, it may be overwhelming and powerful but is also unverifiable and unfalsifiable. If this identity is held to be a person's innermost core concept of self, then questioning the very existence of gender identity becomes equated with questioning that person's entire sense of being, and consequently risks being considered a threat to the right to exist, or even as a threat to kill.

Inherent in the notion of ‘gender identity’ is that there already exists a specific subjective experience of being a man or a woman. However, there cannot be a significant intrinsic experiential difference between male and female human beings when we cannot know what those differences are. One cannot possibly know how it feels to be anything other than oneself. Medicine may be in danger of reinforcing social norms and reifying a concept that is impossible to define over and above material biological reality. At present, many health, social, educational and legal policies are being adapted to give gender primacy over sex.

This is what I was questioning, on how would a person know what they are. To simply say, 'one just knows' sounds like a person saying they experienced some feeling that tells them it was God.
If one is willing to use this subjective approach, it calls into question that person's claim that they need empirical evidence for religious faith, which they don't see.
It seems evident, ones preferences are a product of their beliefs.

 

[nPeace]

Wait... What?
@JesusKnowsYou did you just kill someone's cat?

 

[nPeace]

Oh, I think "questions remain," that's rather obvious. I disagree with the conclusion that you seem to be trying to draw out of that, that therefore sexual reassignment surgery is never medically appropriate or helpful. Ample evidence shows that you're simply incorrect there. For many trans people, it is helpful.

Do you disagree with the American Medical Association and American Psychiatric Association that the evidence shows that SRS is medically necessary and effective for many trans people? And why?

There is no widely held view that it is proven necessary. It is a preferred method that is chosen, just like some other orthodox medical practices, such as antibiotics and blood transfusions.
Just as realizations of dangers, risks, and problems are seen later down the line, I see this as no different.
Evidence shows that medical practices are often misused and abused.

The situation is similar to what's stated here...
The RCPsych's position statement acknowledges these elevated rates of mental illness within the transgender population, but appears to attribute them primarily to hostile external responses to those not adhering to gender norms (or sex-specific stereotypes). A deeper analysis of mental illness and alternative gender identities is not undertaken, and common causal factors and confounders are not explored. This is worrying, as attempts to explore, formulate and treat coexisting mental illness, including that relating to childhood trauma, might then be considered tantamount to ‘conversion therapy’.
...
As there is evidence that many psychiatric disorders persist despite positive affirmation and medical transition, it is puzzling why transition would come to be seen as a key goal rather than other outcomes, such as improved quality of life and reduced morbidity. When the phenomena related to identity disorders and the evidence base are uncertain, it might be wiser for the profession to admit the uncertainties. Taking a supportive, exploratory approach with gender-questioning patients should not be considered conversion therapy.

 

[nPeace]

Wrong feelings? How can feelings be wrong?

You honestly don't know? I doubt that.
However, if you really don't know, I'll allow you to gain that experience yourself.

 

[nPeace]

That's messed up.



I don't understand...

I don't understand why you don't understand.

They seem fixed because human beings are wired to see patterns and build habits etc in order to survive.

How did you connect it to a giver, though?

Now I don't understand. Or maybe you don't understand what I am saying.
Do you realize I am not referring to human laws, but universal laws?

I have always known prayer as a conversation to god. While I don't know everyone's prayers, it would make sense if someone was dealing with a problem they'd ask god for some sort of help just as a child ask his parent for help. I'm sure it's a mixture of conversation and asking for help from one's creator.

If a parent sees their child (rather than 'its' child ) saying that she is not a female but a male inside, how would you address that without (hopefully?) telling that child he or she may be misguided about his body and mind?

While there are many things we can't understand, when we do we address our biases about things we don't understand for the wellbeing of those we care about?

Here's a video about this. Take your time.

"At an age when he was just preparing to sign up for Medicare, and was contemplating when to take Social Security, Skip Pardee and his wife Veronica were confronted with a situation that potentially could have ripped their close knit family apart. This talk is about what happened, how they handled it, and the lessons Skip and Veronica have learned from it.

"A native of Detroit, Michigan, Skip graduated from the United States Air Force Academy in 1968. For the next eight years he served as an Air Force pilot. He flew 370 combat missions in the Vietnam war. Skip is currently in his 33rd year as a chiropractor in Minden, Nevada"



Probably, yes. Many former christian non-religious see prayer as beseeching. Not all religions see prayer like that if not at all.



But you got to admit that if parents see their child going through something they personally believe is wrong or an illnesses, they'd have some beseeching god in the manner of help?

