I completely understand it, I don’t believe it.
“People like me”, by that big scary phrase you mean “random anonymous guy on the web”
In this statement you specified your thighs, not thighs in general. There was no such qualification in the Y-chromosome statement you quoted earlier. I read it the way computergeek did; that Y-chromosomes are inherently “lame-ass”, versus simply being lame-ass by being present where they’re unwanted.
Powers &8^]
Evidence suggests for this particular mental illness, the most effective treatment is “cross-sex hormones, gender reassignment surgery, and social and legal transition to the desired gender” and that one of the primary reasons gender dysphoria was not removed from the ranks of mental illnesses was “to avoid jeopardizing either insurance coverage or treatment access”. Everything else is arguing past each other, as the treatment for gender dysphoria is different from conventional treatments for mental health issues.
Are you certain you read it right? Let me quote it:
How do the two “my’s” in the quote not signify clearly and unambiguously that Serano is talking about herself and her Y chromosomes and her body?
I did read the context. I am willing to admit my own ignorance on the topic, I am learning things in this thread.
You seem opposed to the idea that a person’s sexual identity has some independent status from their genitals. You seem to feel a person’s genitals should take precedence over their sexual identity.
You’ve also likened it to cutting off fingers, or aiding bulemics by making them throw up more.
I guess I’m trying to figure out your point about gender. Care to rephrase more clearly?
Yes, separate bathrooms, what toilets we use, whether we use toilet paper or not, whether we use a bidet or not, having stalls or not, having communal restrooms or individual use rooms, having indoor plumbing or going to an outhouse. You said “Bathrooms are not a cultural expectation”, but everything about bathrooms is a cultural expectation.
I would argue that I was now a man in two halves- one half in a male body and one half in a female body.
Now, will you answer the questions I posed to you earlier?
I wouldn’t use the word disease as I find it too loaded. No one is arguing that transsexedness can’t be treated. Those with cites on their side just feel it should be treated with hormone replacement therapy and sexual reassignment surgery.
I won’t go into the political reasons for medical definitions.
My position regarding surgery has been posted several times.
I’m not ignorant on the topic. You response was that not being ignorant meant being a transsexual.
For every other aspect, body takes precedence.
Transsexuality is a disease of the mind, not the body. The body is right.
(There are of course, very rare cases where the body isn’t clear)
Yeah. Body says A, mind says B.
I do not accept the validity of the common concept of gender. Sex is gender.
It is a cultural aspect derived from biology. Not a cultural aspect on its own like, say, shaking the right and not the left hand.
Man in all cases, because it is clealry established that, at least for sexual identity, my brain works properly.
If you need drugs and therapy to solve a mental condition, it’s a mental illness.
So, the body takes precedence? If body and mind disagree, the body is right?
But you just said that the body is right. Now you say that if I transplanted your brain into a female body, you would still be a man? Wouldn’t that mean that the mind is right and the body is wrong?
That’s right in the gigantic majority of cases.
Amputees feel phantom limbs, they even scratch them.
The problem with hypotheticals is that they quickly break down, but I’ll answer. Since the original body and the original mind agreed, then it is established that my mind was right. Since my mental sanity regarding my sexual identity is correct, whatever happens to my body after that is, in that matter, incosecuential.
If somebody druged my and amputated my penis, and gave me fully functioning uterus, ovaries , vagina, and breasts and tricked my endocrinal glands into secretin females hormones I’d still be a man.
But if they had disagreed, then the body would be right?
Sanity and insanity are NOT clinical terms. They are legal terms.
So, in that case your brain’s sexual identity would be correct? And the body would be wrong?
I’ve explained myself long enough.
I’m done.
So to sum up-
You concede that the brain has a sexual identity. You also concede that the brain’s sexual identity can differ from the body’s.
You insist that in such a case, the body is right.
Why do you think the body has primacy? What do you base this on?
I must confess these “brain transplant” arguments and the related discussion are confusing the core issue somewhat.
The evidence seems very clear.
Transsexuals exist. They’re here, they are fellow human beings on this earth who want simply to be treated like fellow human beings. This is not in dispute.
They have a mental gender which differs from their physical gender. This is not in dispute. Tens or perhaps hundreds of thousands of transsexuals have been completely professionally evaluated. Google Scholar can find hundreds or thousands of technical papers explaining this. The root cause is academic; they are living, loving, human beings.
This disconnect causes them distress, in varying levels, but often to the point of suicide attempts. This also is not in dispute.
To resolve this distress, the most effective and proven treatments known are to align the body with the mind, not the mind with the body. I provided many citations which as of yet have not been refuted.
This alignment takes the form of body presentation and morphology changes, whether by clothing, or hormones, or SRS. The process of alignment is not in dispute.
So it comes down to “should transsexuals be treated as the gender they present.”
