Law of noncontradiction and is a woman a woman?

[Sidis Coruscatis]

In particular, when bad faith comes cloaked in rhetoric which aspires to reason, it is the most treacherous form of sophistry.

What about bad faith cloaked in rhetoric that aspires to empathy?

I don't think there is any other issue that makes me more angry at ideological machinations than this today. The constant appeals to emotion and authority about something so fundamental and inherent to humanity are akin to demanding that I must become a logician before I can think. Consigning people to a lifetime of medical check-ups and medication (if they want to take their newfound identity to its ultimate conclusion, at least) because of momentary confusion is the opposite of empathy. It is not a secret anymore that transgender "medical care" is an extremely lucrative venture. The swiftness and alacrity with which institutions facilitated needless butchery is suspicious to say the least.

If grown people want to make their lives harder instead of rooting out the real cause and fixing their traumas, fine. But let's for a moment stop pretending that this is exclusive to adults, as that is no longer the case. Idiot parents are now raising "trans kids" due to minor temperamental deviations between assumed femininity and masculinity, and public schools that heavily employ progressive-minded teachers are encouraging the highly impressionable (and creative, which has much to do with it) children to embrace it. And we know that this goes beyond rhetoric and even early-stage procedures like administration of puberty blockers, as seedy places like Vanderbilt hospital have practically admitted to operating on minors despite the attempts to whitewash the fact.

Psychological research has been fairly clear for a while now that people with unresolved childhood trauma are more likely engage in body modifications like getting extensive tattoos and piercings. In my estimate, this is an attempt to escape who you are by changing your physical appearance and taking on a persona, and I went through a similar process when I was under great psychological stress without the means to resolve it in my youth. Transgender ideations sound like a radical extension of the same response. This is further strengthened by the fact that the demographic has massive rates of depression and suicidal thoughts. And no, I don't think this is due to bullying and ostracism; bullies have been around forever and such an increase in psychopathology is an oddity. As @Defective has mentioned, gender dysphoria is often accompanied by comorbidities that seem like the actual trigger rather than the result of some internal metaphysical inconsistency. The proportional rise of self-reported gender dysphoria (because this is practically the only condition where the patient decides the diagnosis and cure; thanks, "gender-affirming care" and greedy quack psychologists) with the proliferation of the concept in the mainstream is also suspicious. Not to mention that the modern concept of gender itself is a legacy of a sick degenerate and pederast, John Money.

Ian, you mentioned that this is not playing, but that's at core exactly what it is. As far as I can tell, the incidence of gender dysphoria is almost fully on the side of left-leaning demographic. We know that liberals score higher in openness to experience, which often translates to creativity, which is often the willingness to engage in fantasy play and live on the fringe of society. I remember being a zealous progressive some 13 years ago and incidentally having many of the same ideas that are the marks of young leftists today: irregular haircuts, unnaturally dyed hair, tattoos, eccentric clothing, etc. When we want to experience something that we are not and have not, we play at it. Children do this all the time, but they are conscious of it. Creative people love to imitate and bring something foreign into the mix. Openness is also inversely related to conscientiousness, which explains why highly creative people often suffer from psychological disorders: lack of discipline and principled approach to life often results in maladaptations and being poorly prepared to deal with ineluctable suffering.

 

[slant]

What about bad faith cloaked in rhetoric that aspires to empathy?

I don't think there is any other issue that makes me more angry at ideological machinations than this today. The constant appeals to emotion and authority about something so fundamental and inherent to humanity are akin to demanding that I must become a logician before I can think. Consigning people to a lifetime of medical check-ups and medication (if they want to take their newfound identity to its ultimate conclusion, at least) because of momentary confusion is the opposite of empathy. It is not a secret anymore that transgender "medical care" is an extremely lucrative venture. The swiftness and alacrity with which institutions facilitated needless butchery is suspicious to say the least.

If grown people want to make their lives harder instead of rooting out the real cause and fixing their traumas, fine. But let's for a moment stop pretending that this is exclusive to adults, as that is no longer the case. Idiot parents are now raising "trans kids" due to minor temperamental deviations between assumed femininity and masculinity, and public schools that heavily employ progressive-minded teachers are encouraging the highly impressionable (and creative, which has much to do with it) children to embrace it. And we know that this goes beyond rhetoric and even early-stage procedures like administration of puberty blockers, as seedy places like Vanderbilt hospital have practically admitted to operating on minors despite the attempts to whitewash the fact.