Yes. Prayer is conversing with God, and at time include requests for help, but what I am saying is those request are not used like one rubbing a genie lamp.
For example, people sit and pray for world peace. Why?
Do we expect that God will make everyone suddenly stop fighting and killing, and make everyone at peace?
Prayers must be in harmony with God's will, and we must be willing to act in harmony with our prayers. Similar to when Jesus prayered in the Garden on the night of his trial.

 

[nPeace]

I'll ignore your last question, as I don't see how it relate to me, or anything I said, and so don't understand why you asked such a question.

Then you don't understand my OP that you objected to. I simply said that in a free society anyone should be allowed to make whatever choices they want as long as they aren't harming anyone ELSE. You responded by asking me how do I know who gets hurt when such a choice is made and then YOU posted the video that became my focus as an example of someone getting hurt by such a choiceion.

I responded by saying that the ONLY person who was hurt in the example you gave was the person who made the choice... no one ELSE was hurt. And in a free society people are free to make choices that hurt THEMSELVES... just not anyone else.

Thus your bomb analogy isn't applicable. The pilot of a bomber is dropping bombs on OTHER PEOPLE to harm them. The pilot himself isn't the one getting hurt. IF the pilot chooses to bomb themselves, that's their choice in a free society... as long as they aren't harming ANYONE ELSE.

No. You completely ruined the analogy.
The bomb is not supposed to harm anyone.
I really don't know why you went there.
The bomb is supposed to be dropped and no one is to get hurt.

If you don't want me to focus on the video you provided as an example of people getting hurt by gender choices then give me an example of such a choice harming SOMEONE ELSE.

Why would that be required?
Are you saying that having an example will allow you to know that no one is hurt?
You don't know that anyone isn't being hurt. That's all that is required.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What I want to believe?
It's not about what I want to believe. How about what you want to believe?
You claimed you have always known, but you have corrected yourself, and rightly so." As long as I can recall", sounds more realistic, and accurate.

Anyway, you seem upset. Are you? There is no need to be.
I decided to use a more reliable source, to research de-transitioning.
Do you have any objections to this article?
I would like to get some feedback from you, @Rival, @Shadow Wolf, @Left Coast if you don't mind.

Why do you think desistance has a higher occurrence, and why do you think the following is the case?
Direct, formal research of detransition is lacking. Professional interest in the phenomenon has been met with contention. Detransitioners (persons who detransition) have similarly experienced controversy and struggle.
Detransition is commonly associated with transition regret...

Apparently the majority of persons with these "feelings" regret the most "prized medical treatment". What are your thoughts on that?

A 2003 German study found evidence for an increase in the number of demands for detransition, blaming poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians who — contrary to international best practices — assumed that transitioning as quickly as possible should be the only correct course of action. Surgeon Miroslav Djordjevic and psychotherapist James Caspian have reported that demand for surgical reversal of the physical effects of medical transition has been on the rise.

Poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians.
Sad, actually. imo.

Would you say one's preferences are based on what they believe.

Some consider gender identity to be fixed and absolute, with some neuroscientists asserting that it develops in utero in the second-trimester brain. However, there is little to no convincing evidence to support fundamental differences between the brains of females and males. If one's ‘internal sense of being a man or a woman’ no longer refers to a ‘man’ or ‘woman’ as defined by biological sex then the definition of gender identity risks becoming circular.

Within current debates, if gender identity becomes uncoupled from both biological sex and gendered socialisation , it develops an intangible soul-like quality or ‘essence’. As a pure subjective experience, it may be overwhelming and powerful but is also unverifiable and unfalsifiable. If this identity is held to be a person's innermost core concept of self, then questioning the very existence of gender identity becomes equated with questioning that person's entire sense of being, and consequently risks being considered a threat to the right to exist, or even as a threat to kill.

Inherent in the notion of ‘gender identity’ is that there already exists a specific subjective experience of being a man or a woman. However, there cannot be a significant intrinsic experiential difference between male and female human beings when we cannot know what those differences are. One cannot possibly know how it feels to be anything other than oneself. Medicine may be in danger of reinforcing social norms and reifying a concept that is impossible to define over and above material biological reality. At present, many health, social, educational and legal policies are being adapted to give gender primacy over sex.

This is what I was questioning, on how would a person know what they are. To simply say, 'one just knows' sounds like a person saying they experienced some feeling that tells them it was God.
If one is willing to use this subjective approach, it calls into question that person's claim that they need empirical evidence for religious faith, which they don't see.
It seems evident, ones preferences are a product of their beliefs.

