Bah, I ment to hit preview, not submit!
“Of those who transition, sometimes transitioning is required.” Should be: Of those who are intersexed, something transitioning is required.
“But I also know a lot of asians living in Southern California” Should be: But I also know a lot of Asians because I live in Southern California."
Forgive all my horrible grammar and misspellings, that was supposed to be the rough draft. :o
Oh, come off it! You want to pick a fight, can’t you do better than that?
In fairness, though, it is often hard to tell when you’re being serious or when you’re being sarcastic. And that was a perfect example-- I wasn’t sure myself.
How does someone with Androgen Insensitivity develop a penis in the first place? I thought the development of male genitalia required some androgen-mediated process.
Precisely. In many cases, it can be shown to be linked clearly to hormonal or genetic conditions. In other cases, it can’t be (though that doesn’t mean that biological causes won’t be found, either.) Either way, it’s hard to examine the evidence honestly and not come to the conclusion that transgenderism exists.
Sorry. I could have sworn you were suggesting it as an actual criterion. Didn’t mean to apply a false claim to you.
Nevertheless, a lot of MTF transsexual people I’ve seen pictures of, as well as the few I know personally, look distinctly feminine well before any hormones or other concrete steps towards transitioning. I doubt that’s a coincidence.
I’m not a doctor … however, two minutes’ worth of searching got me to the following link
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/7466/615
(WARNING: contains NSFW images of genitals after surgery) which proves to be a decent basic introduction to the matter. The British Medical Journal is a legitimate scientific publication, and not a bastion of political correctness as far as I’m aware.
I’m sure I could turn up more, given another two minutes. But I think two minutes is more than your OP is worth, already.
For using “transgendered” as an insult.
You may not demand one, but you sure asked for one – “Before we go further, who here has the expertise to offer a concise and definitive meaning of the word “transgendered”?” My point was that, apparently, you used the term without knowing what it means.
Then why use it?
Dammit, you made me go look up ‘burdock.’ It seems you have to parboil it before you can pound it. To much trouble, really, considering I have neither said nor inicated that I think that makes you a bigot. I actually think you’re a right cool dude, who has a wonderful way with words. I share Elucidatorisms with my friends all the time. Even the righty-tighties. I just think you chose your words very poorly in this case.
Hold it! Now I am confused. Were you secretly wishing me good fortune? Layers and layers to ya.
TATAKI-SU-GOBOU(vinegared patted burdock)Hoping that one’s home will be like the widely spread and firm root of the burdok (gobou). Pounding and breaking (tataite hiraku) the burdock is related to the ancient saying “Knock and the way will be opened, or open the way and get good luck.”
Pound the burdock yourself.
I’m not trying to pick a fight. I’m genuinely unsure if that was meant to be a joke or an actual refutation of John Mace’s argument.
None of those definitions, however, have confused transgenderism with crossdressing. What makes you think they’re the same thing?
I agree. 'luce is frequently sarcastic, but he’s also mostly earnest.
In less flattering terms, there are some posters who probably don’t really believe their own bullshit, but elucidator ain’t one of 'em.
Excalibre, there are different degrees. I hate to link to wikipedia, but it has a nice summary. I can find more authoritive cites if you wish.
My friend is type 4.
Of course not! You are talking about someone with distinct physical phenomena that can be verified and determined. But what about someone who has this opinion of themselves but have no such physical correpondence? Are we to assume that all of them are the same, that none of them are delusional?
Has anyone ever changed their mind? Have thought of themselves as a “female in a mans body” but thought differently later? Sometimes people just are miserable and assign reasons for their misery which may, or may not, be germane. If surgery has a reasonable to good chance to change a miserable hermaphrodite into a healthy, happy man or woman, I say go for it! Of course!
But if it were my son or daughter, I would want a damn sight more.
Friend 'luci, you’re arguing from quicksand and Jell-O here, not the commonsense bedrock you seem to feel you stand on. A lot of people have offered you a tremendous amount of illumination (I sure as hell have learned a lot, and I thought I knew a fair amount on this topic). They’re far more credible and persuasive than the uber-sensitive co-opers who appear to have soured your thinking on this aspect of gender + sexual identity.
