Epic Story! "The Mystery Of The Transvestite And The Stolen Car "[now a debate on slurs]

[Inner Stickler]

Fine, use your approach, but remember that as a straight man, you have no idea what it's like to deal with this on a personal level every day and if Eve sometimes strikes you as abrasive, well, count yourself lucky that you don't have to deal with people denying your basic qualities on a regular basis. It's really easy to tell other people to grin and bear it when you don't have to do any heavy lifting yourself.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

random person: You're a complete cunt, hajario.
hajario: Just so you know, that word is considered quite offensive in most circles. You should avoid using it.
random person: Oh, I do beg your pardon. You're a total cunt, hajario.

ACT II

random person: You're still a cunt, hajario.
hajario: Yeah? So I guess you wanna put your nigger dick in my tranny cunt and make some retards?
random person: Oh, I do beg your pardon. Your edgy satire has shown me the error of my ways.

FIN

(with apologies to pretty much everyone)

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

Fine, use your approach, but remember that as a straight man, you have no idea what it's like to deal with this on a personal level every day and if Eve sometimes strikes you as abrasive, well, count yourself lucky that you don't have to deal with people denying your basic qualities on a regular basis. It's really easy to tell other people to grin and bear it when you don't have to do any heavy lifting yourself.

You are, once again, shifting the goal posts and, it seems, willfully missing my point.

-I am Jewish and have dealt with lots of prejudice in my time including getting beaten by a group of kids when I was a kid and having my hours cut to nothing when my boss found out about my ethnicity.

-I have, indeed, done some heavy lifting. As I said, I have donated considerable time and money of my own to help with the cause. (Have you done the same?) This is of no direct benefit to me but I do so because I can't abide abuses of human rights.

-Please show me where I have asked anyone to grin and bear anything. I have very clearly said that that specific prejudice must be called out and am only disagreeing about the method by which to do it.

[Una Persson]

Originally Posted by hajario

I will note, that the vitriol and comparisons to other slurs were started by a particularly nasty post by a transgendered woman and that's what set off the hijack. All that was accomplished by that nastiness was to piss people off and entrench the views of some of them. Minds were actually changed when reasonable people arrived later and provided cites and explanations with kindness.

Yes...you're correct. That being said, I do err on the side of giving Eve the benefit of the doubt in cases like this. While there many more transgendered women on here, Eve is out and public IRL, which means she is subject to more personal abuse and direct intolerance than those who are in, say, deep stealth mode. It's a much more personal issue for her than for most other persons.

[Inner Stickler]

Originally Posted by hajario

-Please show me where I have asked anyone to grin and bear anything. I have very clearly said that that specific prejudice must be called out and am only disagreeing about the method by which to do it.

Eve has spent countless hours being the board's go-to reference on transgendered and has been polite and gracious to us and lord only knows how many other people outside of the dope on the issue. She doesn't tell you to be nice to the people making cracks about christ-killers, you can do the same for her.

[Una Persson]

Originally Posted by hajario

I have, indeed, done some heavy lifting. As I said, I have donated considerable time and money of my own to help with the cause. (Have you done the same?) This is of no direct benefit to me but I do so because I can't abide abuses of human rights.

Not that it's a tangible benefit, but you have my deep and earnest respect for doing such (and other things about you as well.)

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

Eve has spent countless hours being the board's go-to reference on transgendered and has been polite and gracious to us and lord only knows how many other people outside of the dope on the issue. She doesn't tell you to be nice to the people making cracks about christ-killers, you can do the same for her.

And the goal posts move again. (And if I am not mistaken, Eve is also Jewish.) You have mistaken and misstated my opinion numerous times today. I'm not sure why you think that I, as a person fighting the same fight, can't have a difference of opinion on how we should work together.

[Sicks Ate]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

The implication of the second statement is pretty clearly that transgendered people have not been treated poorly throughout history. I think it's a little disingenuous to get irritated at RNATB for thinking that's what you meant.

It is nothing of the sort. The implication of the second statement is that the term 'tranny' doesn't have near the same history behind it, not that transgendered haven't been treated poorly. There's quite a gulf between 'treated poorly' and 'kept as slaves for two hundred years and then treated as second class citizens for another hundred.'

Having said that:

Originally Posted by Una Persson

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass about comparing and contrasting the offensiveness of different slurs. Again, I wonder why this hijack always occurs where people try to weigh "nigger" versus "tranny" and conclude that unless one is close to or equal to the other in "severity" (however the hell that's measured) then it's OK to use one but not the other...all of which ignores the basic principle of politeness of "it doesn't matter *how* offensive it is; it's offensive to transgendered persons, please don't use it."

My conclusion is not that it's ok to use 'tranny' because it's less offensive than 'nigger.'

