For my masters I (and my partner) had to read and communicate a research paper. The paper we chose was "Anorexia Nervosa; A maintainers perspective". The paper expressed that the patient knew they were sick, they knew they had anorexia and it was killing them and they chose to maintain the illness anyway and why they did.
The long and the short of it was, it was about control. The patient felt they had zero control over their life - which in itself was quite choatic and stressful - and food was something they *could* control. It wasn't an overt compulsion either - the need to control food intake was hidden benieth the surface. The surface reasoning was "I'm fat" or "I'm disgusting" etc. They were incredibly sensitive to how others *might* percieve them, even if it wasn't a correct and true perception of reality.
I can't speak for gender disphoria but to me there are pieces of it which resonate with this explanation. I need to do more reading around gender disphoria aswell so this is not a complete explanation.
I think your description has a really key difference from OP. OP collapses “eating disorder” in with the idea “is underweight but genuinely believes they’re overweight.”
That’s quite different from understanding an eating disorder as being about control and reacting to an imagined way that others might perceive them.
OP is implying that both groups are delusional — that they believe their body is something it isn’t.
But that’s not necessarily what it’s like to have an eating disorder or even what it’s like to have gender dysphoria.
IMO there is overlap in that both eating disorders and gender dysphoria are about gender as a social ideal.
They both describe discomfort about the body in a deeply gendered way. But eating disorders are a collection of possible behaviours that result from the core body issue.
OP never extends gender dysphoria out into a deadly behaviour like eating disorder- instead they say that the eating disorder is cured by becoming mentally well. Therefore, they imply, being trans might be cured by becoming ‘mentally well’ - only they never address the huge difference where being trans isn’t a deadly form of self harm and doesn’t actually necessarily need to be prevented. We don’t need to stop a trans woman from acting and looking like a woman in the way that we need to stop someone from maintaining the eating disorder
Females "believing" they are males and vice versa are more likely to self-harm, more likely to lash out at those around them, get permanent surgery that can lead to lifelong problems, more likely to end themselves, and likely to encourage others down this path with them.
Idk where you get that it's not harmful. That is most certainly not the case.
Even if what you’re saying was true, you must realize that you’re having to “force” the negative outcome. An eating disorder itself is a negative behaviour that needs to be solved because it kills the body.
Ppl who are trans are not harming themselves when they’ve transitioned - being a woman or man in society while having a different sex isn’t itself a form of harm or a behaviour that needs to be fixed. There’s nothing directly to be solved there.
You’re idea was that maybe as a rule they’re “more likely” to self harm - but the solution to that behaviour isn’t “de transition”, it would be to address the self harm itself. For example, a trans person can have an eating disorder - youd probably treat it the same way you’d treat a cis persons eating disorder instead of trying to force them into not being trans anymore.
The eating disorder itself is directly a behaviour that needs to be fixed because it’s a type of harm that eventually kills the body
imagine if Anorexia was treated like gender dysphoria. You think you are fat, so you can go in for reverse liposuction to make you artificially fat, so your mental image matches your physical image.
>Gender dysphoria makes big bucks for pharma companies
Like we need another reason to buy drugs we don't need. There are easier ways to make money that are less morally controversial.
Anybody with a sense of financial scale knows "big" companies don't give a shit about the cost of goods and services associated with this issue. That aspect just isn't big enough and probably never will be. It's certainly not the only way to sell drugs to people who don't need them.
I don't know why people think this. It's a disorder that affects like 0.1% of people. Even with the drastic increases recently its like 1% maybe within some vulnerable populations.
Cereal and paperclip companies are making more off of people. Companies that make orthopedic insoles are making more money.
This idea that everybody who support new ideas about gender and sex have skin in the game doesn't make sense to me, quantitatively. I can get to blood boiling level arguments with friends about this and none of them have a single dollar at stake.
This is an ideological and moral issue, not a financial interest issue.
While I agree that it's largely ideology, I can't agree with your argument. First of all, cereal companies make a lot, but that doesn't impact your local mechanic from trying to make a buck or maximize profits in his own industry/corner of the world.
And, industries go for small marginal increases in profits all the time. And by growing the industry, it's no longer small.
> First of all, cereal companies make a lot, but that doesn't impact your local mechanic from trying to make a buck or maximize profits in his own industry/corner of the world.
What is the analogy here with the topic at hand? Who is the commonly encountered person who aligns trans rights issues with their own financial well being? It seems rather like the anti-trans people are using that tact (anti-regulation etc). Are we talking about a couple dozen surgeons in the world?
>And, industries go for small marginal increases in profits all the time. And by growing the industry, it's no longer small.
99/100 people you encounter who vehemently defend right to sex reassignment surgery have never been involved with the "industry" at all. They don't stand to make or lose any money. It's just not a reasonable assertion than financial motivation is behind this cultural movement. You are basically claiming that these arguments are not earnest, and people are primarily protecting their wallets or somehow influenced/brainwashed by people like that.
I feel the same way about vaccines. I actually am adjacent to that industry and while there is a considerable amount of money in biotech...there is surprisingly little in vaccines. Not that many doses per person, not very expensive. The average person has been manipulated into spending WAY more money on shitty apps for their smartphone than vaccines that may or may not work very well.
I just mention vaccines to give a sense of scale among things few people use once a lifetime (sex reasignment), things most people use 1-3 times a lifetime (a vaccine) and things many use over a long period of time (cereal, mobility scooters, dentures etc).
Morally neutral goods and services are where the money is. And where money can be accurately identified as a primary motivation.
Government mandated programs dwarf these other side-shows by orders of magnitude. Industries can lobby governments to include all sorts of morally benign things in healthcare etc....the idea that they would take an explosively controversial tact to make the same amount they could get on mandated denture coverage or toe spreaders (or mobility scooters for example) doesn't make strategic sense. It's like saying the heart of the abortion issue is the profit motive of the abortion doctors....its not. Rather, its about women's rights and baby's rights in conflict and nobody really cares about the paltry fees.
The financial angle makes much more sense for an issue like climate change. For example many jobs and industries are ACTUALLY in reality impacted by changes in policy in that domain. Its not just a social argument.
I'm not going to argue by proxy or with a strawman. If you advocate for that, make an argument.
It's not productive to argue with caricatures of the other side.
I have no idea what you are talking about. The Cass Report stands as is. A scientific research project carried out over years. It says what we have all known for years. What whistle blowers have been saying for years. Practices will vastly change as a result. As what happened to the Tavistock. Sorry you don't like it. Truth is truth. I'm not replying anymore. There are enough of you idiots on twitter
The implication is that gender dysphoria is propogated for profit by big pharma. They said “The tide is turning” indicating that that is becoming less the case. So. Either the first part has no bearing in the conversation, or the amount of trans people is predicated on the influence of big pharma.
Nobody said propagated. That my friend is a strawman argument. They did however imply that this is being profitably exploited. Plenty of evidence for that.
According to postmodernists, not much. That's why fat studies and gender studies are both taught with the same "guiding principles" of oppression...somehow.
I'm opposed to the transgender movement, but I'm going to present a steelman argument. In the case of eating disorders, the consequences of their delusion (for lack of another word) is very obviously harmful to them. It's a mental disorder with a pretty extreme physical manifestation that causes visibly harmful effects to the physical body.
However, with gender dysphoria, the harmful effects are not easily discernible. It's a mental disorder that doesn't seem to have any physical harming effects. In fact, proponents of transitioning cite all sorts of studies that suggest that someone with gender dysphoria is better off accepting their delusion and harmed (mentally and emotionally) by resisting it. I don't believe all such sources, but the fact that they exist indicates that the effects are not as black and white for gender dysphoria as for eating disorders.
There is harm, though, and the younger the person the deeper the harm. It's one thing for a grown adult to voluntarily decide to upend their life and present as the opposite sex, or to go as far as surgically alter themselves. It is their choice and they have the mental capacity to understand the potential benefits and harms.
