Transgenderism

[mikkel_the_dane]

These kinds of mental disorders are difficult to spot.

Yeah, but all of what we debate are not mental disorders.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It's awkward to explain to some Christians that de-conversion was a painful and difficult process that I never wanted to undergo, but also that my life is so much better having left the religion behind. I am happier as an ex-Christian, but I didn't choose to forsake God to enjoy sin or anything. It's just that, in hindsight, the whole religion centers around an abusive father figure working through the intermediaries of totalitarian institutions. I simply didn't realize this until after I left the religion.

I always thought it was hyperbole when anti-theists described Christianity that way and that the criticism only really applied to, like, the Westboro Baptist Church. My faith wasn't based on hate like theirs. My faith was based on love and reason. Or at least, so I believed, because that's what my local totalitarian authorities told me I had to believe according to the abusive father figure who was always reading my mind to make sure I never thought otherwise.

I underestimated how affected I was by this idea of some supreme authority constantly reading my mind and judging my every thought. It's really a miserable way to live; you're essentially always under someone's boot that you can't even reliably commune with.

I wish I could give your post a 'friendly' frubal, Ella. Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. I appreciate it.

I posted the following in another thread, but I thought it was also appropriate in response to your post.

According to the Bible, God is capable of hatred, as well as anger and jealousy. Christians, in my opinion, are deceiving themselves by focusing solely on his alleged love and mercy while ignoring the other verses that depict his hatred, anger, and jealousy. When I left Christianity, I reread the Bible without rose-colored glasses, and I now see God as a sadistic and psychopathic monster who delights in inflicting pain and torturing people, as well as causing total chaos and disasters in order to inflict pain and kill people. And as a former devout Christian and survivor of childhood abuse, I compare God to a narcissistic and abusive parent who only "loves" you when you do or say exactly what they want you to do. And you think that if you don't make them angry, they won't hurt you, but you're not completely sure because they have an extremely violent temper and are known to lash out in anger. So, if you disobey them and make them angry at you, then there will be hell to pay. That isn't a relationship based on unconditional love, but rather one based on fear and mistrust. If God exists, then I don't believe that he is worthy of my respect and reverence, let alone my love and worship. I do believe, however, that he has earned my contempt. If God exists, then he can go to hell. He clearly doesn't think I'm worth his time, and I now don't think he's worth mine.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

And your question is too simple.
So here is the long answer.
If male/male in a standard 2 sexes and nothing else society, then you properly won't choose a female gender.
If male/female in in a standard 2 sexes and nothing else society, you can learn as per society that you are male/male and never consider that your gender is female.

Assume I am asking my question within the context of our society since this entire discussion has been implicitly understood to be contextualized within our current society up to this point. Again, if you keep veering off, I will have to assume that you not discussing this in good faith, and perhaps I’m not the one who is captive to an ideology.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, if trans people feel like one gender trapped in the body of another then it seems that really feminine gay men could make the case that they feel like a women trapped in a mans body.

Some of them do end up transitioning. There's a lot of self-hatred and pressure to be "straight" with some gay men. You seen this in Iran where homosexuality gets you the death penalty but the government will pay for sex changes. But a man being effeminate doesn't mean he is a woman or wants to be one. Transsexualism is a separate thing. It's a medical condition.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Assume I am asking my question within the context of our society since this entire discussion has been implicitly understood to be contextualized within our current society up to this point. Again, if you keep veering off, I will have to assume that you not discussing this in good faith, and perhaps I’m not the one who is captive to an ideology.

Well, we are not in one society. We are in general for religion.
I am religious, but Danish and a product of a progressive society that is secular and relies on science, when it comes to sex and gender.
What society are you in and how did it influence you?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Some of them do end up transitioning. There's a lot of self-hatred and pressure to be "straight" with some gay men. You seen this in Iran where homosexuality gets you the death penalty but the government will pay for sex changes. But a man being effeminate doesn't mean he is a woman or wants to be one. Transsexualism is a separate thing. It's a medical condition.

But not a disorder!

 

[Ella S.]

I wish I could give your post a 'friendly' frubal, Ella. Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. I appreciate it.

I posted the following in another thread, but I thought it was also appropriate in response to your post.

According to the Bible, God is capable of hatred, as well as anger and jealousy. Christians, in my opinion, are deceiving themselves by focusing solely on his alleged love and mercy while ignoring the other verses that depict his hatred, anger, and jealousy. When I left Christianity, I reread the Bible without rose-colored glasses, and I now see God as a sadistic and psychopathic monster who delights in inflicting pain and torturing people, as well as causing total chaos and disasters in order to inflict pain and kill people. And as a former devout Christian and survivor of childhood abuse, I compare God to a narcissistic and abusive parent who only "loves" you when you do or say exactly what they want you to do. And you think that if you don't make them angry, they won't hurt you, but you're not completely sure because they have an extremely violent temper and are known to lash out in anger. So, if you disobey them and make them angry at you, then there will be hell to pay. That isn't a relationship based on unconditional love, but rather one based on fear and mistrust. If God exists, then I don't believe that he is worthy of my respect and reverence, let alone my love and worship. I do believe, however, that he has earned my contempt. If God exists, then he can go to hell. He clearly doesn't think I'm worth his time, and I now don't think he's worth mine.