It occurrs to me that there is a baseline, where a word becomes hateful or degrading to a person, below which the degree of offensiveness is no longer of consequence.

I think that several here are, understandably, reading this thread with the defensive glasses on. I'm not arguing anything here, I was just attempting to understand the issue better, myself. Thanks.

[hajario]

Thinking about this a little more...

Generally speaking, it's one thing to sit on the internet a bleat on about how open minded you are. It's another thing to be like me who has marched in public for LGBT rights, donated my hard earned money to the cause and spent countless hours trying to educate people. I have, in real life, changed minds. I am, in fact, eminently entitled and qualified to tell anyone my opinion on how to deal with this sort of prejudice.

Let me tell you about a couple of real stories from my life.

When I was 18, I very ignorantly referred to someone I didn't like as a "stupid fag." A woman overheard and nicely said to me, "Did you mean that he was a stupid gay person or a stupid jerky person? You really shouldn't use that word that way." I thought about it and told her that she was right and never did it again.

The next one is longer so will be in another post.

[Inner Stickler]

Do you do this to help marginalized populations or for bragging rights on the internet?

I don't give a shit what sort of credentials that you feel you have, you have no right to tell Eve how she should handle transphobia.

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Inner Stickler

Do you do this to help marginalized populations or for bragging rights on the internet?

Considering that I haven't mentioned it much, if at all, before, you tell me? I don't talk about it at all out of context. I just do it. I only mentioned it this time to explain that I am not just an armchair internet warrior.

I don't give a shit what sort of credentials that you feel you have, you have no right to tell Eve how she should handle transphobia.

Well then we can both play this stupid game. You have no right to tell me how I should handle transphobia.

[hajario]

Story #2 happened just last year.

I am not going to out anyone but a somewhat well known actor in a popular children's show, who is now deceased, happened to be gay. He was popular with the kids in his neighborhood even well after his retirement.

Somehow the guy came up in conversation and one of my co-workers starting mocking him. He said something like, "Haha. Did you know that that guy was queer as a three dollar bill? There is no way I would have let my kids play with them."

Now I could have gone off on him but I didn't. I explained that being gay means that he likes men, not boys and that statistically his daughter was in more danger from a random man that his son with a gay man. My co-worker really thought about it and told me that I was right and then apologized for saying that. There is no way that demeaning him and using a bunch of other slurs would have made that point.

Now I don't mean to imply that I can convince anyone. I probably fail more than I succeed. I do know that it works.

Why is it that I am not entitled to tell people about it regardless of their transgendered status?

[Guinastasia]

Originally Posted by Una Persson

RuPaul is a gay male drag queen, not transgendered. Furthermore, they're in a unique position with fame, money, etc. and not directly subjected to abuse they have to take from anyone, so their opinion on the matter is of highly questionable value.

Which was what I was asking -- he's not considered "transgendered". (Although would a drag queen be considered a transvestite?)

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Which was what I was asking -- he's not considered "transgendered". (Although would a drag queen be considered a transvestite?)

IME the term transgendered is an umbrella that includes transvestites in one group and transsexuals in another.

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Which was what I was asking -- he's not considered "transgendered". (Although would a drag queen be considered a transvestite?)

You're correct but "tranny" is a pejorative for both transgendered people and transvestites.

[Vinyl Turnip]

One's an umbrella and one's a pejorative. They're pretty much functionally equivalent, but the cuter-sounding word is an offensive slur for some reason.

[Miller]

Those are some great stories, hajario, and as a member of the Lesbian-Gay-Bacon-Tomato community, I'm genuinely thankful that you make the effort to help us.

However, your position in this thread is bullshit. Eve did not attack anyone. Not one single word of any of her posts her insulted or disparaged any other poster on these boards. She expressed a good deal of anger, sure - and that anger is absolutely and completely justified. And more over, it's a vitally necessary part of the civil rights process. Politeness is great, but if we're only ever polite about gay and trans rights, it's very easy for the mainstream to interpret that those rights are not a very big deal. I mean, if we're not upset about being oppressed, our oppression can't really be that severe, right?

I agree, if Eve had come in here and said, "Fuck you, you fucking bigots!" then that wouldn't have been helpful. (Also, against the rules.) But if she'd come in here and said, "I don't like the word "tranny," and would prefer people not use it," how many people are going to remember that in a month? Or a year? On the other hand, how many people are going to remember her post to this thread now? Eve's a very cool lady, and a popular fixture of the board. Seeing her snap someone's head off over use of the word "tranny" is going to make a hell of a lot more of an impression than your milquetoast alternative.