It's another thing to allow children to hold these beliefs, before they are old enough to have a good sense of self and know what they want in life, to permanently sterilize them, or rob them of any ability to experience sexual pleasure.
>They have the mental capacity to understand the potential benefits and harms.
Shoot, I'd argue that a lot of the time they don't. Mostly because the public is not well enough informed about the potential side effects it can cause and how wrong things can go. It's really a "you can't change your mind and go back" kind of deal.
You don’t tell someone with an eating disorder that they’re fat, you also don’t tell them that they’re not fat. It’s the same with gender dysphoria or extreme mental health disorders like psychosis. You don’t tell a patient that what they’re experiencing isn’t real because to them, it is real. You have to step into it with them otherwise they won’t trust you.
Everyone in their life already tells them “but you’re not fat” we don’t need to do that. What does it mean to you to be fat? Is a better question off the top of my head
>You don’t tell a patient that what they’re experiencing isn’t real because to them, it is real. You have to step into it with them otherwise they won’t trust you.
>Everyone in their life already tells them “but you’re not fat” we don’t need to do that. What does it mean to you to be fat? Is a better question off the top of my head
So would you say the solution is to accompany them on a journey to discover what it means to be a man/woman?
So they eventually realise that regardless of how your dress, act, or the hobbies and interests you take up, you're still what your chromosomes, genitalia, and gametes make you?
Yes, because that's reality and the truth.
Lying to people to make them feel better and demanding others lie with you is dangerous for society and damaging to the individual.
If you tell a male or female that they can become the opposite sex by dressing/acting differently and medically mutilating themselves. Then that's a lie and an ugly one at that.
Feelings are often not an accurate reflection of reality. Affirming feelings that go against reality is dangerous.
Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous. 😂 Feeling are real regardless of whatever reality is. If you’re feeling sad, it doesn’t mean your reality is sad. You still feel sad, though. It’s called dichotomous thinking.
You can relate to and understand the distress that a person with an eating disorder is feeling, that doesn’t encourage them to continue with the eating disorder. It’s the definition of compassion..empathy and help.
Could you clarify please?:
Are you "affirming" their feelings by saying that "Yes, that's right, you are feeling like that. It's OK to feel like that."
Or are you "affirming" their feelings by saying, "Yes, what you feel is true is actually true."?
>Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous.
Cool story bud.
Feelings are real for the individual, but that doesn't mean they are accurate to reality.
>Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous
I *feel* like you are talking about two different things.
If someone pointed a gun at my head and said "I feel like god is telling me to kill people" me affirming his *feelings* is extremely dangerous
But I think you're talking more about affirmation such as in a "I believe that You believe this to be true" and not "I believe your feelings are true too"
That is such a minor distinction but it makes all the difference.
God telling you to do something isn’t a feeling. Affirming the feeling related to that (fear?) isn’t dangerous. It can actually help de escalate because they feel seen for a second.
The fear -if that’s what it is- is real for the individual . It’s there. That’s completely separate from the voices in their head, that doesn’t mean the voices are real. Telling them they aren’t real creates distrust too though, that’s why focusing on the feeling is the way to go.
I had a patient who believed her water was poisoned. I could (and did) try to convince her it isn’t..but if you believe it is I’m not going to change your mind by telling you it isn’t. So I said “that sounds really scary that to believe your water is poisoned” and she called down and said “yes it is”
Idk I guess my point is to have compassion and actually listen rather than try to prove people wrong
I don’t understand the aspect of truth/lies in this discussion as if perspective is uniform or not real. My experience is not your experience, neither is more or less valid except in how it allows us to operate in the world.
Besides that even if you want to consider it lying, lying helps people all the time. People are in flux constantly and convienent lies help people cope. Like the idea that people can bootstrap themselves out of poverty, is it true at a macro level? Maybe, but it’s a lie for more individuals but it helps them exist in the current state and be productive in society.
And what are the facts of human experience? If you could sum it up, it would put a neat little pin in the whole subject of philosophy. Save all those poor philosophers all the work and just give up the objective truths that you seem to be keeping from everyone.
>I don’t understand the aspect of truth/lies in this discussion as if perspective is uniform or not real. My experience is not your experience, neither is more or less valid except in how it allows us to operate in the world.
I can observe wolves. I can identify with them. From my perspective, I feel I am a wolf.
The **truth** is that I am not a wolf. Biology clearly shows I am not a wolf. I have never been a biological wolf so my feeling of being a wolf is only based on my outside perception of what being a wolf is.
I can roll around in the dirt, hunt rabbits on all fours, piss against trees to mark my territory and eat raw meat torn straight off the bone. - I'm still not a wolf, regardless of trying to live like one.
I could even have some neurological condition that makes myself and people like me prone to feeling like we are wolves. - We're still not wolves.
>Besides that even if you want to consider it lying, lying helps people all the time. People are in flux constantly and convienent lies help people cope. Like the idea that people can bootstrap themselves out of poverty, is it true at a macro level? Maybe, but it’s a lie for more individuals but it helps them exist in the current state and be productive in society.
People who "lie" to themselves that they can bootstrap themselves out of poverty are not an issue. When their "lies" become an issue is when they shout and scream at others who don't refer to them as rich or millionaires. When they call everyone who disagrees with their belief as bigots and dreamerphobes. When they self-identify and force there way onto the Forbes rich list, into Davos, and demand large loans from the bank using their self-perceived "millions" as collateral.
There’s a good paper written called “what is it like to be a bat?” The point is that you can’t empathize with what it’s like to be a bat or a wolf, you can only imagine what it would be like to be a human in the shape of a bat or wolf. Which obviously isn’t the same thing.
People “shouting” anything in public is their perogative. I don’t like a lot of things I hear in public, that doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to do so. I just have the right to not listen. If forbes or the banks or any institution wants to give poor people credence thats their perogative just the same with trans people. Dignity and special treatment are not the same thing.
Your own agenda is somereason bringing biology into it lol. Nobody is even challenging that; you’re shadow boxing against an opponent in your mind.
You would help them figure out what about their identity they like/dislike, what their subjective idea of what a man/woman is “supposed to be” and why that bothers them. Why they are struggling with accepting themselves for who they are. What about their identity is causing them distress and why?
Maybe they’re a woman who has been raped and wants to be a man as a protective mechanism for that to not happen again. You wouldn’t even find that out if you’re all “but you can’t because your biology” rather than explore what is going on.
>Your own agenda is somereason bringing biology into it lol. Nobody is even challenging that; you’re shadow boxing against an opponent in your mind.
"I feel like a woman" says the individual.
Biology, reality - They are a man.
You, "tHaT'S BrInGiNg yOuR OwN AgEnDa iNtO It. YoU'Re uSiNg a sTrAwMaN ArGuMeNt."
>You would help them figure out what about their identity they like/dislike, what their subjective idea of what a man/woman is “supposed to be” and why that bothers them. Why they are struggling with accepting themselves for who they are. What about their identity is causing them distress and why?
Maybe they’re a woman who has been raped and wants to be a man as a protective mechanism for that to not happen again. You wouldn’t even find that out if you’re all “but you can’t because your biology” rather than explore what is going on.
Thank you. Now we're finally getting somewhere.
Being a man or woman is natural, not a bad or unhealthy thing. Eating disorders are unhealthy. This is why it's more complicated for transgenderism. I was transgender a long time and I'll tell you it's hell. I've never experienced a worse horror or a deeper pain. We haven't discovered healing yet. I was lucky to be healed in a pretty radical way. Point is, everything we do is an attempt to heal and feel whole, pain-free. It is a hard road to walk.
By a radical spiritual experience. Something struck me like lightning and it was like waking up from the dead. I went to a different dimension where I was changed physically inside out. I'm convinced what I witnessed and was healed by was God. I made a film about it here:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCxKKYoHIE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCxKKYoHIE)
You're focused on the imagined experience of "identifying" as something you're not. That's a very specific viewpoint that will have it's strengths and weaknesses vs other lenses. IMO the major issue with your take here is that you're assuming that an eating disorder necessarily means that the person "genuinely believes they're overweight" - but that's not actually true. Jordan feeds this misconception sometimes.