It's actually a good article. But you have to take in everything. Not just poor quakity if care and rushing transitioning. But it also highlights many times poor treatment from others. Financial hardships. Isolation. Concern for getting adequate care. And you have to take in considerations, that you skipped over, that prior to 2000 gender non conformity and non-binary wasnt a thing and that may possibly account fir the numbers. And, indeed, I've net some who transitioned before those ideas and say they better identify with that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't understand why you don't understand.

I mentioned that the majority rules (say most people don't have gender dysphoria) doesn't determine what is right or wrong. It's like the more people have it (or other less common conditions) the more its normal or seen as disability (excused from being morally judged).

I'm still not getting how changing one's body if it doesn't hurt the person or others is wrong. Most people don't choose to do so especially since we don't have medical illnesses that promote as such, but still...

I'm not quite sure how it has to do with results of the law though.

Now I don't understand. Or maybe you don't understand what I am saying.
Do you realize I am not referring to human laws, but universal laws?

I can't tell the difference. What's universal laws if they're not natural laws?

I don't know if natural (I mentioned natural if I'm not mistaken) and human laws are the same. I'm speaking more of how life is inherently sporadic. We put patterns to things because that's how our brain makes sense of the world and can intelligently guess how to move in it. Same with nature, the physical universe, and everything made up-energy.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What's universal laws if they're not natural laws?

I've never thought of Nature's Laws as Universal Laws before. The two basically are inseparable. I like it!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The bomb is supposed to be dropped and no one is to get hurt.

You are wanting us to get hurt though. The way you emphasis detransitioning suggests you want us to fail and see only failed transitions.

 

[QuestioningMind]

No. You completely ruined the analogy.
The bomb is not supposed to harm anyone.
I really don't know why you went there.
The bomb is supposed to be dropped and no one is to get hurt.


Why would that be required?
Are you saying that having an example will allow you to know that no one is hurt?
You don't know that anyone isn't being hurt. That's all that is required.

No. You completely ruined the analogy.
The bomb is not supposed to harm anyone.
I really don't know why you went there.
The bomb is supposed to be dropped and no one is to get hurt.

What a truly bizarre analogy... one in which there are dropped bombs that aren't intended to hurt anyone. Can you provide an example of such a 'bomb'? If not, it's really not analogical to anything

Why would that be required?
Are you saying that having an example will allow you to know that no one is hurt?
You don't know that anyone isn't being hurt. That's all that is required

I can only go by the example that YOU provided. And in THAT example, the ONLY person who was hurt was the person who made the choice. If you have an example of such a choice hurting SOMEONE ELSE, then provide it... don't just complain that I'm focusing on the ONLY EXAMPLE you came up with.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What I want to believe?
It's not about what I want to believe. How about what you want to believe?
You claimed you have always known, but you have corrected yourself, and rightly so." As long as I can recall", sounds more realistic, and accurate.

Anyway, you seem upset. Are you? There is no need to be.
I decided to use a more reliable source, to research de-transitioning.
Do you have any objections to this article?
I would like to get some feedback from you, @Rival, @Shadow Wolf, @Left Coast if you don't mind.

Why do you think desistance has a higher occurrence, and why do you think the following is the case?
Direct, formal research of detransition is lacking. Professional interest in the phenomenon has been met with contention. Detransitioners (persons who detransition) have similarly experienced controversy and struggle.
Detransition is commonly associated with transition regret...

Apparently the majority of persons with these "feelings" regret the most "prized medical treatment". What are your thoughts on that?

A 2003 German study found evidence for an increase in the number of demands for detransition, blaming poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians who — contrary to international best practices — assumed that transitioning as quickly as possible should be the only correct course of action. Surgeon Miroslav Djordjevic and psychotherapist James Caspian have reported that demand for surgical reversal of the physical effects of medical transition has been on the rise.

Poor practice on the part of "well-meaning but certainly not unproblematic" clinicians.
Sad, actually. imo.

Would you say one's preferences are based on what they believe.

Some consider gender identity to be fixed and absolute, with some neuroscientists asserting that it develops in utero in the second-trimester brain. However, there is little to no convincing evidence to support fundamental differences between the brains of females and males. If one's ‘internal sense of being a man or a woman’ no longer refers to a ‘man’ or ‘woman’ as defined by biological sex then the definition of gender identity risks becoming circular.

Within current debates, if gender identity becomes uncoupled from both biological sex and gendered socialisation , it develops an intangible soul-like quality or ‘essence’. As a pure subjective experience, it may be overwhelming and powerful but is also unverifiable and unfalsifiable. If this identity is held to be a person's innermost core concept of self, then questioning the very existence of gender identity becomes equated with questioning that person's entire sense of being, and consequently risks being considered a threat to the right to exist, or even as a threat to kill.