I think the "tranny v. nigger" hijack was inevitable, regardless of what sort of response Eve had led with (presuming she wasn't ignored entirely because she choked all the passion out of her complaint for fear of offending people). Analogies are one of the most common debate tools, and the analogy between "tranny" and "nigger" are obvious and compelling. The comparison would have been made eventually in any discussion of the subject, and that's naturally going to attract those who are more interested in having a "more-oppressed-than-thou" dick measuring contest than any sort of actual social justice.

Lastly, while the offense may have been made out of ignorance, this is the Straight Dope. Since when do we treat ignorance kindly around here?

All that being said: Sincerely, thank you for being an ally.

[Malthus]

Originally Posted by Miller

Those are some great stories, hajario, and as a member of the Lesbian-Gay-Bacon-Tomato community, I'm genuinely thankful that you make the effort to help us.

However, your position in this thread is bullshit. Eve did not attack anyone. Not one single word of any of her posts her insulted or disparaged any other poster on these boards. She expressed a good deal of anger, sure - and that anger is absolutely and completely justified. And more over, it's a vitally necessary part of the civil rights process. Politeness is great, but if we're only ever polite about gay and trans rights, it's very easy for the mainstream to interpret that those rights are not a very big deal. I mean, if we're not upset about being oppressed, our oppression can't really be that severe, right?

I agree, if Eve had come in here and said, "Fuck you, you fucking bigots!" then that wouldn't have been helpful. (Also, against the rules.) But if she'd come in here and said, "I don't like the word "tranny," and would prefer people not use it," how many people are going to remember that in a month? Or a year? On the other hand, how many people are going to remember her post to this thread now? Eve's a very cool lady, and a popular fixture of the board. Seeing her snap someone's head off over use of the word "tranny" is going to make a hell of a lot more of an impression than your milquetoast alternative.

I think the "tranny v. nigger" hijack was inevitable, regardless of what sort of response Eve had led with (presuming she wasn't ignored entirely because she choked all the passion out of her complaint for fear of offending people). Analogies are one of the most common debate tools, and the analogy between "tranny" and "nigger" are obvious and compelling. The comparison would have been made eventually in any discussion of the subject, and that's naturally going to attract those who are more interested in having a "more-oppressed-than-thou" dick measuring contest than any sort of actual social justice.

Lastly, while the offense may have been made out of ignorance, this is the Straight Dope. Since when do we treat ignorance kindly around here?

All that being said: Sincerely, thank you for being an ally.

These are all good points, but there is another side - "snapping someone's head off" about being oppressed by a word choice that many do not know is in fact oppressive comes across as unreasonably thin-skinned, and the target of the anger unfairly treated.

Hence the comparison to "nigger". The issue really isn't that the one is more inherently offensive than the other, or that one group is more oppressed than another. The issue is that those using the term "nigger" must know it is a slur. They are using it because it is a slur. Many who do not have transgendered friends, lovers or relations simply do not know that "tranny" is a slur. I certainly did not. I think "snapping someone's head off" ought to be reserved for people using slurs that they know or ought to know are offensive.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Malthus

These are all good points, but there is another side - "snapping someone's head off" about being oppressed by a word choice that many do not know is in fact oppressive comes across as unreasonably thin-skinned, and the target of the anger unfairly treated.

Hence the comparison to "nigger". The issue really isn't that the one is more inherently offensive than the other, or that one group is more oppressed than another. The issue is that those using the term "nigger" must know it is a slur. They are using it because it is a slur. Many who do not have transgendered friends, lovers or relations simply do not know that "tranny" is a slur. I certainly did not. I think "snapping someone's head off" ought to be reserved for people using slurs that they know or ought to know are offensive.

Look at the original title of the thread. Now read the linked story. I have said before and will say again the whole humor of the story depends on a man sleeping with a transperson without realizing it. Even without use of the word tranny, this is cruel and offensive.

[hajario]

Thank you, Miller, for your genuine and intelligent response. This gives us something to actually discuss instead me having to defend myself against things that I never said or implied. I am glad to see that you think that I have a right to my opinion although you disagree.

You are correct in that I shouldn't have used the word "attack" to characterize Eve's responses. And don't for one second think that I think that we shouldn't be angry when we are confronted with prejudice or ignorance. I was sickened and depressed for a week when Prop 8 passed here a couple of years ago. I also get that at some point, a Stonewall has to happen. At first though, I think people need to be given a chance to learn before you hit them with the big guns. Back when I was 18 and that woman confronted me, I wouldn't have learned the same lesson had she come out screaming.

[Malthus]

Originally Posted by DocCathode

Look at the original title of the thread. Now read the linked story. I have said before and will say again the whole humor of the story depends on a man sleeping with a transperson without realizing it. Even without use of the word tranny, this is cruel and offensive.

Not arguing about the linked story here. I haven't read it and don't really want to - sounds nasty.

Only about the debate in this thread, after it was moved here to great debates.