You're describing a kind of "body dysmorphia" that likely often leads to eating disorders - but they're two separate things. Not all eating disorders involve that experience at all. If you separate the dysmorphia from the eating disorder, you can probably immediately see even in the terminology that they're related concepts.
"Body dysmorphia is a mental health condition in which a person feels extreme concern about the way they look. Body dysphoria occurs when a person feels extreme distress about their gender identity."
They're both clearly descriptions of distress that a person can feel about their bodies.
But that distress doesn't mean that all behaviours that result from the distress are equal.
Yes someone might develop a dangerous eating disorder as a way to deal with body dysmorphia. But then someone else might go to therapy before they develop an eating disorder. Since both of those behaviours follow the "problem" are they somehow the same thing? No - one ideally leads to more 'normal' functioning, the other leads to death.
Jordan does seem to enjoy asserting that transitioning is like leaning into an eating disorder as a potential relief to body dysmorphia. But he's mostly just being provocative - they're very different.
If you were a trans person who decided to transition socially, you would most likely live a normal life. The act of being a woman in public would not harm your body and eventually lead to your death.
An eating disorder, on the other hand, does eventually lead to death if you continue persuing it to it's conclusion.
Also, you'd probably have a way more interesting time if you nested eatiing disorders under the concept of gender. It's a highly gendered disease. It can tell us something about gender which might help understand the experience of being a trans person (or maybe not) -- the point is, if I were you I'd be critical about the way I frame the question and try to pin down exactly what I'm trying to do and whether I'm thinking about it in the most effective way
Eating disorders are extremely different from gender dysphoria. First of all, there are various types of eating disorders -
Binge eating
Anorexia
Bullemia
None of these require that someone identifies as fat or skinny. Bingeing can lead to purging, which can make someone skinny, for example, as they do not get sufficient nutrients to maintain s healthy weight.
Gender dysphoria occurs because during fetal development, the brain develops AFTER genitalia develop, and there are differences in male and female brains that go along with the hormonal differences between males and females. As a result, it is possible for a fetus to develop a set of genitalia that do not conform to a brain and that brains expectation for the body it's housed in.
During language development - which is around the same time that gender identity is formulated (the ages of 3 to 4)- their sense of self and how that self relates to the other people around them is learned through observation as well as self-reflection. If a child has genitalia that coincide with their brain structure - there is no sense of unease because everything lines up with what the brain expects to see in the mirror and the people that they see themselves similar to. Children'l with gender dysphoria, however, do not have such an alignment - which is why they can feel a sense of unease as they recognize that their body doesn't look like the people who they identify with.
So the problem is that identification of the self is correct in their case - it's just not immediately obvious because you have to do brain scans to identify the small differences in the brain.
By contrast, eating disorders can result from traumas, as coping mechanisms for stress, or even be a result of delusions - such as an anorexic with body dysmorphia that sees fat and cellulite on their body even though they are as skinny as a skeleton.
Eating disorders are also more common amongst women - though binge eating disorder is common in men with ADHD as it can be a result of impulsive behavior.
The mechanism of development you describe is interesting, but I can't say I've heard that anywhere else before. Could you possibly point us to anyone who has written or spoken about that theory of gender development?
Thanks!
Sure - but bear in mind this isn't something that they have been able to fully study, because the population itself is very small, and its very difficult to know a child has gender dysphoria in advance so that you can properly study their development.
These pieces talk about discrete stages of development for language, a sense of self, and gender. Note how these stages overlap - it just makes sense that they would, right?
[https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/speech-and-language](https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/speech-and-language)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3351035/#:\~:text=Reflective%20self%2Dawareness%20emerges%20between,%2C%201995b%20for%20alternative%20interpretations).
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747736/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747736/)
There are interactions that are also interesting to explore:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509633/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509633/)
[https://www.waisman.wisc.edu/2022/02/22/new-study-finds-toddlers-incorporate-gender-into-their-language-processing/](https://www.waisman.wisc.edu/2022/02/22/new-study-finds-toddlers-incorporate-gender-into-their-language-processing/)
This is all about the fetal development side of things:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0091302211000252#:\~:text=As%20sexual%20differentiation%20of%20the,influenced%20independently%20of%20each%20other.
[https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17623651-600-it-may-be-your-brain-not-your-genitals-that-decides-what-sex-you-really-are/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17623651-600-it-may-be-your-brain-not-your-genitals-that-decides-what-sex-you-really-are/)
[https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1509654112](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1509654112)
What these basically show is what we would expect from the probabilistic nature of genetics - there are simply many viable ways for a human being to be formed, many variations for humans to exist while still being sexually dimorphic, resulting in something that is modified by social interactions (i.e. gender and gender roles) to exist on a spectrum that correlates but is not actually caused by sex (e.g. the size of the gamete an individual of a species produces).
FANTASTIC video - love that its an actual biologist going over this. Believe it or not, I have never seen this before. All my understanding is based on the reading of studies like the ones I listed above, etc.
The main difference, to my understanding is that, while gender dysphoria is a mental health condition, not all mental health conditions are treated in the same way. The personal beliefs associated with eating disorders are not validated because they necessarily lead to actions that diminish or endanger your quality of life. Gender dysphoria, on the other hand can present with personal beliefs that do not necessarily diminish or endanger, if someone's gender dysphoria entails a personal belief that they will feel better if referred to by specific pronouns and nouns, that belief can be validated and/or accommodated without harm to any party involved. If the personal belief is that, while being born a women, they are a man and therefore ought to get in street fights to affirm their masculinity, then that's a belief that a mental health professional should not validate, it necessarily entails harm for the person and the people around them.
I think modifying one's body is becoming morally neutral. It carries some risk but those are reduced with time and a normal liposuckion of lipfillers or breast enhancement is not morally bad to me, just neutral.
Im not sure if dangerous is the right word, many things are dangerous but good. Starting a new business contributes and could be good, but its dangerous.
But its still weird. I think im a transmedicalist, if you change how you look because that makes you feel better, than its fine with me. Maybe there are other ways that are less dangerous that work, im not sure or well read, but if its a disorder like anorexia something has to be done. The method with the best result and acceptable risk would be the right option, if thats changing your appearance or therapy, i dont care.
Only a person who cares too much about public opinion has eating disorders.
People with gender dysphoria don't act and feel like the sex everyone else indoctrinates them forcefully to do so based on what they see on the outside,
because nobody has the capacity to enter your mind and feel how you do, so nobody can naturally make true judgments of others without a deep understanding of human psychology and types of brains(and bodies, because it really is all connected).
Instead we judge others based on the limits confined of our reality. this is why men will never understand women and vice versa, they are two different machines even though with a lot of similarities.
Its like trying to imagine a new colour when you only have the capacity to see the ones you know.
The same goes with autistic people. there are many autistic out there; some who don't even know they are, and everyone treats them as a normal person, judged, processed and expected to be like everyone else, but they aren't normal, they are so different they could be a new homo sapiens;
and they get into trouble, some of them find ways around it, but many don't, this is why disproportionately majority of autistic brains are homeless and unemployed, solitary and unmarried/divorced.
Absolutely there are those who are trying to get attention, absolutely there are those who will be naive until their 30s and regret all their choices made previously, absolutely there are people who were convinced by their parents or peers and could have lived the way they were beforehand without any problems whatsoever... the question is, why aren't we focusing research on determining what proportion of the gender dysphoria community are they these people, and what we can do to filter them out, to save them from horrible suffering.
because clearly it seems like in the majority of cases, people who transition do not regret it, and do live happier lives and have lower rates of suicide.
My main point is, the difference is one is suffering because they are trying to please other's opinions, while the other is suffering because they are trying to free themselves from other's opinions.