What is the real driver for going out of one’s way to treat a transwoman presenting as female, as if they were male?
Treating transsexuals as their presented gender is not an unreasonable or burdensome demand on everyone else. It does not burden anyone one whit more to treat a transwoman in the same manner as an XX woman. They’re not demanding to be treated as two different genders, or asking for special privileges above and beyond being treated as their gender. In fact, by going out of one’s way to treat them as a gender differently than they present, one is actually creating more work for themselves, as well as creating more distress for transsexuals. And being a bigoted fuckhead at the same time, but I digress. Discrimination normally creates a lot more work, trouble, and burden than tolerance.
So let’s cut the thinly-veneered hysteric homophobia and penis panic. Stop the castration anxiety. Cease the stark raving terror that men want to invade the women’s toilets. Get a grip and take a deep breath. Transsexuals as a population do not want to steal your “mighty” wang. They do not want to “trick” you into having sex with them. They do not want to peep under stalls in toilets. And they have not gone through years or decades of absolute hell just so they can attempt to “steal” some twisted idea of feminine sanctuary from men.
The solution to the transsexual “issue” is so doggone simple: just treat transsexuals as the gender they present in public, the workplace, in schools, and in society in general. No extra work. No psychodrama. That’s all. Pretty please, with sugar on it.
Agreed, but it was never an issue for me.
Agreed, except on the cause being simply academic.
Agreed, but it was never an issue for me.
Agreed that it aligns the body and the mind.
So it comes down to “should transsexuals be treated as the gender they present.”
If John wants to be called Mary, I’ll call him Mary, but out of courtesy and not because I really think John is a woman.
Wrong, at least for me for all your attacks. No homophobia, penis panic, castration anxiety, toilets, wang stealin, trick, peeping, sanctuary. Keep that to yourself. You destroy all your “compassion and science” case.
And in this sentence you show you a lack of courtesy. Saying you’ll call “him” Mary belies that you probably wouldn’t treat a transsexual you met IRL with the dignity and respect as due a fellow human being who has done you no harm other than merely existing as themselves.
Actually, that sort of stubborness regarding identity isn’t limited to just transsexuals. It’s nowhere near as serious, but I knew a man once who changed his first name from “Lawrence” to “Lorenzo” for professional reasons (he was a performer in an area where an Italian name had advantages over an “American” one). 10 years later there were people who still called him “Lawrence” not out of a slip or carelessness but because they were very, very insistent that his REAL name was “Lawrence”. Um… no, it wasn’t, it was Lorenzo and had been for a decade, yet these folks not only stuck with the old name but would arrogantly “correct” anyone who had met and known him as Lorenzo since the legal change.
Then there’s the whole issue of people who “correct” married women who retain their maiden names, or hyphenate, or do something else they don’t approve of.
Needless to say, such folks go ballistic over anything more extreme than a name change. A gender change? Who is going to clean up the exploded head goo?
It’s not just castration anxiety (although that is a real factor in many instances), it’s about people who can’t accept that someone might change, or that other people don’t conform to their stubborn, incorrect images of them. How dare those people NOT play the game! How dare they not conform/submit/play their role?!
Belive want you want.
My point is very clear, your own I’m-the-defender-of-transsexuals shtick is really your bias showing.
John is a man and will alwyas be a man. Out of courtesy I’ll call him Mary (and she and her), but it’s courtesy for a person suffering a disease.
Hold on a moment, then. Let’s apply that to the first part of your post.
An amputee in their original body and the original mind agreed, thus it is established that your mind was right. Since their mental sanity regarding their limb status is correct, whatever happens to their body after that is, in that matter, inconsequential.
Thus, if someone drugged them and amputated their limb, they would still, mentally, be a person with said limb. That would seem to be the outcome if we apply the argument you’re using on amputees. Thus, they should be treated, per your argument, as people who still have that limb.
Yes. I am highly biased towards treating all people in general with dignity and respect, and towards vehemently defending one of the most mistreated and abused communities, transsexuals. If one is to have a “schtick”, then there are likely few more honorable to have.
And I’m heavily biased, being an actual scientist myself, towards agreeing completely with the widely-recognized scientific consensus of the disconnect between physical and mental gender, and towards giving mental gender precedence. Something you have serious issues with for some strange reason.
But thanks for noticing! 
It’s a bit of a tangent and anecdotal, but there is a sentiment which is honourable on its face making life more difficult for those experiencing gender dysphoria: opposition to elective vaginoplasty. I watched a documentary (The Perfect Vagina) where the documentary maker expressed an opinion along the lines that if her daughter was not happy with her vagina at age 18, she’d have failed as a mother. While there is valid concern about exploitation of insecurities for profit, this kind of Platonic thinking may manifest itself in a more ugly fashion when dictating that people be happy with the body they’re “born with”.