Psychological research has been fairly clear for a while now that people with unresolved childhood trauma are more likely engage in body modifications like getting extensive tattoos and piercings. In my estimate, this is an attempt to escape who you are by changing your physical appearance and taking on a persona, and I went through a similar process when I was under great psychological stress without the means to resolve it in my youth. Transgender ideations sound like a radical extension of the same response. This is further strengthened by the fact that the demographic has massive rates of depression and suicidal thoughts. And no, I don't think this is due to bullying and ostracism; bullies have been around forever and such an increase in psychopathology is an oddity. As @Defective has mentioned, gender dysphoria is often accompanied by comorbidities that seem like the actual trigger rather than the result of some internal metaphysical inconsistency. The proportional rise of self-reported gender dysphoria (because this is practically the only condition where the patient decides the diagnosis and cure; thanks, "gender-affirming care" and greedy quack psychologists) with the proliferation of the concept in the mainstream is also suspicious. Not to mention that the modern concept of gender itself is a legacy of a sick degenerate and pederast, John Money.

Ian, you mentioned that this is not playing, but that's at core exactly what it is. As far as I can tell, the incidence of gender dysphoria is almost fully on the side of left-leaning demographic. We know that liberals score higher in openness to experience, which often translates to creativity, which is often the willingness to engage in fantasy play and live on the fringe of society. I remember being a zealous progressive some 13 years ago and incidentally having many of the same ideas that are the marks of young leftists today: irregular haircuts, unnaturally dyed hair, tattoos, eccentric clothing, etc. When we want to experience something that we are not and have not, we play at it. Children do this all the time, but they are conscious of it. Creative people love to imitate and bring something foreign into the mix. Openness is also inversely related to conscientiousness, which explains why highly creative people often suffer from psychological disorders: lack of discipline and principled approach to life often results in maladaptations and being poorly prepared to deal with ineluctable suffering.

Have you done research about the way that the brain maps body parts? A couple of interesting things that come up are the concept of "phantom limbs", where somebody has lost a body part usually a limb but due to the brain map not having updated this, they actually can still feel the limb.

It's complicated, but I think there is a good case to be made that the brain develops a sense of the way the body is when in the womb.

All fetuses are originally female until the y chromosome is added. At least in the sense that they are x and the introduction of y turns the clitoris into a penis, etc. So it seems possible to me that we could even prove scientifically based on all of this that, in extremely rare cases, the mapping of the body "messes up" creating a xy individual who has an incorrect mind map of being xx. Given that this would be a physiological issue, in the same sense that phantom limbs are, there would be no way that psychological counseling or anything else could "convince" the incorrectly mapped brain of what is actually the case.

I think your cultural arguments make sense... But I'm just wondering if, supposing the argument I'm telling you were true (I'm not claiming I have absolute evidence that it is), that some of the people you're discussing have an issue that's actually physiology instead of psychological? I would imagine it's incredibly rare, like maybe 1% or less of the population, but that would depend on what is happening in fetal development that is causing it. Like for example older mothers tend to have much higher rates of different types of problems in baby development and since there are more and more older mothers you might see an increase not because it's more genetically common but just because of whatever circumstances make it possible.

Do you get what I'm driving at?

I don't think this possibility negates anything that you're talking about. It's only my opinion but I think that much of the younger generation and their desire to be them/their and preoccupation with gender has to do with the current social hierarchy of oppression and how you can't really claim to be a person of color the way you can claim an abstract gender. Also I think science is getting to a point where hypothetically in the future reproduction might be possible without humans having sex, basically test tube babies, and if the becomes the norm a lot of what gender is based on becomes less relevant because I would argue gender was always about child rearing - females having certain duties and males having certain duties- which increases the chances of the human race to survive. That culture is being challenged because of technological innovation.

I'm not really going to touch about the impact on children and the stuff you touch on there for now because I'm more interested to know if the evidence was correct if you could entertain that an amount of this is genetically, not psychologically based. I'm also not proposing what we should do about it or allow to be done about it because that's complicated too. I'm just trying to get a read on your underlying thought process.

 

[Defective]

It seems like people view open disagreement as saying you "can't say that" or "can't think that".

Rather than what I think people are communicating:

"That's not what I believe and I don't like your perspective."

Generally speaking, people have their perspective because it resonates with their morals and values. Of course those people are not going to want to be constantly surrounded by what they don't agree with, what they find opposing their views. And of course they will voice their opposition. They are even allowed to tell you they want you to stop saying what you're saying or they have certain moral judgements about you due to your opinion. This is all reasonable and basic human nature.

Here at least, there is absolutely no censorship going on. Open disagreement is absolutely ok.

Very true. Most of us will potentially surround ourselves with those who reinforce our beliefs rather than challenge them.

 

[aeon]

The constant appeals to emotion and authority about something so fundamental and inherent to humanity are akin to demanding that I must become a logician before I can think.

I agree, looking at it from a different perspective.

Humanity, as a cohort of individuals, includes people with many different chromosome pairings, some with half of a pair, and some with a mosaic presentation. That cohort also includes a wide variety of physical sex characteristics—some present with penises, some with vulvas, some with both, some with something in between, and some present with none whatsoever.