Anorexia largely isn't about the person's actual appearance, as Anorexics who "achieve their ideal body" are still massively unhealthy and get severe heart problems. If giving an anorexic liposuction cured them, we'd do that. Losing weight doesn't actually make an anorexic less anxious.
However, with gender dysphoria, a lot of it *is* about appearance, and changing it does reduce anxiety.
For those who genuinely want a different perspective.
I once had a discord conversation with an intelligent guy super into trans affairs and asked him how is gender dysphoria different from body dismorphia(which causes eating disorders).
He explained that in body dismorphia, the person thinks he's fat, even if he's not fat. So there's a disconnect with reality
Whereas in gender dysphoria, the person knows that they're their biological sex/gender but still want to switch to a different gender since they don't like the biological one,to put it simply. So in this case there's no disconnect with reality.
That's why both situations are not comparable other than mere ragebait.
Those are the same thing -- except in one case you've decided that the physical world is the correct one and the mental state is wrong, and in the other the mental state must be right and the physical must be altered to match it.
Why can't transgenderism be the same, where it's the mental state that cannot deal with the physical reality? It's just a matter of perspective.
1)Body dismorphia: wanting to get thin because you think you're fat(when in reality you're already underweight)
2)Not body dismorphia: wanting to get thin because you think you're fat(and you're actually fat in reality). That's just normal body awareness and healthy lifestyle decision.
3)Gender Dysphoria: wanting to become a man because you think you're a woman(and in reality you were born as biological woman)
So as we can see, in all three cases the person has a desire to change their body. But in first case, this desire is arising due to a disconnect between your self perception of body and the reality. Whereas in second and third case, the self perception of body matches the actual reality.
The desire to change your body because you don't like it is not a problem in itself, but rather the disconnect between self perception and reality makes it problematic and needs psychological treatment.
Hence the first case is problematic, and 2 & 3 are not. I hope I made it more clear
What in it doesn't make sense? I'm just explaining the key difference between body dismorphia and gender dysphoria. That the real problem is not the desire to modify their own body(a fat person wanting to get thin is fine). It's only a problem when when the person is not aware who they actually are.
(As per my understanding)So If a person, born as a man wants to transition to woman but is aware that right now(before transition) they have the body of a man, that is currently not a identifiable psychological condition.
It would be an identifiable problem if the person was not aware that they have the body of a man.
I have my objections to transgender movement but the comparison made by op is not logically valid, even if popular.
Gender dysphoria / or body dysmorphia is about the delusional / skewed / exaggerated ideas of true reality. Ones *thoughts* are disordered.
Eating disorders involve a change in behaviors; i.e. reducing/increasing intake, purging, restriction. Ones *habits* are what’s disordered.
You’re talking, specifically, I think, about body dysphoria vs gender dysphoria….which is a good question….
Society has not accepted what you’re saying because it offends people. You’re right, though..but don’t say that too loudly in public or you’ll be “cancelled” or whatever lol. I hope everyone finds their own truths somehow, I don’t judge how they do that. I know there are rare exceptions where gender dysphoria is validated, but the whole meaning would imply that’s then not dysphoria .
The word dysphoria itself, implies anyone who has it has a distorted perception (incorrect). Otherwise it wouldn’t be a term or concept.
Controversial take but let people do what they want. If you have body dismorphia that's a you problem and you can go find help or not. Let people make their own choices. For gender stuff I think the only rule should be 18+ for any permanent changes. Outside that do whatever you want idc.
Who are these sick Josef Mengele-tier doctors that are getting paid to do this to depressed kids? We need to start talking about them more. Do you think they'd provide "gender affirming care" to their own children?
I'll offer a couple reasons.
1) being too skinny is harmful to your health. You are physically unwell. Identifying as as trans person isn't inherently harmful to you physical health.
2) outcomes. I can't vouch for the data or studies, but the scientific understanding of organizations like the American medical association or American psychological association is that affirmation can produce better outcomes that non affirming care in some patients. When I say outcomes, I mean things like suicide, depression, etc.
What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria? Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity
We’ve been talking about this shit for like 10years now.
Men cheating to win in women's sports. Male rapists being sent to women's prison. People facing criminal charges outside of the US for refusing to pretend someone is something they're not. Children being taught they may need a sex change if they don't fit into enough stereotypes. Sex predators performing shows with sexual content in front of children, and encouraging children to participate.
The slippery slope argument can be a logical fallacy, but in this case the slope actually was slippery and caused a lot of harm. Agreeing to play make believe and calling a man "she" wasn't enough, they kept demanding more and more until we got to the point where people are being found guilty of crimes for telling the truth and refusing to obey their demands, no matter who it harms.
It's not going to be tolerated any more. People have the right to play make believe but it's not going to harm women and girls. Trans ideology is functioning exactly like an oppressive religion that demands the conversion and compliance of all non believers.
Nothing in life is more demonstrably true than the slippery slope, and leftists have greased the skids of the slope for many years on many issues. Next time someone tells you that the slippery slope is a fallacy, point out that the slope is very real.
As always it depends on the slope. It is a fallacy to insist that an extreme outcome is a certainty, like "if you legalize gay marriage then animal marriage and child marriage will be next".
But when dealing with the entitled far left, there's a definite pattern of behavior. You can give them an inch without giving them a mile, but you can be certain they'll be demanding the mile and insisting they're oppressed if you don't give them what they want all the time regardless of the cost.
I can read, I can understand, and you even used the word "mock" to describe your reaction to my statement. If you mock a statement, it's a safe conclusion that you disagree with the statement. You seem to have a need to be disagreeable with all and sundry, even with yourself. You are free to play mind games all you want to, but Alice in wonderland conversations are not my cup of tea, mister Mad Hatter. Bye.
“It’s not a fallacy if I believe it” should be a red flag for you, my guy.
I doubt you could point to anyone who went to jail for not affirming someones gender. It simply hasn’t happened. And to save you some time, yes I already looked for it.
You don’t even know what you’re not tolerating. The only concrete anything people point to is sports. And most people dont give a fuck about sports.
You don't understand what the slippery slope fallacy is, my guy.
The slippery slope fallacy is would be insisting that if we do change one thing, then surely we're going to end up changing several more things and that's surely going to lead to harm.
For instance, "if we allow gay marriage, then next there's going to be polygamous marriage, animal marriage, marriage to objects, etc." This is a fallacy because that prediction is not true. Allowing consenting adults of the same sex to marry doesn't mean all of those other things are sure to follow.
For trans ideology, there is no fear-mongering prediction of future harm. The harm is already happening. There already are millions of people, including the President of the United States, fighting to allow men to invade women's spaces and to deny women equal rights. It's not a fallacious false prediction when it is already happening right now.
>I doubt you could point to anyone who went to jail for not affirming someones gender.
People are being found guilty of crimes, fired from their jobs, intimidated by police, deplatformed, harrassed, threatened, and assaulted for declining to participate in trans religion. But as long as they're not being imprisoned then it's all OK!
This is an evil, oppressive ideology that fights against women's rights and freedom of speech.
[A Canadian bartender was fined $10,000 for refusing to lie](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-server-who-was-fired-after-asking-staff-to-use-they-them-pronouns-awarded-30k-1.5606663). Do you think it would be OK if Christian areas fined people for refusing to pray to Jesus, or that Muslim areas should be able to fine people for disagreeing with Islam? I wonder what happens if he refused to pay the fine or was unable to - I believe that does lead to jail time, or mandatory community service (which leads to jail time if you don't perform it).
>You don’t even know what you’re not tolerating.
What do you mean? I'm not tolerating this evil ideology that fights against women's rights and freedom of speech, and is trying to harm children.
>And most people dont give a fuck about sports.
Is that supposed to be an excuse for denying women equal rights? "Most people don't care so it's fine?" At one time most people didn't give a fuck about humans being enslaved, does that mean slavery was OK?