Very well said.

I think we forget that the Hebrew God was a synthesis of Yahweh and Elohim, two pagan deities that existed during a time where the gods were feared. They were given the lavish praise of being all-good, all-mighty, all-powerful, incomparable in their grace, etc. as a means of propitiating and satiating them. Sacrifices were given to the gods to keep them from sending a plague or a famine down upon your people, and heretics were executed in creatively cruel ways so that their heresy would not bring the wrath of the gods down upon the entire community.

In Mesopotamian religion as a whole, humans were the slaves of the gods. Humanity had to submit to their divine masters and know their place in the world. Children obeyed their mothers as their property, wives obeyed their husbands as their property, men obeyed their rulers as their property, and the rulers obeyed the gods as their property. It was a rigid hierarchy with abuse and slavery baked right into it.

This never went away. Many Biblical translations try to lessen how harsh this is by replacing "slave" with "servant," but the context and the meaning still carry over. Abrahamic religions are still concerned about avoiding the judgment of God to this day. The fear of God and being his servant is praised all throughout the Bible, and even the more "liberal" Christians will call themselves "humble servants of God."

It's really not surprising that these religions are so abusive and unhealthy. I feel like anyone looking at it as an outsider can see it with stark clarity. I appreciate that you aren't one of those pagans that tries to do Christian apologetics.

ETA: I mean, look at how angry and terrified some people get at blasphemy! That's a great example of how the underlying mentality has continued

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Well, we are not in one society. We are in general for religion.
I am religious, but Danish and a product of a progressive society that is secular and relies on science, when it comes to sex and gender.
What society are you in and how did it influence you?

Look, I am willing to defer to whichever viewpoint you hold about how gender identity is imposed on us. I am asking: once that gender identity is dictated to me scientifically, do I have the agency to choose to identify with the other gender?

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Look, I am willing to defer to whichever viewpoint you hold about how gender identity is imposed on us. I am asking: once that gender identity is dictated to me scientifically, do I have the agency to choose to identify with the other gender?

Even if this is as far as we get, I feel like this dialogue was necessary and productive. If you want to stop now, that is okay. It’s a difficult topic and I’m not looking to trap someone into a losing position for the sake of winning or anything like that.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

So then I will clarify that I realize and appreciate how imposing certain imposed identities are.

Can you clarify what you mean by imposed? The word, to me, comes across as something that requires a third party, so something like 'biologically imposed' doesn't really fit to me.

For example, I'm autistic not by imposition of a third party identity but because of operations of my psychology (and presumably physiology but brain scans aren't necessary for diagnosis.)

There is imposition by neurotypical society that I behave in a way that is neurotypical. I can choose to behave neurotypically to a limited extent (masking). I have the agency to go along with that imposition.
But since masking hurts me more than accommodation hurts neurotypical society, it is empowering for me to not feel imposed to act neurotypical. It does not feel empowering to be told that because I can act neurotypical, I should.

Does that make sense?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But not a disorder!

It's a medical disorder. I wouldn't be on testosterone therapy if there was nothing wrong with me.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Can you clarify what you mean by imposed? The word, to me, comes across as something that requires a third party, so something like 'biologically imposed' doesn't really fit to me.

For example, I'm autistic not by imposition of a third party identity but because of operations of my psychology (and presumably physiology but brain scans aren't necessary for diagnosis.)

There is imposition by neurotypical society that I behave in a way that is neurotypical. I can choose to behave neurotypically to a limited extent (masking). I have the agency to go along with that imposition.
But since masking hurts me more than accommodation hurts neurotypical society, it is empowering for me to not feel imposed to act neurotypical. It does not feel empowering to be told that because I can act neurotypical, I should.

Does that make sense?

I mean that your autism is imposed on you based on your experience of symptoms. I’m calling that an imposed identity. You didn’t choose it. It imposes itself on you.

After that, I’m proposing that you can, at a subjective level, choose how much you identify with it. I’m not saying that you can dis-identify with it and have it instantly stop imposing on you, but I’m sure you’ve come across people with autism who see autism as a primary aspect of their identity and others with similar symptoms of autism that don’t consider autism to be as central to their identity, right?

 

[Treasure Hunter]

I mean that your autism is imposed on you based on your experience of symptoms. I’m calling that an imposed identity. You didn’t choose it. It imposes itself on you.

After that, I’m proposing that you can, at a subjective level, choose how much you identify with it. I’m not saying that you can dis-identify with it and have it instantly stop imposing on you, but I’m sure you’ve come across people with autism who see autism as a primary aspect of their identity and others with similar symptoms of autism that don’t consider autism to be as central to their identity, right?

To expand on this, if your autism miraculously goes away, are you going to say that you are no longer you since you don’t have autism anymore? That you are no longer in the right body? The one who highly identifies with autism (subjectively) might say that, but the only who doesn’t identify highly with it likely won’t.