Despite this basis in fact, the appeals to emotion and authority are constant as it concerns the enforcement of the sex and gender binary. When these fail, violence is sometimes used.

Consigning people to a lifetime of medical check-ups and medication (if they want to take their newfound identity to its ultimate conclusion, at least)

People choose and take action in accordance with their need. If they are consigned, as you put it, that is something they own and are responsible for.

Also, my sense is no one who chooses as such has a newfound identity. They typically have an identity that was assigned at birth, as well as an identity that is their own. Those identities are typically quite old by that time—enough so that newfound would be a misnomer.

because of momentary confusion

Do you honestly believe anyone lives such a life based on momentary confusion?

It is not a secret anymore that transgender "medical care" is an extremely lucrative venture.

It sure can be—greed and grift exist in all human domains. And that’s particularly so in the United States, where healthcare is capital-focused, as opposed to well-being-focused.

The swiftness and alacrity with which institutions facilitated needless butchery is suspicious to say the least.

I’ll ask trans individuals if it was needless—they live with it, after all. Also, it has been fifty years of surgery and legal recognition as of this year, 2022. Is that swift?

If grown people want to make their lives harder instead of rooting out the real cause and fixing their traumas, fine.

I suggest you speak with people who are trans, and ask them about what is harder for them, as they would define it.

As you do, ask about how they came to recognize they are trans. You’ll hear about trauma often enough, but not as a causative event.

But let's for a moment stop pretending that this is exclusive to adults, as that is no longer the case.

No, it is not. For those whose gender is not congruent with the gender they were assigned at birth, their story began early indeed.

Idiot parents are now raising "trans kids" due to minor temperamental deviations between assumed femininity and masculinity, and public schools that heavily employ progressive-minded teachers are encouraging the highly impressionable (and creative, which has much to do with it) children to embrace it.

I’m sure this happens, but what worry is there in it? If it fits, it will remain, and if it does not, it won’t.

I hardly see exploration and choice—even when what ultimately prove to be mistakes are made—as being worse than the standard-issue coercion assignment of narrow and rigid gender identities and roles in accordance with the reductive gender binary. That’s everywhere, and a real waste of human potential.

Psychological research has been fairly clear for a while now that people with unresolved childhood trauma are more likely engage in body modifications like getting extensive tattoos and piercings.

I’m familiar.

In my estimate, this is an attempt to escape who you are by changing your physical appearance and taking on a persona

For some, I’m sure it is. For others, it is a demonstration of oneness with the self, and control subsequent to their autonomy having been denied.

Transgender ideations sound like a radical extension of the same response.

A deeper examination that includes review of the clinical data reveals the truth is otherwise.

This is further strengthened by the fact that the demographic has massive rates of depression and suicidal thoughts.

But are those things comorbid, causative, or response to the experience of living in this culture?

gender dysphoria is often accompanied by comorbidities that seem like the actual trigger rather than the result of some internal metaphysical inconsistency.

Don’t rest with what seems to be—talk to some trans folks and ask them about their experiences.

The proportional rise of self-reported gender dysphoria (because this is practically the only condition where the patient decides the diagnosis and cure; thanks, "gender-affirming care" and greedy quack psychologists) with the proliferation of the concept in the mainstream is also suspicious.

Of course it has to be this way, because the individual was assigned a gender at birth, without consent, and in ignorance. Only they could come to be aware of the error, as originally made.

My sense is most people appreciate being engaged with in a gender-affirming manner. I should reasonably expect a person to react negatively to being misgendered, or ignored in regards to their gender, and certainly so in the context of healthcare.

The internet makes possible the dissemination of all kinds of information. Sometimes that information sparks awareness of long-standing aspects of human experience which went largely unrecognized to that point.

a sick degenerate and pederast, John Money.

An interesting take, to be sure.

Ian, you mentioned that this is not playing, but that's at core exactly what it is.

Are you trans? What is your basis of certainty in this regard?

Also, when I said this is not playing, I was referring to gender identity. Gender expression can be a kind of play, but that’s not the case for everyone.

As far as I can tell, the incidence of gender dysphoria is almost fully on the side of left-leaning demographic. We know that liberals score higher in openness to experience, which often translates to creativity, which is often the willingness to engage in fantasy play and live on the fringe of society.

Openly-expressed gender dysphoria certainly is. Owing to value systems and social structures common to the right-leaning demographic, gender dysphoria tends to be private and anonymized when expressed.

I remember being a zealous progressive some 13 years ago and incidentally having many of the same ideas that are the marks of young leftists today: irregular haircuts, unnaturally dyed hair, tattoos, eccentric clothing, etc. When we want to experience something that we are not and have not, we play at it. Children do this all the time, but they are conscious of it. Creative people love to imitate and bring something foreign into the mix. Openness is also inversely related to conscientiousness, which explains why highly creative people often suffer from psychological disorders: lack of discipline and principled approach to life often results in maladaptations and being poorly prepared to deal with ineluctable suffering.