I stand with other of your comrades (non-Trotskyite fellow traveler corps) who find this unexpected blind spot in jarring contrast to your usual good sense.
elucidator, there are some crazy people who think that they are transsexual when in fact, they have a psychological problem. Sometimes these people go through bad doctors who push them on despite warning signs. Yes, there are people who transition and then regret it later. I know at least 3 people who started HRT and then realized it wasn’t for them.
But this does not mean that everyone who identifies as transsexual is crazy. Testing for biological causes is hard and impossible to do in all cases. It requires money too. The psychological screening should remove all those people who are clearly insane and it often does. If people are slipping through, then we need to re-educate the doctors and work on better seperating real cases from fake. We don’t dismiss the whole thing as bogus. Some people say that they are “ex-gay.” They were gay before but now live a normal heterosexual life. This doesn’t mean that all homosexuals are liars who really can get married and be happy with kids. It just means a good psychiatrist needs to learn how to disguinish between the two.
Are we to assume that just because the cause of someone’s transsexuality isn’t obvious, that there must not actually be one?
Again, what’s the difference between that reasoning and telling gay people that our own feelings aren’t valid or real? People do that too - and the reasons to class it as a disorder to be treated seem just as convincing to me as the reasons to decide a transsexual is actually just delusional.
In case it’s not obvious, my problem with you is not because I think you’re being “insensitive” (although I found that joke just as problematic as Una Persson did) but because your thinking on this subject is really not rational; you are not showing the insight that I would expect from you to be able to examine your own thought process and rationally consider them. I keep harping on the fact that your reasoning can be used to dismiss homosexuality for a reason: why in the world would that thought process be valid in one area and not in another? Why are you comfortable taking me at my word when I say who I’m attracted to, but not taking someone else at their word when they say what gender they are?
Does it make any more sense to assume that they’re all delusional, as you did in your OP? You are aware that sex change operations are not done on an out-patient basis, right? Just getting approved for the operation requires a huge battery of counseling and psychological testing, plus a year spent living as the opposite gender full-time. And not everyone gets approval after that process. It’s not just done willy-nilly. And yes, sometimes it’s the wrong choice for that person, and they do end up regretting it, which is tragic. That does not invalidate the entire process, or the experiences of those who have undergone gender reassignment with no regrets whatsoever.
What the hell does what you want have to do with it?
What kimera said. If I write a surgery letter for somebody, I’ve followed the Harry Benjamin Standards and do not think they are psychotic or delusional.
By the way, some people retain their sexual attraction to whoever they found attractive before the surgery. This used to be something one had to hide from the person performing the evaluation, since the model of trans surgery decisions was toward “heterosexual” pairings. That is less the case today.
So if I had said “masculine Ann Coulter”, you would be cool with that? Or the “hermaphroditic Ann Coulter”, that’s a pass. Or the “goddam ugly as sin bitch Ann Coulter”, that’s ok? Hey, if I’m going to tiptoe around your sensibilities, I’m going to need some parameters here.
I know what it meant to me. Not much. Means a lot to you. Different strokes. You have asserted an entirely fair definition, which I might be entirely willing to accept, except that I’d never have occassion to use it. Hardly ever had occassion to use it before, doesn’t mean squat to me if I never use it again.
Seemed like a good idea at the time. Now, not so much. On the other hand, fuck it, you go around afraid to offend anyone, you will never say anything worth hearing.
Damn! And I had such a good burn, all prepped up and polished! And you gotta go say something nice! Shit! You’re not Canadian, by chance? It would still work if you’re Canadian. Please advise.
:rolleyes: Yes, the only really worthwhile things to say are ones that denigrate groups of people.
Back in 1970 when my draft lottery number was 66 I had my route to Canada all planned out. By a very weird circumstance I was 4-F and never had to use it. Will that work for you?
Good! Thank heavens! But why are you telling me this?
Never said that it did. Someone else said I did. And they will continue to insist that I did, no matter what I say. Time to shrug.
The distinction, to me, is that saying, “masculine Ann Coulter,” is saying that Ann Coulter is ugly. “Transexual Ann Coulter” is saying transexuals are ugly.
Lewis Carrol aside, having your own private definition of a word is pretty useless when it in no way resembles the way the word is used by everyone else. If I insist that the word “menagerie” means “a type of frog,” it is accurate to say that I do not know what the word “menagerie” means. “I know what it meant to me,” does not sufficiently refute the charge.
Are you so confident that you will never, in the rest of your years, meet someone who is transgendered? Or that you do not already know someone who is transgendered?