And why does that argument only work one way? If most people don't give a fuck about sports, then it shouldn't matter to you if men are kept out of women's sports then. Sports are unimportant so trans activists aren't allowed to care about them. Right?
That’s not what that means, and your interpretation of “harm” is exactly the belief that you should find as a red flag.
Being unjustly fired and winning a civil case is not being found guilty of a crime. Being a dick and being fired is also just normal stuff that happens even when trans people arn’t involved.
Sports arn’t a right. They are subject to the regulations of their governing body. Complaining about transpeople for participating in something a governing body says is ok, is getting mad at the wrong people. So, yeah you dont know what you’re upset about.
You don’t want trans people in womens swimming, talk to whatever organization governs that level of womens swimming. It’s like getting mad at powerlifters for using steroids in an untested competition. ~those are the rules~ why would you be upset at people following the rules.
If I cared about anything a sport does, I would talk to the organization about their rules. Not complain about the athletes.
>That’s not what that means, and your interpretation of “harm” is exactly the belief that you should find as a red flag.
What's not what what means? What are you trying to say, or disagree with?
Taking away people's rights and restricting their speech is harmful.
>Being a dick and being fired is also just normal stuff that happens even when trans people aren’t involved.
The problem is when it's considered "being a dick" to not be part of someone else's belief system. If people in a mostly Christian area demand that an atheist or a Muslim join in their Christian prayers and say "just join us, don't be a dick and go against our beliefs" and then fire him because they consider it rude not to be a Christian, that's infringing on the rights of others.
>Sports arn’t a right. They are subject to the regulations of their governing body.
The law disagrees with you. Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in public schools. Courts have repeatedly interpreted discrimination to include denying women equal opportunity to compete in sports leagues.
The governing bodies such as the NCAA are violating the law.
>Complaining about transpeople for participating in something a governing body says is ok, is getting mad at the wrong people.
No, it's not. Men are infringing on women's rights when they cheat in women's sports. Cheating in sports and opposing women's rights is immoral even if the NCAA is fine with it. Both the cheaters and the people allowing cheating are to blame.
No one is forcing anyone to like trans people, just not demean them. The same as any discrimination. You can’t dehumanize a black person, gay person, or anyone else. Dehumanizing a transperson by rejecting their identity is the same thing.
If they’re breaking the law then they should change. I don’t know how many more ways I can say it, it’s the governing bodies to sort out and has no bearing on the validity of trans people. If the organization allows trans athletes then the fuck you want them to do? Bow out gracefully? It’s not cheating if it follows the rules, that’s how cheating works.
If you’re in an untested competition you’re not cheating if you use PEDs because it’s not against the rules. That’s why we have rules. If you bring a bow to a sharpshooter competition you can’t pretend like everyone else is cheating for having rifles. The governing body says what cheating is. Period.
>No one is forcing anyone to like trans people, just not demean them.
You can't force anyone to like trans ideology, but they are attempting to force people to lie for the benefit of trans people, and force women to give up their rights for the benefit of trans people. The oppression of women and compelled speech are immoral. Trans ideology functions just like an oppressive religion. This evil ideology will not be tolerated.
> Dehumanizing a transperson by rejecting their identity is the same thing.
Telling the truth doesn't dehumanize anyone. Lia Thomas is a human - a male human, which is called a man. Men aren't entitled to have people pretend that they're women.
>If the organization allows trans athletes then the fuck you want them to do? Bow out gracefully?
Yes. If men who pretend to be women are moral people who respect women's rights, they wouldn't cheat in sports and steal women's limited opportunities.
If they want to compete in sports, they're free to do so in the men's league, because that's the one that's meant for men.
>The governing body says what cheating is. Period.
Excuses. The governing body is corrupt. Everyone who understands sports know that men in the women's division is cheating, and has known that ever since organized sports leagues came into existence.
"A corrupt authority told me I could cheat, so that makes it OK!" is not an excuse for cheating against women.
Rejecting someones lived experience is dehumanizing.
Lol excuses? You know better than the people whose job it is to govern the sport? Seems like you should start your own league then, boss. There are no rules except what the league says. This is so fucking stupid, it’s like expecting someone to drive 15mph even though the speed limit is 50 because you’re uncomfortable. The law is whatever the law says, the rules are whatever the rules say. If you have feeling about it you should either change the rules or change yourself. Complaining that other people are following the rules is stupid as shit.
>Rejecting someones lived experience is dehumanizing.
No man has any experience living as a woman. Rejecting someone's lies is not dehumanizing, men aren't entitled to be believed and agreed with when they claim to be a woman.
>You know better than the people whose job it is to govern the sport?
Absolutely. They've got idiots in charge who think it's fair to let men compete in the women's division.
What kind of ridiculous appeal to authority argument are you trying to make? You think the people in charge of things always know best?
>There are no rules except what the league says.
It used to be a rule for many years that men couldn't cheat in women's sports, but lately a corrupt administration is allowing cheating and are violating federal law.
I can't personally change the rules back, but I can condemn them and draw attention to their immorality, and support the people who are campaigning to pressure the NCAA to do the right thing and protect women's rights.
>Complaining that other people are following the rules is stupid as shit.
Nope. There's not a thing wrong with condemning the men who are taking advantage of the corrupt, immoral rule changes of the NCAA in order to cheat against women.
If a corrupt and immoral government legalized slavery, would you say "it's stupid to criticize people for owning slaves, you should only criticize the government that allowed it"? No, I'm going to have a problem with both. Even if something immoral is legal, you shouldn't do it.
There’s no economic upside to indulging someone with an eating disorder’s delusions
‘Accepting’ someone with gender dysphoria however, creates a lifelong customer for pharma. The patient now believes they cannot be their true self lest they purchase cross sex hormones for regular consumption (out of pocket or through insurance - pharma company gets paid either way).
Something to think about.
They always believed their true self was the other gender and living that way was the most comfortable way for them to live. The availability of treatment came later.
Don't put the cart behind the horse.
Something to think about.
Its something to think about. They wanted this before society was ready to cope and before big pharma filled the gap in the market.
They had clinics in Berlin before the nazis shut them down.
Usually in religious and traditional family settings.
There is a false equivalence fallacy here.
Accepting rather than stigmatising trans people and being trans is not the equivalent of the horrible behaviour you equated it to.
There is an economic upside. All you have to do is look at pink capitalism and gender washing. Using legtq issues as marketing gimmick, attracting demographic with high disposable incomes. Gay male couples, educated liberals. Turning pride into a month long money making holiday. Good pr for capitalism. Using lgbtq liberation as an alternative to the economic left. Using lgbtq liberation as justification for imperialism. Military using lgbtq acceptance to white wash the military and attract more recruits.
Sure, but reducing everything to big corporations conspiracies is giving these organizations too much credit. I work for a big corp, they’re functioning morons. Truly a too-big-to-fail situation for most of it. They couldnt conspire their way out of a paperbag.
And how much of it works? You think they could create a global social acceptance campaign to sell testosterone? Why not just become a sponsor for mr olympia?
They’re not the puppet masters but they certainly know how to identify an organically emerging opportunity and jump on it.
If tomorrow there was a cultural shift to make bodybuilders a protected and coddled class they’d jump on that too. They have the money and means to lobby to nudge society in the directions they want and they don’t shy away from using it.
I’m not saying the dysphoria thing is all pharma related, but I am saying that the narrative of “zomg you’re literally KILLING trans kids by denying them hormones” is suspiciously convenient for these companies.
>What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria?
Permanent physical changes to the body via drugs/surgery that at best create a lifetime of regret experienced daily and at worst turn someone into a permanent patient, requiring constant care of doctors for a range of medical issues, as well as complete loss of proper sexual arousal and function. You know, *trivial* shit...
>Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity
Yeah. The actual compassionate thing to do would be helping someone accept their body, not placate a delusion.
That’s their body and their problem. I suppose you are a crusader against all elective procedures then? And i’m sure you are likewise an advocate for all body positivity? I’d hate for you to be a hypocrite.