Fair enough.

My sense is this play informs some people’s gender expression. Some, but not all.

My sense is gender identity is otherwise, even for the genderfluid.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

Do you get what I'm driving at?

Yes, that's a reasonable take. But if that were true, it would only account for cases where men feel like women. It is also unclear how much this would actually affect the development of the baby, as sex determination happens very early.

If anything, it seems like the opposite would be more likely because testosterone is so powerful. This study shows that male-to-females retain male patterns of criminal activity while female-to-males become more prone to it. Maybe testosterone can override some female characteristics but probably not the other way around.

I don't know what oppression are you talking about, but most people have a pretty good life. Far better on average than even a century ago. A truly oppressive hierarchy does not produce real and broad improvements in quality of life. It is possible that we have been the beneficiaries of that improvement for long enough that it abraded the baseline of our mental fortitude so that even normal social expectations are now seen as too difficult to maintain.

 

[slant]

Yes, that's a reasonable take. But if that were true, it would only account for cases where men feel like women. It is also unclear how much this would actually affect the development of the baby, as sex determination happens very early.

If anything, it seems like the opposite would be more likely because testosterone is so powerful. This study shows that male-to-females retain male patterns of criminal activity while female-to-males become more prone to it. Maybe testosterone can override some female characteristics but probably not the other way around.

I don't know what oppression are you talking about, but most people have a pretty good life. Far better on average than even a century ago. A truly oppressive hierarchy does not produce real and broad improvements in quality of life. It is possible that we have been the beneficiaries of that improvement for long enough that it abraded the baseline of our mental fortitude so that even normal social expectations are now seen as too difficult to maintain.

You are getting caught up in the details as to whether these social concepts of oppression are accurate or not, that wasn't my point. To argue that people are not making these statements and it is not causing a power dynamic where in certain circles to have an identity like a gender identity that is different would give you a social boost is just denying the current culture. I was extremely careful the way I stated things, framing them as observations and not underlying undeniable philosophies in life so that we could avoid getting caught up in whether ideas are true or not because that wasn't the point.

Whether an idea is true or not, people still clearly believe it and it does impact culture. That was my point.

Anyway though thanks for the clarification. It would indeed be a small percent either way. I do think most of what's going on is socially driven which makes the conversation a bit more nuanced. When people think it's all socially driven it's hard because I do think there is a small portion of people for whom it's not. But it seems like you had a basic understanding of that part, I was just curious.

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

Humanity, as a cohort of individuals, includes people with many different chromosome pairings, some with half of a pair, and some with a mosaic presentation. That cohort also includes a wide variety of physical sex characteristics—some present with penises, some with vulvas, some with both, some with something in between, and some present with none whatsoever.

Yes, but these are anomalies where something went wrong during development. The existence of these exceptions does not make them discrete categories that are on the same level with the biologically "correct" ones.

If they are consigned, as you put it, that is something they own and are responsible for.

Again, we are not only talking about adults here. Children require parental guidance exactly because they are not responsible to make reasonable decisions. When that relationship is inverted, something is wrong.

Also, my sense is no one who chooses as such has a newfound identity. They typically have an identity that was assigned at birth, as well as an identity that is their own. Those identities are typically quite old by that time—enough so that newfound would be a misnomer.

I can't really answer this and many of your other responses because it simply relies on your acceptance of the axiom that you can have an identity mismatch at birth, which is then revealed thorough later experience. I don't think you have an established identity at a birth, and I don't care about experience. My experience is not a determinant of the "real me" and grows continually. I don't think traumas or blocks generated by experience can be resolved by medical intervention, but only by realignment of your values and transformative work.

Also, it has been fifty years of surgery and legal recognition as of this year, 2022. Is that swift?

The difference is that for most of that time, there had been actual investigations and regulations of diagnosis and treatment. Now, therapists are little more than glorified prescription dispensers and science has become politicized.

Do you honestly believe anyone lives such a life based on momentary confusion?

The thing about momentary confusion is that without proper guidance and order, you invite enough chaos for it to stop being momentary.

I’m sure this happens, but what worry is there in it? If it fits, it will remain, and if it does not, it won’t.

I'm sure those who went for hormone therapies and double mastectomies will remain with their choices for a long time.

A deeper examination that includes review of the clinical data reveals the truth is otherwise.

What data?

But are those things comorbid, causative, or response to the experience of living in this culture?

Could be any of them, but the prevalence even after transition indicates that something deeper than gender is wrong. It's not like other groups don't share the same culture and yet are more adjusted.

An interesting take, to be sure.