Inherent in the notion of ‘gender identity’ is that there already exists a specific subjective experience of being a man or a woman. However, there cannot be a significant intrinsic experiential difference between male and female human beings when we cannot know what those differences are. One cannot possibly know how it feels to be anything other than oneself. Medicine may be in danger of reinforcing social norms and reifying a concept that is impossible to define over and above material biological reality. At present, many health, social, educational and legal policies are being adapted to give gender primacy over sex.

This is what I was questioning, on how would a person know what they are. To simply say, 'one just knows' sounds like a person saying they experienced some feeling that tells them it was God.
If one is willing to use this subjective approach, it calls into question that person's claim that they need empirical evidence for religious faith, which they don't see.
It seems evident, ones preferences are a product of their beliefs.

I'm more annoyed than anything, with some posts in this thread. I don't feel the need to justify myself or explain my perception of self. It's a settled issue for me and not one I spend time thinking about anymore. I know who I am.

As for detransitioners, what am I supposed to say? They made a mistake and too bad. It has nothing to do with me. I focus on my own healthcare and what other people do is their own business and responsibility. Has nothing to do with other trans people.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't understand why you don't understand.


Now I don't understand. Or maybe you don't understand what I am saying.
Do you realize I am not referring to human laws, but universal laws?


Yes. Prayer is conversing with God, and at time include requests for help, but what I am saying is those request are not used like one rubbing a genie lamp.
For example, people sit and pray for world peace. Why?
Do we expect that God will make everyone suddenly stop fighting and killing, and make everyone at peace?
Prayers must be in harmony with God's will, and we must be willing to act in harmony with our prayers. Similar to when Jesus prayered in the Garden on the night of his trial.

Reading your other convo, how is it wrong that someone transgender chooses with her doctor whether surgery etc would be the best option for them?

How do those who detransition weaken the argument that the transition works for some people and not for others?

What is your position on what gender is and how people define themselves by gender?

Articles etc are fine but like religion, topics that have to do with identity, beliefs, self perception, culture, etc are highly personal. So it's best to get knowledge from the people who live with it not those who study it.

I've had epilepsy near 20 years and counting. My doc said I probably know more about it than most...not because of the stats and intellect, but because I lived through it and found what works for me etc etc. Likewise, with gender identity. Maybe look at it differently it may give you sound perspective.

 

[Rival]

You honestly don't know? I doubt that.
However, if you really don't know, I'll allow you to gain that experience yourself.

Feelings aren't facts. Feelings are feelings. They aren't wrong or right, they just are. There's no right way to feel about anything or anyone. That would be absurd. If I fall in love with someone and it's a person I can't have will you tell me my feelings are somehow wrong? Of course they're not. They're feelings.

 

[Left Coast]

There is no widely held view that it is proven necessary. It is a preferred method that is chosen, just like some other orthodox medical practices, such as antibiotics and blood transfusions. Just as realizations of dangers, risks, and problems are seen later down the line, I see this as no different.

I realize you're a Witness so your faith informs you to be against blood transfusions, but they literally save people's lives. And, sorry, you're against...antibiotics? Again, they literally save people's lives.

Now, are there risks to medical treatment? Of course. Look up the adverse side effects of ibuprofen some time. So there's a cost-benefit analysis to be weighed in any potential medical intervention. SRS, like the other interventions you mentioned, can have negative downstream consequences, but doesn't always. And has been shown to be quite effective. So if you regard SRS like any other medical treatment, you shouldn't have an issue with it as long as trained physicians are prescribing it and have weighed the pros and cons with the patient giving informed consent.

 

[nPeace]

I realize you're a Witness so your faith informs you to be against blood transfusions, but they literally save people's lives. And, sorry, you're against...antibiotics? Again, they literally save people's lives.

Now, are there risks to medical treatment? Of course. Look up the adverse side effects of ibuprofen some time. So there's a cost-benefit analysis to be weighed in any potential medical intervention. SRS, like the other interventions you mentioned, can have negative downstream consequences, but doesn't always. And has been shown to be quite effective. So if you regard SRS like any other medical treatment, you shouldn't have an issue with it as long as trained physicians are prescribing it and have weighed the pros and cons with the patient giving informed consent.

I just want to correct one thing here. Where did you read that I am against antibiotics? Did you read it, or did you assume it?
I suggest it's the latter.