If the debate is "the linked story is cruel and offensive", I have nothing to say on that.

[Una Persson]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Which was what I was asking -- he's not considered "transgendered". (Although would a drag queen be considered a transvestite?)

Much debate exists. Some TG/TS persons I know are not at all happy to be grouped with transvestites - a couple I know are rather disgusted with the comparison. Others think it's great. The root cause behind the concern is that some, possibly a majority, of transvestites cross dress for a sexual kink and have no doubt themselves that they are a man (or woman) dressing in the clothes of a woman (or man).

RuPaul is a drag queen, and thus doing it purely as a part of their act. Their opinions overall are about as relevant as anyone's. Or not.

[Martin Hyde]

Originally Posted by Una Persson

Some of you folks, doggone it...how disappointing. I don't want to lecture or hector (but that's exactly what I'm doing... )...I can't believe folks (not referring to Sage Rat whose post I quoted) interact with human beings in real-life society the way you do on the SDMB. Internet tough talk is just that, because I'm sure the first time anyone walked up to a relevant audience and exclaimed "hey, nigger is just a word, words don't have any power!" or "hey Jews, don't pressure me into not using kike! It's just, like, words and stuff, man!" or even "why don't you like Polack jokes, Jerzy? Do you hate free speech?" they'd either be shunned from society or would get their ass kicked.

I don't think I have ever heard "tranny" used in anything but a derogatory manner, and I think I've only heard an actual TS/TG person use it a couple of times themselves. The people who don't think it's offensive likely don't treat it seriously because all those "trannies" running around are, well, funny. They're just dudes dressing up as chicks to have sex, right? Or milquetoast ersatz males feminized by a domineering wife with rolling pin in hand. Or ultra butch dykes who want to steal the white man's womenfolk.

There's no real reason to be rude to people in general but the fact is Jews are a 5,000 year old religious group with a long history of persecution. Blacks are a major ethnic group with established historical persecution in the United States (and many other majority white countries.) People who have gender identity disorders (all along that spectrum) are just dudes dressing up as chicks and/or dudes who have gotten a doctor to mutilate them to have imitation female genitalia (or vice versa for both, I guess.) To expect that people look at these individuals the same way as blacks who just have a common human genetic trait and deserve no persecution for it is ridiculous. GID patients have a mental illness and society should be looking into ways to eradicate that mental illness through some form of treatment that isn't the equivalent of giving a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks he's Napoleon a bicorn hat and a saber.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

There's no real reason to be rude to people in general but the fact is Jews are a 5,000 year old religious group with a long history of persecution. Blacks are a major ethnic group with established historical persecution in the United States (and many other majority white countries.) People who have gender identity disorders (all along that spectrum) are just dudes dressing up as chicks and/or dudes who have gotten a doctor to mutilate them to have imitation female genitalia (or vice versa for both, I guess.) To expect that people look at these individuals the same way as blacks who just have a common human genetic trait and deserve no persecution for it is ridiculous. GID patients have a mental illness and society should be looking into ways to eradicate that mental illness through some form of treatment that isn't the equivalent of giving a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks he's Napoleon a bicorn hat and a saber.

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/5/2034.long


Read it. It's scientific evidence that the human brain is sexually dimorphic and that the sex of the brain can be at odds with chromosomes and morphology.


Either attack the research, or admit that you are wrong.

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

There's no real reason to be rude to people in general but the fact is Jews are a 5,000 year old religious group with a long history of persecution. Blacks are a major ethnic group with established historical persecution in the United States (and many other majority white countries.) People who have gender identity disorders (all along that spectrum) are just dudes dressing up as chicks and/or dudes who have gotten a doctor to mutilate them to have imitation female genitalia (or vice versa for both, I guess.) To expect that people look at these individuals the same way as blacks who just have a common human genetic trait and deserve no persecution for it is ridiculous. GID patients have a mental illness and society should be looking into ways to eradicate that mental illness through some form of treatment that isn't the equivalent of giving a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks he's Napoleon a bicorn hat and a saber.

*Sigh* All of those posts that I made today....down the crapper. Let it be known that I have no problem with this post getting hit with both barrels. This is not in the same league with someone who genuinely didn't know that tranny is considered offensive.

[MsWhatsit]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

GID patients have a mental illness and society should be looking into ways to eradicate that mental illness through some form of treatment that isn't the equivalent of giving a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks he's Napoleon a bicorn hat and a saber.

Holy shit, dude.

[Martin Hyde]

Originally Posted by DocCathode

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/5/2034.long

Read it. It's scientific evidence that the human brain is sexually dimorphic and that the sex of the brain can be at odds with chromosomes and morphology.

Either attack the research, or admit that you are wrong.