Don't know what's so interesting about it. He thought that pedophilia and showing porn to children is good for their sexual development. His experiment on David Reimer speaks for itself.

What is your basis of certainty in this regard?

I had a video on this, but it keeps getting deleted. The theory is that younger generations who were raised by technology, or were otherwise socially isolated, are lacking in real social play with the opposite gender, and their differentiation of gender nuances is suppressed until later on when they compensate by self-experimentation.

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

You are getting caught up in the details as to whether these social concepts of oppression are accurate or not, that wasn't my point. To argue that people are not making these statements and it is not causing a power dynamic where in certain circles to have an identity like a gender identity that is different would give you a social boost is just denying the current culture. I was extremely careful the way I stated things, framing them as observations and not underlying undeniable philosophies in life so that we could avoid getting caught up in whether ideas are true or not because that wasn't the point.

Whether an idea is true or not, people still clearly believe it and it does impact culture. That was my point.

Anyway though thanks for the clarification. It would indeed be a small percent either way. I do think most of what's going on is socially driven which makes the conversation a bit more nuanced. When people think it's all socially driven it's hard because I do think there is a small portion of people for whom it's not. But it seems like you had a basic understanding of that part, I was just curious.

I see, and I agree. My view is well-encapsulated here:

 

[aeon]

Yes, but these are anomalies where something went wrong during development. The existence of these exceptions does not make them discrete categories that are on the same level with the biologically "correct" ones.

I used to think and feel the same, and to some extent still do given the developmental defects present with various aneuploidies.

That said, for decades, newborns with normative chromosomes and ambiguous genitalia were subjected to surgeries to address what were considered errors in development. This resulted in a great amount of distress, including suicides, in this population later in life.

Such surgeries are nonconsensual (and unnecessary, given normative urinary function). It is no surprise that having been violated, and awareness of sex/gender nonconformance, were common expressions from those subjected to genital surgeries.

My sense changed based on two things: First, speaking with intersex folks who had been assigned a gender. Second, as part of extension of values concerning consent, boundary, autonomy, and so on.

Intersex folks are different than most, and I recognize that, but I do not consider them less than. I welcome their witness as part of the right to self-determination.

Again, we are not only talking about adults here. Children require parental guidance exactly because they are not responsible to make reasonable decisions. When that relationship is inverted, something is wrong.

I fully agree with you. I have mentioned this to you before—there are best-practices protocols in place concerning juvenile presentation of distress in regards to gender. Children receive guidance from a multi-disciplinary team of adults. But so too are those children listened to. There is a long-term process of evaluation and consideration that is patient-focused, and clinician-led.

I can't really answer this and many of your other responses because it simply relies on your acceptance of the axiom that you can have an identity mismatch at birth, which is then revealed thorough later experience.

Fair enough. I recognize chromosomal sex, dimorphic sex, gender identity, gender assignment, and gender expression as distinct, and that it is possible for those things to be noncongruent.

I don't think you have an established identity at a birth, and I don't care about experience. My experience is not a determinant of the "real me" and grows continually.

I’m not sure one way or the other, but I have reason to believe it possible based on the biological underpinnings of human development, and in particular, the interaction of androgens and the neurology of the developing brain.

I also consider the reports of children expressing gender mismatch in regards to their sex in cases where those children are too young to have been gender socialized one way or the other.

I don't think traumas or blocks generated by experience can be resolved by medical intervention, but only by realignment of your values and transformative work.

The clinically-validated and peer-reviewed results of EMDR suggest medicine does have something to offer the traumatized, but I agree with this in general, and specifically given your choice of words. They speak to my own experience.

The difference is that for most of that time, there had been actual investigations and regulations of diagnosis and treatment. Now, therapists are little more than glorified prescription dispensers and science has become politicized.

Those best-practices of diagnosis and treatment are still in place, and the results of recent review and revision were announced this year, in 2022.

Therapists cannot issue prescriptions, at least in the United States, but they are an integral part of multi-disciplinary teams focused on the well-being of those experiencing gender distress.

The thing about momentary confusion is that without proper guidance and order, you invite enough chaos for it to stop being momentary.

True that.

What data?

Childhood gender nonconformity <- Wikipedia link with citations on developmental etiology

Evaluation and Treatment of Gender-Dysphoric/Gender Incongruent Adults <- NCBI link with citation on developmental etiology and info on treatment modalities

I had a video on this, but it keeps getting deleted. The theory is that younger generations who were raised by technology, or were otherwise socially isolated, are lacking in real social play with the opposite gender, and their differentiation of gender nuances is suppressed until later on when they compensate by self-experimentation.

I’d like to see that.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[slant]

I see, and I agree. My view is well-encapsulated here:

This is probably a dumb question, since under your name you have "Jesus" but watching this video the guy seems religious - are you religious?

Because the whole core culture war is about religion vs anti religion I don't really see a way to reconcile the two.