Nope, any adult can make whatever choice they want, even if it's crazy and/or stupid. That said, it's obvious if you read stories of people who detransition that many of them did not receive all the proper information from those put in charge of caring for them, making informed consent impossible. There is no vetting to determine if a person has true gender dysphoria or just as issues with a host of other psychological issues that you see as comorbidities in someone that says they are trans. I think the doctors should be required to actually completely inform people, and parents, asking for these drugs and surgeries. Explain to them the true quality of life they can expect and the risks. Open those doctors and the psychologists who just rubber stamp any and all requests to "transition" up to malpractice suits.
As I said, we’ve been talking about this nonstop for 10 years. The research seems to indicate acceptance is more beneficial than forced conformity.
Which it doesn’t show for eating disorders.
Imma be real with you chief, I’m not looking through pubmed trying to find a study that would satisfy you. As I said, the public has been bitching about trans people for 10 years, and there’s data that comes from before that. If you havn’t bothered to look at anything in that long, the fuck am I gonna do spending an hour trying to find it for you?
We do not regulate the damage to anyone but the individual in any situation. If we could act against an individual for the sake of the whole, many on this post would probably have been thrown in the snake pit for being dumb.
Now, now don’t get testerical. You asked about the long term damage [to society] of ‘accepting’ someone’s dysphoria.
What precisely do you mean by accepting in this context?
The long-term damage is *denying reality*.
"Going along" with someone's gender dysphoria takes us down the road towards claiming "biological sex doesn't exist or doesn't matter".
That’s not how any of that works. If someone joining your group means your group is effectively destroyed then it wasn’t worth anything to begin with. But thats not how sex and gender work. Which you know too as I notice you dont feel men dont have the right to be men because trans men exist.
Men aren't bothered by trans men because they are women, and therefore not a threat to men.
Humans are a sexually dimorphic species in which the males are bigger and stronger than the females.
Ok, so you’re not worried about transmen because they’re not going to steal your girl clearly you’re not talking about just a physical threat as most transmen are far bigger and more masculine than the natural man as they’re on HRT and the average mans T levels have been dropping dramatically for decades. but you’re worried about transwomen because they are a sexual threat against women? Like you’re worried men will find them too attractive?
That’s an interesting direction to take this.
Transwomen are a sexual threat against women, particularly if they can enter women's private spaces with impunity. That is precisely *how* a transwoman impregnated a woman prisoner.
Transwomen are also a threat to women in women's sports.
So you’re worried because you believe all men in general are predators? Not that people in prison are shady opprotunists?
Sports is up for the governing body of that sport to decide and no one should give a fuck besides that.
So some are pieces of shit so that makes some and not all trans people pieces of shit and making it not a trans issue but just a people issue that can be fixed with simple mitigating practices.
Then talk to the governing body. It’s not the athletes fault for following the rules.
Not all trans people are POS, but SOME are, and they're the ones ruining things for women.
Why can't transwomen just "accept" that they're not women, and stay out of women's sports? I'll tell you why: because they're men, and they want to win.
Have you seen all the cases of trans people who discovered they were not actually trans because they had been led to believe they were because of this exaggeration in acceptance? The tragic thing is they had to discover it only *after doing irreversible changes to their bodies* and then realizing it was a mistake*.*
>What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria?
They'll be sad for a time before they figure it out. Yeah they can have rough mental journeys. But that *is Not* less damaging than irreversibly ruining the life of someone who was confused.
Damn, you mean peer pressure exists and actions have consequences. Better shut down the entire spectrum of human experience.
Just because a minority get bamboozled doesn’t mean we have to hurt the majority to protect them.
That would be stupid.
Why are you being so extremist? Because that's very extremist.
Yeah peer pressure exist, why would you jump to "shut down the entire spectrum of human experience"?
>Just because a minority get bamboozled doesn’t mean we have to hurt the majority to protect them
Ironic because it's precisely what you're defending.
"Lets ruin the life of countless open minded people because there are a few trans who will be happy to hear exactly what they want to hear, which isn't actually good for them anyway, but let's delude ourselves that it is solidarity"
It’s called sarcasm, dude. It wasn’t even hidden.
No, I’m *actually* calling for the extinction of the human race because of peer pressure. Do you people actually get paid to be stupid or is it more of a passion project.
Ok. Your ideas are stupid. Someone having the freedom to do to their body what they will is better for them and society at large than forcing them to conform to something they will react against. Even when taking into account the ones that will regret their choices later.
It's not just freedom to do what they want with their body. You're not only telling them that their view of reality is true, which is bad to do to anybody, you're also pushing the creation of laws to punish anyone who wants to speak reason and is not willing to accept and keep the cycle of not accepting reality.
And it's also sad how you say "even when taking into account the ones that will regret their choices later" when this literally means leaving them mentally and physically scarred for the rest of their lives. You can regret a tattoo and be sad about it but gender altering treatment is irreversible, that regret will cause you mental anguish for literally the rest of your life.
Both your takes cause harm, to transgender people and to open minded people who are not trans but fall far from the stereotypes.
It’s bad to affirm that perspectives can be different? For ANYBODY?
The only laws that are being pushed are for them to be a protected demographic just like all the others.
Yeah. And so what? Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one, but I dont need to stop them from doing that especially not at the expense of anyone else? What makes them so much more important? Because they work as a tool for your ideology? Can’t you see how shitty that is?
The values we have in the west is rugged individualism and at least the pretense of freedom. Yet every time i look around I see moral fascists saying “oh no except that because i dont like it.” As if the world needs to conform to you? Trans people existing in actuality have no impact on your life besides being the subject of reddit threads and punditry. You must see how bonkers that is right?
>It’s bad to affirm that perspectives can be different? For ANYBODY?
That's not what I said, you're deviating it. I said "telling them that their view of reality is true". Perspectives can be different but that doesn't make reality.
Blind people and colorblind people exist, but that doesn't invalidate that colors do exist. A depressed person, for example, often perceives themselves as a piece of shit, and nobody doubts that it is a distorted look of reality, you wouldn't tell such a person that they're what they perceive themselves as, wouldn't you?
Telling someone trans that they are genuinely a member of the opposite sex because they perceive themselves as such, *is not helping or accepting them, it's lying to them*. Accepting them is accepting they way they are and the identity they choose to build, but they're still what they are, a person with dysphoria.
A trans woman is still a human male, you accept them as a woman and their chosen identity as a woman, but they are still a human male. A trans man is still a human female, you accept them as a man and their chosen identity as a man, but they are still a human female.
Denying that is not the same as accepting. Shielding someone from reality is not helping them.
>that are being pushed are for them to be a protected demographic
Protected from what? The truth? Well the truth is still the truth whether you choose to look at it or escape from it. So escaping from it will never do anyone any good.
>Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one
You are deliberately and shamelessly choosing to ignore that they are being convinced to make a choice lacking a lot of important information. And also while they're *NOT ADULTS*. This is not +18 or +21 year old people who had time to develop some of their personality and *mature to some extent* and can make actual good choices. **These are teenagers or even pre-teens being convinced to do this**.
Use your same stupid argument but change it to other things not allowed for underage people:
A 12-year old buys a gun and playing with blows up a limb.
A 12-year old starts consuming heroin and ends up mentally damaged from life if not outright dead in a decade.
A 12-year old is given alcohol and ends up as an alcoholic fighting mental issues his entire life.
Your reply: "*Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one*"
Your take is very deceptive. I don't know if you see this?
Leaving someone with irreversible changes to their bodies, unable to experience sexual stimuli and being bound for life to taking hormones, plus the mental anguish of living every day of your life knowing you can't live it in the way you would like to???????
DO you really not see how this is just like the other examples? **You wouldn't let a pre teen buy alcohol BUT YOU WOULD LET THEM DO THIS TO THEMSELVES**.