I've actually addressed similar research to this many times. All the studies I've ever seen (including this pathetic study with only 42 participants) have a few things in common:

• Small sample size, usually less than 100 persons.
• Persons who desperately want to believe "transgendered people are men with female brains" (or insert appropriate genders in appropriate place) take the research to say far more than it actually does.
• Generally the specific way they do the above is a study finds some similarities between a "transgendered" male brain and a healthy female brain and then take that as general proof that the mentally ill male literally has a female brain in a male body

For example one popular study on brain activity had GID patients look at pornography and the researchers noted what areas of their brain were activated by the pornography. The researchers found some similarities between brain activity areas in a GID male and a healthy female. However, they also found unique activity not seen in healthy males or healthy females. Rather than convincing or even suggesting to me that the GID patient literally had a "female brain" it suggests to me the GID patient had an abnormally functioning brain, a result of defective physical development of the brain itself or defective production of various chemicals in the brain in levels that cause mental illness.

So let's go to your particular study, and it's really no different than other studies I've seen on brain structure of GID patients. It simply shows abnormalities "similar to that of the healthy female brain." But the brain is a major and complicated organ, abnormalities in a male brain here or there doesn't suddenly make the male brain female. There is a lot more to being male or female than just a few select areas of the brain, males and females do lots of mental tasks differently in thought areas dispersed throughout the entire brain itself.

Finally, let's say any of these studies ever prove what none has ever come close to even suggesting (note it is not the researchers that utilize foolish claims and say that certain abnormalities in a mentally ill person's brain make their brain the "brain of an opposite biological sex")--that in fact somehow you have a female brain in a male body. Here is the problem, ask any biologist to sex a mammal, they need not look at the brain but instead the genitalia. It's basically obvious then if the animal is male or female, in rare cases the animal may be physically deformed. Only in those cases of irrevocable physical deformity should we just try to accommodate the person. In cases where there is the potential that we could correct the deformity in brain function with future pharmaceutical approaches that would be a far better approach.

Schizophrenics have brains different than healthy humans, but that doesn't mean they have healthy brains. A GID person is possibly the same way but again, I've never seen any definitive evidence as to what causes GID, it could be chemical imbalances or physical deformity of the brain itself.

If we eventually know that schizophrenia and GID are both caused by irreversible brain deformity that develops in the womb, I would argue we would strive to find genetic counseling technology to prevent such people from being created in the first place.

I'll repeat what I said in an earlier thread on this subject:

Again, if I give a biologist a bitch and a dog, how is it going to sex them? Is a Ph.D. biologist going to hem and haw or is he going to say the dog with a vagina, ovaries, and mammary glands is a female and the dog with testes and a penis a male?

I try to avoid using the word gender because it opens up the floodgates to all kinds of equivocation. Historically gender was not associated with sex until the 1950s, prior to that the word gender in English typically was primarily only associated with certain terminology relating to grammar (i.e. gender of certain words or such--mostly phased out of Modern English but still present in lots of other languages.)

It's not totally unavoidable though, as a lot of the medical literature uses terms such as "Gender Identity Disorder" and etc.

Male and female are different sexes and are defined biologically, there is no controversy in the rest of the animal kingdom (at least in mammals) about which individual animal is a male and which individual animal is a female.

If someone wants to adopt "cultural roles" normally associated with someone of a different sex that is fine, cultural roles are not set in stone. Biological sex is. Where people jump the shark is when they don't want to just change roles, they want to change their genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics to masquerade as a member of a sex to which they do not belong. At that point you aren't just adopting a "gender role" (a social construct) different from that which is normally associated with your biological sex, instead you are actively seeking to deny the truth of your biological sex and perform self-mutilation in an attempt to elaborately mimic the alternate biological sex.

[Miller]

Still haven't figured out that dogs and people aren't the same thing, I see.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

I've actually addressed similar research to this many times. All the studies I've ever seen (including this pathetic study with only 42 participants) have a few things in common:
[list][*]Small sample size, usually less than 100 persons.

I'll grant that the sample size is small.

*]Generally the specific way they do the above is a study finds some similarities between a "transgendered" male brain and a healthy female brain and then take that as general proof that the mentally ill male literally has a female brain in a male body

Do you deny that the brain of homo sapiens sapiens is sexually dimorphic?

For example one popular study on brain activity had GID patients look at pornography and the researchers noted what areas of their brain were activated by the pornography. The researchers found some similarities between brain activity areas in a GID male and a healthy female. However, they also found unique activity not seen in healthy males or healthy females. Rather than convincing or even suggesting to me that the GID patient literally had a "female brain" it suggests to me the GID patient had an abnormally functioning brain, a result of defective physical development of the brain itself or defective production of various chemicals in the brain in levels that cause mental illness.

You've just attacked a cite that I never used. I believe that's a strawman.