 

[aeon]

I see, and I agree. My view is well-encapsulated here:

I found the video to be worth watching.

I think humanity’s issues with the right to consent, self-determination, autonomy, and the recognition and honor of boundary—in relation to gender and otherwise—ultimately transcend political position.

Religion is a framework through which to consider things. As an agnostic, I’ll leave it at that.

Given the host’s use of “hermaphrodite” and “transvestism,” I have reason to doubt his knowledge of the overall topic, and reason to think his purpose is that of agenda, not the humility of curiosity.

The host asserts the body is a symbol of the soul. I don’t agree or disagree with that.

The guest asserts that being is a property of a human-created hierarchy. I disagree, and I consider said hierarchy as subjective and ultimately chosen, albeit informed by what we have elevated to the position of perennial wisdom.

The likening to gargoyles was both funny and fatuous. Taken seriously, one may recognize the invalidation, or alternatively own and recontextualize, a la queer.

They double-down on asserting their choice of hierarchy and categories. This is why they see the liberation of gender as extreme. That’s okay, and I can appreciate that. The likening to the Eucharist—the symbol, and what it represents—and the separation thereof—I think that is a flawed premise, which leads to disordered thinking.

The witness of the body does not reveal the gender, and assuming it does is exactly why we are where we are. It could have been otherwise, but we collectively chose to judge instead of accept.

I appreciate the mention of pathologization at the beginning of the 20th century. At a point we decided we knew the intention of creation, and decided what was outside of intention.

The host seems oblivious to the idea of beauty being in the eye of the beholder. He asserts beauty as an objective truth, and wonders why we collectively do not recognize it.

The likening to carnies and the carnival parade was interesting, and worth consideration in terms of its historical and cultural context.

Thanks for sharing.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

This is probably a dumb question, since under your name you have "Jesus" but watching this video the guy seems religious - are you religious?

Because the whole core culture war is about religion vs anti religion I don't really see a way to reconcile the two.

That must be one of those scripted titles that trigger with a specific post count, but that's kinda funny. Yes, I'm religious. And yes, we are in a theological war, essentially.

 

[Wyote]

yes, we are in a theological war, essentially.

Why does God care about penises

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

Such surgeries are nonconsensual (and unnecessary, given normative urinary function). It is no surprise that having been violated, and awareness of sex/gender nonconformance, were common expressions from those subjected to genital surgeries.

Understandable, but I'm not advocating for any interventions for intersex population, just like I'm against physical interventions for any gender.

I also consider the reports of children expressing gender mismatch in regards to their sex in cases where those children are too young to have been gender socialized one way or the other.

I'm extremely skeptical whether a child that is young enough to not have been socialized in any way would be able to conceptualize what a gender mismatch is.

The clinically-validated and peer-reviewed results of EMDR suggest medicine does have something to offer the traumatized, but I agree with this in general, and specifically given your choice of words. They speak to my own experience.

Obviously there is some merit to medication, otherwise it wouldn't be used. But my view on this is the same as on antidepressants—they are crutches at best, never an end in itself. My brother is one of those who believe that everything can be solved with a magical pill that will fix some kind of deficiency here and there, and he's a complete washout who has changed absolutely nothing in the last 10 years. He's a slave to multiple substances and once the real support goes away—his overly agreeable environment—he will founder so hard it might kill him outright.

Those best-practices of diagnosis and treatment are still in place, and the results of recent review and revision were announced this year, in 2022.

I have to wonder about the authorities managing the reviews, as staff members themselves have spoken out against reckless handling of cases.
E.g. https://www.commonsense.news/p/top-trans-doctors-blow-the-whistle
https://news.sky.com/story/nhs-over...nsgender-treatment-former-staff-warn-11875624

It seems, though, that NHS has recently veered radically away from their prior methods, so that's something.

I’d like to see that.

So would I. There were some good insights.

I'm getting worn out by the lengthy responses, but there are some claims worth answering in your other post later.

 

[Mindhoverer]

You see, I’m a conservative and it’s been a big thing these days to question “what is a woman?” And while many people don’t want to answer the question, I thought of a question epistemological one myself. Now a progressive leftist might agree that a woman is a woman. Now I’d like to follow that up with “permanently?” Now I don’t know but maybe I’d get some kind of response like “not if they don’t want to be.” The point is this, a woman can’t be a woman and not a woman at the same time. It’s nonsense.

I would like to quote Simone de Beauvoir here - "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman"'. Also, sex is biological and gender is a social construct. Genders are very broad generalizations based on a body type and how that body type behaves or is forced to behave. So, socially there is no answering as to what makes a woman a woman or what doesn't make a woman. The outside world can at max talk about the biological construct and define it scientifically. But genders are social and there's no generalizations here, and it is up to each person to believe in what they think they are and be identified accordingly.