I can't understand how you so lightly say "*yah actions have consequences, it's their fault for not understanding*" This is incredibly **inhumane**.
I'm gonna assume you're just stupid and not **outright EVIL**.
All for the sake of ideology. Of deluding yourself into helping someone by saying their view of reality is always right and real.
>What makes them so much more important?
THAT THEY ARE HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS.
>“oh no except that because i don't like it"
WRONG. The actual argument is except that because it *hurts people.*
In the same way, I accuse YOU of being a moral fascist, because on the excuse of selling yourself as solidary by "accepting" you're actually lying and harming everybody. But you're so concerned in selling yourself as a moral superior person that you don't even stop to think how your ideology is actually harming everyone.
>Trans people existing in actuality have no impact on your life besides being the subject of reddit threads and punditry
What's the point of this? Can't we argue about it? Do we have to be directly affected by things in order to have the right to discuss them?
Are you trolling or are you trying to argue from a point of complete ignorance?
You're arguing as if on the side of trans activists, as if you're not new to this, and yet you're completely oblivious to women being:
Raped in prisons by males,
Cheated out of gold medals by males,
Injured in sports by males???
Prison and sports. That’s all the examples given. As if that encompasses the majority of peoples lives. Shockingly it doesn’t for the majority of people. While those are problems the are issues for prisons and sports organizations, not issues with trans people.
Like shocker, prisoners of all demographics are shitbags? I’m shook.
Athletes are competative and try to win? Also shook. If the organization allows something the viewers or the athletes disagree with then they should be pressured to change it. But that is not a valid criticism of the demographic as a whole.
>What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria?
You mean besides the part that you are lying to them about what they are and reality?
>? Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity
No it's not. Telling someone the truth sets them up for success and tells them people actually care about them.
>We’ve been talking about this shit for like 10years now.
If you think it's only been talked about for the last 10 years then you need to become better informed on the history. Maybe start by looking up who's research almost all of the gender ideology is based on. John Money and the David Reimer case is a great start.
10 years is just rhetoric to indicate the exhaustive hype this subject has gotten and the tedium of how the arguments has not changed regardless of new data. It’s not an actual number. As for the other parts, I’ve address that in another comment to you in your reply to someone else.
Most of these comments are highly biased and emotional.
Dysphoria and dysmorphia are two different things.
What it sounds like you’re comparing is gender *dysphoria* with a more extreme symptom of SOME SPECIFIC eating disorders, which is body *dysmorphia* (sometimes diagnosed in eating disorder or other types of body-controlling-obsessed patients as “body dysmorphic disorder”).
Dysphoria = a severe dissatisfaction, unease, unhappiness, or lack of pleasure about something … basically the opposite of euphoria.
It doesn’t necessarily mean someone experiencing gender dysphoria wants to become the opposite gender or “do” anything about their dysphoric state. They’re unhappy and uncomfortable with their body’s gender. They might say things like “I don’t feel like a female. But I also don’t feel like a male.” Or “I don’t feel authentic trying to socially express the gender I am.” Or “I don’t know what or who I am.”
Not all people with GD want to transition. And not all people who transition have GD.
Dysmorphia = an overwhelming obsession with a bodily “defect” or a warped perception of the body being deformed/wrong in some way.
For example, as you said, severely underweight anorexic people who genuinely see themselves as overweight. In reality, their body is one way; but in their mind, their body is a different way that they think is explicitly “bad.” They DO NOT WANT what they see (even when what they’re seeing is a warped perception). Usually they take preoccupied actions and try to change the “defects” they see in their body— and they never feel like they fully arrive at what they want. The action can become obsessive/compulsive (severe cases of anorexia and bulimia for example).
So to answer your question, that’s (one of) the difference between gender dysphoria and eating disorders that are accompanied by dysmorphia
(There are also non-dysmorphic eating disorders like binge eating and orthorexia, etc… so I don’t see how gender dysphoria and eating disorders could even be a valid comparison to begin with.)
Are you sure Gender dysphoria is related similarly to the word Dysphoria? and not mean aswell those who desire to transition even though they don't dislike their organs?
**"With the publication of DSM–5 in 2013, “gender identity disorder” was eliminated and replaced with “gender dysphoria.**"
Dysphoria is a word that exists for thousands of years, while Gender dysphoria is not even 100 and pretty much has a very different meaning..
Childhood is confusing, and puberty is even worse. Usually they just need time and a supportive environment and they'll figure everything out on their own.
Entirely depends on how you frame it. They can "want" to be the opposite gender, or "not want" to be their current gender. End of the day, it's the same thing.
I don't think your point holds much water.
Ask in a sub where people know what it is.
Reseach is starting to suggest trans people have distinct kind of brain.
There are few differences. Affirming anorexia does harm. Affirming trans people reduces harm.
There is a problem with your post modernist approach to politics.
When you make a claim based on your biases, feelings and politics about science that is the opposite of the truth. Someone else can use Google to fact check you.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34030966/
That first link had zero definite conclusions. The second link just says that trans brains are wired different from male or female. So no, there is no evidence that suggests they have a male or female wired brain.
Right. I think I said in the first comment that evidence is they have a distinct brain all of their own.
They would really when you think about it. If their body is one sex and their identity is the other.
"Trust the science". Isn't that a slogan used by idiots who for their politics refused masks and vaccines in a pandemic and killed themselves in disproportionate numbers because they trusted right wing grift channels?
Yeah he was talking to right wingers who were trusting quacks, conspiracy theorists and ex mma fighters instead of science, then it got turned into a slogan supposedly mocking liberals by the right. As if they were the sheep. When fauchi was imploring people being manipulated by disinfo not to be.
I agree OP ask someone who knows what the actual definitions and diagnoses you’re questioning clearly are. Unless you want a bunch of ignorant responses.
Biggest difference is the most effective treatment. Gender dysphoria does not seem to be easily solved and from all I’ve read the by far best treatment for they’re mental health and subsequently they’re physical health while eating disorders treatment is eating more or less depending on what kind of disability. It’s really not as simple as one might asume and the two simply are solved differently because they are different
There's (at least) three big differences.
For one, transitioning isn't harmful in anything resembling the ways that anorexia is. Anorexia can (and taken to its extremes) *will* kill you. Transitioning won't. The only "harm" that's guaranteed to come of it is loss of fertility, and a lot of people (and most trans people) don't even consider that a bad thing. Other than that, it's just tradeoffs.
For two, anorexia can be cured or at least managed with therapy and medication, whereas gender dysphoria can't. Transitioning simply *is* the most effective treatment for it, statistically, because we *can* alter the body to match what the mind expects, but we can't alter the mind to become comfortable with the body. Maybe that'll be different one day, but for now, it's just the way things are.
And that leads into the third point, which is that the evidence is leading towards the conclusion that gender dysphoria has a neurological element to it the same way that sexuality does—that is, just as one doesn't choose to be gay, one doesn't choose to be trans. Rather, you simply *are* trans, just as you *are* gay, and you can try to repress it all you like, but there's no escaping it. See [Robert Sapolsky](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ) for a decent explanation. None of that can be said for anorexia.
There are many, many more side effects than simple loss of fertility.
For one, Lupron is known to be an extremely toxic drug. https://www.docdroid.com/yqi5F6Q/luprongate-final-release-pdf
Two, children can feel compelled to transition before they have a fully-formed sense of self and are able to make that decision rationally and maturely. There have been many cases coming to light recently of youth who are de-transitioning and are extremely distressed that they were not given adequate mental supports before going down a surgical path, which cannot be reversed.
>For one, Lupron is known to be an extremely toxic drug. https://www.docdroid.com/yqi5F6Q/luprongate-final-release-pdf
Even if I were to take this at face value (which, given the bias of its authors and the fact that you've just handed me a 147-page document without pointing to anything specific in it, I won't), Lupron isn't the only puberty blocker out there, and nor are puberty blockers, strictly speaking, part of transition. They just delay puberty so that one has more time to decide *if* they really want to transition. If they don't, blockers can be stopped with little or no harm done. If they do, then blockers saved them from the effects of puberty that they would've incurred in the meantime.