Finally, let's say any of these studies ever prove what none has ever come close to even suggesting (note it is not the researchers that utilize foolish claims and say that certain abnormalities in a mentally ill person's brain make their brain the "brain of an opposite biological sex")--that in fact somehow you have a female brain in a male body. Here is the problem, ask any biologist to sex a mammal, they need not look at the brain but instead the genitalia.

Except those studies where they deliberately created transgendered rats.

It's basically obvious then if the animal is male or female, in rare cases the animal may be physically deformed.

No, it's generally obvious if the animal has male or female genitalia. These may be at odds with internal structures and/or chromosomes.

[Martin Hyde]

The study by Zhou mentioned in this study linked by DocCathode is actually the very study I've basically laughed off in the past. Not because it doesn't contain interesting results. In the Zhou study it showed that six MTF transexuals taking estrogen had a similar central subdivision of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (or BSTc as they say) as a healthy female.

Anyone even remotely familiar with the brain would realize the BSTc is a very small part of the brain that has only been studied for these differences a few times and in small numbers (obviously since the studies have to be performed on dead patients there is some limitation to the number of dead GID patients who donate their bodies to research), so even if this research outright proved the BSTc of a MTF transexual was the exact same as the BSTc of a healthy female that's not the same as saying the entire brain is female. Countless studies have shown male and females cognitively process many, many different things in different ways, and have differing aptitudes in certain tasks and in acquiring certain skills. These differences are not all contained in a small part of a small part of a small part of the brain, but are the result of differences throughout the entire brain (not to mention hormonal differences as the result of different organs and hormonal levels throughout the body.)

But of course this doesn't even prove the BSTc of a MTF transexual is "identical" to that of a male, only that it has a similar neuron count.

[Martin Hyde]

Before this follows the predictable path, I think it's probably a thread hijack to take a discussion on whether or not tranny is a slur into a general discussion about GID. I'll only reiterate that people with a professional psychiatrically recognized mental illness are not really the same as blacks and Jews and I think it's insulting to blacks and Jews to lump them in like that.

But even if you agree with me (and most do not) that GID patients are essentially similar to schizophrenics (in that they have a mental illness) that doesn't mean we should be rude to them or mistreat them. It's not polite to call someone with schizophrenia a "schizo" to their face, and from my time in the mental health field I would actually say it's ideal to not refer to someone by their disease at all. It's one thing to call someone a schizophrenic in some situations, but it's probably most appropriate to refer to them as "a person who has schizophrenia." That may seem a bit ridiculous as no one thinks it's wrong to call a person with asthma an asthmatic, but the difference is careless labeling with mental illnesses can tend to "define someone by their disease" which doesn't typically happen to someone with asthma.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

The study by Zhou mentioned in this study linked by DocCathode is actually the very study I've basically laughed off in the past.

Yes. I concede you've laughed it off. You certainly have not refuted it with evidence or logic.

Not because it doesn't contain interesting results. In the Zhou study it showed that six MTF transexuals taking estrogen had a similar central subdivision of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (or BSTc as they say) as a healthy female.

Have you read the whole study? It also showed that an MTF transsexual who had NEVER taken estrogen or anti-androgens had the BSTc of a woman.

It further showed that a castrated man, and a man who due to disorder had 6 times the normal level of estrogen in his system still had MALE BSTc's.

If it was hormonal therapy that changed the BSTc, we would not see these results.

Anyone even remotely familiar with the brain would realize the BSTc is a very small part of the brain that has only been studied for these differences a few times and in small numbers (obviously since the studies have to be performed on dead patients there is some limitation to the number of dead GID patients who donate their bodies to research), so even if this research outright proved the BSTc of a MTF transexual was the exact same as the BSTc of a healthy female that's not the same as saying the entire brain is female.

Appeal to authority, appeal to 'common sense'

Countless studies have shown male and females cognitively process many, many different things in different ways, and have differing aptitudes in certain tasks and in acquiring certain skills.

Cite some of these "countless studies". When you do we can examine them.

These differences are not all contained in a small part of a small part of a small part of the brain, but are the result of differences throughout the entire brain (not to mention hormonal differences as the result of different organs and hormonal levels throughout the body.)

Assumes facts not in evidence.,

[MsWhatsit]

It is pretty rare for me to lose all respect for someone in the space of one single post. I guess I was just lucky enough to miss previous threads in which Martin expounded on his theories about how gender reassignment surgery is "mutilation" and how transsexualism is basically the same as believing you are Napoleon Bonaparte.

I appreciate that some of you apparently are willing to attempt to engage with debate with him, because after those posts I genuinely do not have the stomach for it. Holy shit.

[hajario]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

I'll only reiterate that people with a professional psychiatrically recognized mental illness are not really the same as blacks and Jews and I think it's insulting to blacks and Jews to lump them in like that.