 

[Anemoia]

I did write some things to contribute to this thread, but as I thought about it and dipped into Google, it became clear that I didn't know what I was talking about.

Personally, I don't think anybody does, and least of all the pop commentators that take on this subject and the legislators who have to legislate for it. We are living in a crisis of expertise in the West, where the most trusted voices are simply the loudest confidence-men. Our 'public intellectuals' are fighters or comedians and the qualifications for government are not expertise but wealth and Machiavellianism. Public discourse in the West has degenerated to a ludicrous degree.

 

[athenian200]

I think that referring to what transwomen go through as "becoming a woman" makes it easy to dismiss the whole process with absurdly simplistic logic and references to biology textbooks, and it muddies the waters in a lot of unhelpful ways.

The phrase I prefer is that a transwoman is "living AS a woman." Obviously, a male body cannot become a female body, regardless of how the individual living in it feels about being a man. But what you can do is take hormones to make the male body resemble a female one more and help the person be more comfortable in their own skin, and ask other people to treat them more like how they feel inside. The logical contradictions only come into play because you pick apart the concept of "becoming a woman" in a literal way.

What people who go through that process want is to be treated according to their self-concept and identity, rather than having everyone tell them that the body they were born with is all that matters and their feelings don't matter. They're not in denial about the fact that their body doesn't fit with their identity, they are making the best of a bad situation.

I feel like a lot of the arguments against transwomen could also be used against anyone who gets plastic surgery or body modification of any kind. Like for instance, you could tell someone who gets a nose job that regardless of what they look like, their old nose is their real nose and the new one is fake. Or if a woman gets breast implants, you could tell her that being flat-chested is who she is and complain that she's living a lie in that way as well. Transition is basically just a more extreme version of that. You make your body look different than the way it is naturally, to be seen the way you prefer and feel more comfortable in your own skin. With a transwoman, her body's maleness is the physical attribute she doesn't like, and therefore making the body look female is the improvement in her eyes. Doesn't change the original nature of the body, but there you go.

As for referring to someone as a woman, or using preferred pronouns? That's more a matter of respect for the person's identity, as clearly expressed by modifying their body in this way, than a literal belief that they are a woman in the exact same sense someone born in a female body is. Again, they are living as a woman and have invested a lot in coming across as a woman, so in general, it's a matter of treating someone the way they would prefer to be treated, especially in contexts where it simply isn't necessary to treat them differently. That is, in the situation of a transwoman, people are asking that you put identity and compassion for the person living in the body, over an accurate description of the body itself. If you choose not to do that, perhaps because you're a strict materialist and you see that as an idealist position that doesn't fit into your framework of reality? Well, that is a valid philosophical disagreement in some ways, but a lot of people will see it as rather mean-spirited whether you intend it to be or not.

That said, I feel that sometimes inclusive language goes a bit too far, and too many people actually do double down on the insistence that "becoming a woman" literally happens, and go out of their way to erase any distinction between a transwoman and a woman born as a woman, suggesting that any language, even medical language, that hints at a difference or might remind transwomen that they do not have female bodies, is somehow bigoted or unacceptable. Those kind of advocates and activists probably do more harm than good to the transgender community, and validate the idea many conservatives have that all transgendered people are simply delusional and don't understand basic logic.

I mean, come on, do you really think these people don't know what situation they are in? If they were simply delusional, they wouldn't be getting all these surgeries or going on hormones, so they clearly know what their bodies look like and what that implies about their role in society and how others should treat them. They know very well how their bodies work and that their body doesn't match up with their inner identity and sense of self. And more than likely, they've tried what they can to make that identity match that of their body over the years, and failed repeatedly because morality and logic can't really fix what's going on with this part of the mind, no matter how much you argue with yourself and tell yourself what you're supposed to be. They can play the role and do what's expected of them to a degree, if forced, but it makes them miserable and feels like a lie to them. A transgender person will feel like a bit of a fraud either way... they just get a choice whether to create an illusion surrounding the nature of their body so they can act and be treated in a way that feels right to them, which others may see as lying or mere roleplaying... or live an inauthentic life that feels like a straightjacket imposed on them by their body and society that they hate, feeling like an actor 24/7.

The biggest problem with not accepting transgender people, is that these people clearly are doing everything they can to escape from a box that their body and society put them into. The only option left besides accepting them, is trying to force them back into that box, telling them that they must accept living as and being treated by other people, as what their body looked like at birth, because of a strong conviction that they have no right to try and get out of that box regardless of how miserable it makes them.