That is the subjective aspect that needs to be considered.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I mean that your autism is imposed on you based on your experience of symptoms. I’m calling that an imposed identity. You didn’t choose it. It imposes itself on you.

After that, I’m proposing that you can, at a subjective level, choose how much you identify with it. I’m not saying that you can dis-identify with it and have it instantly stop imposing on you, but I’m sure you’ve come across people with autism who see autism as a primary aspect of their identity and others with similar symptoms of autism that don’t consider autism to be as central to their identity, right?

How do you mean 'central to their identity'? Are we talking about how much someone discusses their autism openly?

Most people on the autism spectrum to some extent have it impact their daily life so it make sense for it to be something that comes up to them daily. But a lot of autistic people don't talk about it to neurotypicals either from fear of lashback or infantilization, not getting accommodation, or just not having the energy to explain why they process differently, etc. I'm not sure that makes it less important to them or identify less as autistic because they don't talk about it.

I didn't have the identity at all of an autistic person some years ago because I didn't have the proper language to describe it. But it still effected me way more than other people in my life knew so there was quite a bit of surprise when the diagnosis came. Because they didn't have access to my mental processing and thought I seemed "normal" from an exterior perspective.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

To expand on this, if your autism miraculously goes away, are you going to say that you are no longer you since you don’t have autism anymore? That you are no longer in the right body? The one who highly identifies with autism (subjectively) might say that, but the only who doesn’t identify highly with it likely won’t.

That is the subjective aspect that needs to be considered.

I think it's trivially true to say everyone experiences everything subjectively. Experience is necessarily subjective.

What I struggle with is why it being true that all experiences are subjective relates to imposition vs agency (if that's the dichotomy being drawn, though I would provably call it agency vs impotence.)

 

[Treasure Hunter]

I think it's trivially true to say everyone experiences everything subjectively. Experience is necessarily subjective.

What I struggle with is why it being true that all experiences are subjective relates to imposition vs agency (if that's the dichotomy being drawn, though I would provably call it agency vs impotence.)

This all started due to the claim that gender is not subjective, which seems to be happening because people are thinking of it as something that is imposed on us without the ability to respond to that imposition subjectively as an agent.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

This all started due to the claim that gender is not subjective, which seems to be happening because people are thinking of it as something that is imposed on us without the ability to respond to that imposition subjectively as an agent.

Okay, so, there are objective criteria for describing the state of being transgender just like the state of being autistic. But people will experience being autistic or transgender differently. Thus their experience is subjective.

Saying you are not or do not identify as autistic or transgender but in actuality experiencing things that line up with said objective criteria, even though your experience is subjective, would be being willfully dishonest or making an inaccurate statement out of lack of knowledge.

E.g. I was autistic even though I would have told you I wasn't some years ago.

As I was learning what autism was really, and how it related to my experience, I had denial and imposter syndrome which is pretty common. But me trying to hide or pretend I didn't experience autism to others for whatever reason would have been the opposite of empowering, it would have been unhealthy.

I imagine it would be similar for someone who is trans. They could choose to not call themselves trans, but why should they and why would we call that empowerment instead of what it is, an imposition by society for trans people to not be trans?

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Okay, so, there are objective criteria for describing the state of being transgender just like the state of being autistic. But people will experience being autistic or transgender differently. Thus their experience is subjective.

Saying you are not or do not identify as autistic or transgender but in actuality experiencing things that line up with said objective criteria, even though your experience is subjective, would be being willfully dishonest or making an inaccurate statement out of lack of knowledge.

E.g. I was autistic even though I would have told you I wasn't some years ago.

As I was learning what autism was really, and how it related to my experience, I had denial and imposter syndrome which is pretty common. But me trying to hide or pretend I didn't experience autism to others for whatever reason would have been the opposite of empowering, it would have been unhealthy.

I imagine it would be similar for someone who is trans. They could choose to not call themselves trans, but why should they and why would we call that empowerment instead of what it is, an imposition by society for trans people to not be trans?

I’m skeptical but agnostic overall on the neurological transgenderism claims. Would the claimed neurological markers correspond with anywhere near perfect accuracy with the genders that solidified adults identify as? I have some doubts about that.

Do I think there is a high level of social influence and imposition on gender? I am much less skeptical about that.

Because transgender identity has a subjective element and is socially influenced, even if there is neurological influence as well, trans activists are not going to be able to shut down the social influence / imposition that they don’t like. Why? Because many in society are going to have a hard time seeing how increasing gender confusion is beneficial to society.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Hey @InChrist there is a lot of good stuff on this post of yours. It must be more than a little challenging as so far you are not looking to good. But that is ok, life is full of challenges. What is not ok is your absence in your own post. I would suggest that you either come out here and accept that you are wrong or you defend your position. To put it simply - grow a pair.

While I disagree with the OP's content and its source, I agree that the member who posted it should come back to either recant or defend it.

 

[Viker]

While I disagree with the OP's content and its source, I agree that the member who posted it should come back to either recant or defend it.

Maybe they took up the suggestion from @Sand Dancer and just stopped.