I am Jewish and I am proud to be lumped in with them.

[Martin Hyde]

Originally Posted by DocCathode

Yes. I concede you've laughed it off. You certainly have not refuted it with evidence or logic.

I don't seek to refute the study, but the study doesn't say what you think it says. At least not if you believe it is saying "MTF transexuals have female brains." The study only says "MTF transexuals have BSTc with the same neuron count as females." Unless the study was secretly about the entire brain and not a small part of the brain, I don't have anything to refute. I accept that in that subset, the MTF transexuals had BSTc similar in size and with similar neuron count to healthy females.

Have you read the whole study? It also showed that an MTF transsexual who had NEVER taken estrogen or anti-androgens had the BSTc of a woman.

It further showed that a castrated man, and a man who due to disorder had 6 times the normal level of estrogen in his system still had MALE BSTc's.

If it was hormonal therapy that changed the BSTc, we would not see these results.

Um yes, if you note I said it was the Zhou study that looked at MTF transexuals who had been receiving hormone therapy. The fact that this study looked at MTF transexuals who were not receiving hormone therapy is the principal difference between it and the Zhou study (well, and that it sought to prove the differences in the Zhou study were the result of similar number of neurons in the BSTc and not some other cause for sizing of the BSTc.)

This study is basically a direct followup to the Zhou study, and even used some of the same brains (as noted in the text of your study.)

Cite some of these "countless studies". When you do we can examine them.

My claim isn't relevant to addressing your claim and I withdraw it. I accept that in a small sampling of brains MTF transexuals had BSTc with a similar size and number of neurons to females. Unless you have some proof from within that study that the researchers extrapolate that to mean "these MTF transexuals had female brains in their entirety" then you're not making any claim I need to refute. I don't refute the sizing of the BSTc, the only way I could possibly think to refute it would be through direct physical measurement demonstrating they sized it wrong, and I obviously lack the facilities or the capabilities to do that.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by hajario

I am Jewish and I am proud to be lumped in with them.

As a member of the tribe of Judah, ditto.

[Martin Hyde]

Originally Posted by MsWhatsit

It is pretty rare for me to lose all respect for someone in the space of one single post. I guess I was just lucky enough to miss previous threads in which Martin expounded on his theories about how gender reassignment surgery is "mutilation" and how transsexualism is basically the same as believing you are Napoleon Bonaparte.

I appreciate that some of you apparently are willing to attempt to engage with debate with him, because after those posts I genuinely do not have the stomach for it. Holy shit.

What exactly is it that I'm saying that is so controversial?

1. Gender identity disorder is a recognized mental illness / disorder.

2. Given that, we should find treatments that can try to improve and correct the problems with the GID patient's brain function so that they can live happily as their biological gender.

We should prefer that to surgery which mutilates the natural sex organs that the person was born with.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

What exactly is it that I'm saying that is so controversial?

1. Gender identity disorder is a recognized mental illness / disorder.

2. Given that, we should find treatments that can try to improve and correct the problems with the GID patient's brain function so that they can live happily as their biological gender.

We should prefer that to surgery which mutilates the natural sex organs that the person was born with.

Just for the sake of argument, let us say that you are right and transsexuals are just crazy.

Then what?

Other forms of treatment have been tried. They failed. Access to hormone therapy and SRS makes the patient happier, improves their ability to function, and greatly decreases their suicide rate. With current technology, what other form of treatment would you suggest?

[Martin Hyde]

Like I said, I'm just advocating research and development of alternative treatments. I feel like SRS is a "cop out" medically. Part of me also worries that its use perhaps inhibits any efforts to develop other treatments.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by DocCathode

As a member of the tribe of Judah, ditto.

Another Jew and same here. I'd rather be "lumped in" with Eve than whatever group people like Martin Hyde belong to. That was a creepy-ass post.

That said, I disagree with Miller above about Eve's first post. Astro's been here since 1999. He's not (to my knowledge) a known bigot I've personally never seen him say anything anti-GLBT/bigoted.

So...yeah. I think Eve's first post was an attack, given the poster. Remember the old "Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to ignorance"? I think it applies here. Until a year or two back, tops (and probably less), I'd never known that "tranny" was offensive*. If Astro'd used that term before and was asked not to, fine. But to come in, guns a'blazing and assume the worst isn't going to win allies.

With certain people you know you can't win them over, but Astro's not one as far as I know. There's nothing wrong with going after enemies as loudly and forcefully as possible. But you can't treat everyone like enemies because you can't win without allies.