I think sometimes it is hard to have important conversations surrounding this, though, because some people really want to shut it down with "transwomen are women, end of discussion," or call everyone a bigot for struggling to accept something that is actually really hard to understand and wouldn't make a lot of sense to someone who hasn't lived through the situation themselves. Some transwomen might be fearful of the consequences of acknowledging that there is a difference between themselves and other women, fearing if they acknowledge it, that would legitimize the position of those who think their right to live as a woman should be taken away, and it also brings back painful memories or traumatizes them, so they do sometimes double-down on what seems to be a logical absurdity because they just can't handle the discussion or thinking about it because they feel too threatened and too invested in the new identity they've built, defending it at all costs even at the sacrifice of intellectual consistency. That unfortunately colors people's perception of the community as a whole and makes it seem like that's how all transgendered people are, mentally frail and emotionally fragile people who can't face reality because of trauma. And that's not universally the case.

 

[aeon]

It’s very nice to see you @athenian200

Best to You,
Ian

 

[Krypton]

What about bad faith cloaked in rhetoric that aspires to empathy?

I don't think there is any other issue that makes me more angry at ideological machinations than this today. The constant appeals to emotion and authority about something so fundamental and inherent to humanity are akin to demanding that I must become a logician before I can think. Consigning people to a lifetime of medical check-ups and medication (if they want to take their newfound identity to its ultimate conclusion, at least) because of momentary confusion is the opposite of empathy. It is not a secret anymore that transgender "medical care" is an extremely lucrative venture. The swiftness and alacrity with which institutions facilitated needless butchery is suspicious to say the least.

If grown people want to make their lives harder instead of rooting out the real cause and fixing their traumas, fine. But let's for a moment stop pretending that this is exclusive to adults, as that is no longer the case. Idiot parents are now raising "trans kids" due to minor temperamental deviations between assumed femininity and masculinity, and public schools that heavily employ progressive-minded teachers are encouraging the highly impressionable (and creative, which has much to do with it) children to embrace it. And we know that this goes beyond rhetoric and even early-stage procedures like administration of puberty blockers, as seedy places like Vanderbilt hospital have practically admitted to operating on minors despite the attempts to whitewash the fact.

Psychological research has been fairly clear for a while now that people with unresolved childhood trauma are more likely engage in body modifications like getting extensive tattoos and piercings. In my estimate, this is an attempt to escape who you are by changing your physical appearance and taking on a persona, and I went through a similar process when I was under great psychological stress without the means to resolve it in my youth. Transgender ideations sound like a radical extension of the same response. This is further strengthened by the fact that the demographic has massive rates of depression and suicidal thoughts. And no, I don't think this is due to bullying and ostracism; bullies have been around forever and such an increase in psychopathology is an oddity. As @Defective has mentioned, gender dysphoria is often accompanied by comorbidities that seem like the actual trigger rather than the result of some internal metaphysical inconsistency. The proportional rise of self-reported gender dysphoria (because this is practically the only condition where the patient decides the diagnosis and cure; thanks, "gender-affirming care" and greedy quack psychologists) with the proliferation of the concept in the mainstream is also suspicious. Not to mention that the modern concept of gender itself is a legacy of a sick degenerate and pederast, John Money.

Ian, you mentioned that this is not playing, but that's at core exactly what it is. As far as I can tell, the incidence of gender dysphoria is almost fully on the side of left-leaning demographic. We know that liberals score higher in openness to experience, which often translates to creativity, which is often the willingness to engage in fantasy play and live on the fringe of society. I remember being a zealous progressive some 13 years ago and incidentally having many of the same ideas that are the marks of young leftists today: irregular haircuts, unnaturally dyed hair, tattoos, eccentric clothing, etc. When we want to experience something that we are not and have not, we play at it. Children do this all the time, but they are conscious of it. Creative people love to imitate and bring something foreign into the mix. Openness is also inversely related to conscientiousness, which explains why highly creative people often suffer from psychological disorders: lack of discipline and principled approach to life often results in maladaptations and being poorly prepared to deal with ineluctable suffering.

1. What if some traumas can't be fixed?
2. What if part of the reason the trauma can't be fixed is that most trans people feel like they'll never really pass or be able to be a woman/man/whatever and that could be fixed by earlier interventions?

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

1. What if some traumas can't be fixed?
2. What if part of the reason the trauma can't be fixed is that most trans people feel like they'll never really pass or be able to be a woman/man/whatever and that could be fixed by earlier interventions?

Let's turn this around: Can any trauma be fixed so that our lives are as if it never took place?

The depths of our afflictions can be great indeed. However...

Ephesians 6:12
"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places."

Can an alcoholic be healed by alcohol? Is depression caused by a lack of drugs?

I'm trying to make an analogy here, but this is in fact deeper than that because it relates to a fundamental truth about what it means to be a human being. The dichotomy of being made man or woman is as basic as up and down or left and right, completely inseparable from making sense of anything and the way we are designed.

Is that an acceptable answer to the world that lusts for autonomy in all aspects and preaches to rely on our own understanding? No, but it is the most definitive one.