Final point: yeah, you're right Miller--the thread will probably be remembered--but sadly it'll be remembered the same way DuckDuckGoose's 32-point font "CUNTS" thread was remembered. Not for the attacking thread. Not for the people who were in the wrong to attack her, but for her reaction.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Fenris

That said, I disagree with Miller above about Eve's first post. Astro's been here since 1999. He's not (to my knowledge) a known bigot I've personally never seen him say anything anti-GLBT/bigoted.

Have you read the story he linked to and called "epic"? Astro didn't use the word "tranny" he just linked to a cruel story whose humor hinges on a man sleeping with a transperson without knowing it.

[Guinastasia]

Originally Posted by hajario

You're correct but "tranny" is a pejorative for both transgendered people and transvestites.

I know. I was just asking about RuPaul.

Thanks, Una. That makes sense. I mean, you have people like J. Edgar Hoover (who was an asshole closet case) who got off on it, and or Eddie Izzard, who just likes dressing in women's clothes.

[MsWhatsit]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

What exactly is it that I'm saying that is so controversial?

1. Gender identity disorder is a recognized mental illness / disorder.

2. Given that, we should find treatments that can try to improve and correct the problems with the GID patient's brain function so that they can live happily as their biological gender.

We should prefer that to surgery which mutilates the natural sex organs that the person was born with.

To answer the question: Item 2 on your list, and the word "mutilates," for this specific post. Your Napoleon comparison also, if you want me to reach back in this thread slightly. I am sure I could dig up more examples but I don't think you're actually interested in the answer to the question you asked, and I am still sort of reeling with surprised disappointment, so I'll leave it at that.

[Martin Hyde]

So you're saying you oppose all of #2, meaning you don't want any research done into treatments that might make people with GID live happier lives? That's pretty cruel considering not every person with GID is a good candidate for the surgery but might still have quality of life issues from their affliction.

I think you're putting far too much emphasis on the word "mutilate", tonsillectomy or appendectomy are also mutilations.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by DocCathode

Have you read the story he linked to and called "epic"? Astro didn't use the word "tranny" he just linked to a cruel story whose humor hinges on a man sleeping with a transperson without knowing it.

No--it's a rather sad story about a guy who was cheating on his wife, got caught and realized that from a "trying to explain it" point of view, it's even worse than he thought. (Because saying "I cheated on you with a woman" is (I assume) less awful than saying "I cheated on you with a man" and the car thief was a transexual man, not a m->f transgendered person. The story has the transexual man saying "“I fucked that dude.” over and over )

I don't know Astro's motives but isn't it possible that he called it epic* for the "revenge" aspect? Cheater gets busted and to make matters worse, the big construction worker won't even be able to brag to his coworkers about how, yeah, his wife left him because he had a hot night with a smokin' hot woman?


*I thought it was poorly told, the pics somewhere between embarassing (for the author) and pathetic, and that the story itself was more sad and pathetic than anything else.

[Fenris]

Erm...I think I'm using "transsexual" where I meant "transvestite. It's too late to edit to fix it. Apologies for the repeated error.

[MsWhatsit]

Originally Posted by Martin Hyde

So you're saying you oppose all of #2, meaning you don't want any research done into treatments that might make people with GID live happier lives? That's pretty cruel considering not every person with GID is a good candidate for the surgery but might still have quality of life issues from their affliction.

I think you're putting far too much emphasis on the word "mutilate", tonsillectomy or appendectomy are also mutilations.

Your mutilation point is ridiculous. Nobody describes a tonsillectomy as a mutilation. Mutilation has a very negative connotation and I am sure you know this. Come on.

I do not oppose all of #2. I disagree that your proposed treatment is what we "should" do, and I disagree with your characterization of gender reassignment surgery as letting crazy people be crazy (a net negative to society, it would seem, in your opinion), instead of a valid, working treatment, which is actually what it is.

I am not debating this further. I have been as clear as I need to be about my position and I'm not interested in participating in one of these "let's pick posts apart word by word" debates that go on for 12 pages, which is what this is starting to look like it will turn into. Your views are not only incorrect but also offensive, in my opinion; you obviously disagree. I don't think we're going to get much further than that. Maybe someone else will convince you differently but I am not going to be that person today.

[DocCathode]

Originally Posted by Fenris

Erm...I think I'm using "transsexual" where I meant "transvestite. It's too late to edit to fix it. Apologies for the repeated error.

Meh. We don't know if it was a transwoman or a male transvestite. We have only the valet's word to go on.

[Fenris]

True, but either way this is bogging down the main point that Astro could have read this as a shock-ending tale of cheating gone awry and that IMO Eve's first post was over the top given that.

Look, if the OP had been, say New Deal Democrat (assuming his bigotry extended to this area), of course, don't give him the benefit of the doubt. But this (IMO) isn't that.

[DocCathode]

I think we have two questions- Just what was Astro's intent in posting the thread?

Just who was Eve's post directed at?