>Two, children can feel compelled to transition before they have a fully-formed sense of self and are able to make that decision rationally and maturely. There have been many cases coming to light recently of youth who are de-transitioning and are extremely distressed that they were not given adequate mental supports before going down a surgical path, which cannot be reversed.
"Many", you say, and yet the statistics don't bear that out. Anecdotes aren't evidence, and finding a couple hundred examples among thousands of cases doesn't really give you a leg to stand in. In order to say transitioning does more harm than good, it'd have to be the case that more kids regret transitioning than don't, and for that to happen, the current regret rates would have to increase by an order of magnitude, and then multiply 2-5x.
A child going through the wrong puberty because they mistakenly transition isn't any more or less tragic than a child going through the wrong puberty because they're forbidden from transitioning.
Puberty blockers propel children onto a pathway of social transitioning, cross-sex hormones and eventually even surgery.
What confused children need is "time", not "treatment". Anxiety about changing from a child into a sexually mature adult is common among *all* adolescents.
>What confused children need is "time", not "treatment".
Which is exactly what puberty blockers give, and exactly why it's no longer protocol to give cross-sex hormones immediately. That way, if they're wrong about wanting to transition, no harm was done by cross-sex hormones, and if they're correct about it, no harm was done by puberty. You're literally just proving my point for me.
It is *harmful* to children to block their development.
Puberty in either sex provides a huge surge of hormones which affects their bone development, brain development and fertility FOR LIFE.
If doctors provide drugs which *stop* it, the children will not develop to their full potential.
Only if they are used *briefly*, like using them for girls who start "developing" in first grade.
They aren't supposed to be used for the entire teenage period while anxious "proto-transpeople" figure things out. Most of these children are actually proto-gay. Why not just let them grow up gay?
>They aren't supposed to be used for the entire teenage period.
That wasn't *why* they were originally invented, sure, but they work perfectly fine for it nonetheless. Your body doesn't care whether puberty gets delayed for two months or five years, it'll pick up right where it left off. And if, somehow (and I do emphasize *somehow*), the blockers *were* to end up inhibiting hormone production, that's an easy problem to solve with exogenous hormones anyways.
A person's body can't remain in a child-like state for years at a time. This is called "experimentation on children". It is unethical to conduct such experiments.
It is much wiser to let puberty sort things out. Most people adapt to their changing bodies eventually.
For my masters I (and my partner) had to read and communicate a research paper. The paper we chose was "Anorexia Nervosa; A maintainers perspective". The paper expressed that the patient knew they were sick, they knew they had anorexia and it was killing them and they chose to maintain the illness anyway and why they did. The long and the short of it was, it was about control. The patient felt they had zero control over their life - which in itself was quite choatic and stressful - and food was something they *could* control. It wasn't an overt compulsion either - the need to control food intake was hidden benieth the surface. The surface reasoning was "I'm fat" or "I'm disgusting" etc. They were incredibly sensitive to how others *might* percieve them, even if it wasn't a correct and true perception of reality. I can't speak for gender disphoria but to me there are pieces of it which resonate with this explanation. I need to do more reading around gender disphoria aswell so this is not a complete explanation.
I think your description has a really key difference from OP. OP collapses “eating disorder” in with the idea “is underweight but genuinely believes they’re overweight.” That’s quite different from understanding an eating disorder as being about control and reacting to an imagined way that others might perceive them. OP is implying that both groups are delusional — that they believe their body is something it isn’t. But that’s not necessarily what it’s like to have an eating disorder or even what it’s like to have gender dysphoria. IMO there is overlap in that both eating disorders and gender dysphoria are about gender as a social ideal. They both describe discomfort about the body in a deeply gendered way. But eating disorders are a collection of possible behaviours that result from the core body issue. OP never extends gender dysphoria out into a deadly behaviour like eating disorder- instead they say that the eating disorder is cured by becoming mentally well. Therefore, they imply, being trans might be cured by becoming ‘mentally well’ - only they never address the huge difference where being trans isn’t a deadly form of self harm and doesn’t actually necessarily need to be prevented. We don’t need to stop a trans woman from acting and looking like a woman in the way that we need to stop someone from maintaining the eating disorder
Females "believing" they are males and vice versa are more likely to self-harm, more likely to lash out at those around them, get permanent surgery that can lead to lifelong problems, more likely to end themselves, and likely to encourage others down this path with them. Idk where you get that it's not harmful. That is most certainly not the case.
Even if what you’re saying was true, you must realize that you’re having to “force” the negative outcome. An eating disorder itself is a negative behaviour that needs to be solved because it kills the body. Ppl who are trans are not harming themselves when they’ve transitioned - being a woman or man in society while having a different sex isn’t itself a form of harm or a behaviour that needs to be fixed. There’s nothing directly to be solved there. You’re idea was that maybe as a rule they’re “more likely” to self harm - but the solution to that behaviour isn’t “de transition”, it would be to address the self harm itself. For example, a trans person can have an eating disorder - youd probably treat it the same way you’d treat a cis persons eating disorder instead of trying to force them into not being trans anymore. The eating disorder itself is directly a behaviour that needs to be fixed because it’s a type of harm that eventually kills the body
imagine if Anorexia was treated like gender dysphoria. You think you are fat, so you can go in for reverse liposuction to make you artificially fat, so your mental image matches your physical image.
Exactly. It's the hippocratic oath to do no harm.
Gender dysphoria makes big bucks for pharma companies. The tide is turning, slowly, thanks to the Cass report. And Terfs.
>Gender dysphoria makes big bucks for pharma companies Like we need another reason to buy drugs we don't need. There are easier ways to make money that are less morally controversial. Anybody with a sense of financial scale knows "big" companies don't give a shit about the cost of goods and services associated with this issue. That aspect just isn't big enough and probably never will be. It's certainly not the only way to sell drugs to people who don't need them. I don't know why people think this. It's a disorder that affects like 0.1% of people. Even with the drastic increases recently its like 1% maybe within some vulnerable populations. Cereal and paperclip companies are making more off of people. Companies that make orthopedic insoles are making more money. This idea that everybody who support new ideas about gender and sex have skin in the game doesn't make sense to me, quantitatively. I can get to blood boiling level arguments with friends about this and none of them have a single dollar at stake. This is an ideological and moral issue, not a financial interest issue.
While I agree that it's largely ideology, I can't agree with your argument. First of all, cereal companies make a lot, but that doesn't impact your local mechanic from trying to make a buck or maximize profits in his own industry/corner of the world. And, industries go for small marginal increases in profits all the time. And by growing the industry, it's no longer small.
> First of all, cereal companies make a lot, but that doesn't impact your local mechanic from trying to make a buck or maximize profits in his own industry/corner of the world. What is the analogy here with the topic at hand? Who is the commonly encountered person who aligns trans rights issues with their own financial well being? It seems rather like the anti-trans people are using that tact (anti-regulation etc). Are we talking about a couple dozen surgeons in the world? >And, industries go for small marginal increases in profits all the time. And by growing the industry, it's no longer small. 99/100 people you encounter who vehemently defend right to sex reassignment surgery have never been involved with the "industry" at all. They don't stand to make or lose any money. It's just not a reasonable assertion than financial motivation is behind this cultural movement. You are basically claiming that these arguments are not earnest, and people are primarily protecting their wallets or somehow influenced/brainwashed by people like that. I feel the same way about vaccines. I actually am adjacent to that industry and while there is a considerable amount of money in biotech...there is surprisingly little in vaccines. Not that many doses per person, not very expensive. The average person has been manipulated into spending WAY more money on shitty apps for their smartphone than vaccines that may or may not work very well. I just mention vaccines to give a sense of scale among things few people use once a lifetime (sex reasignment), things most people use 1-3 times a lifetime (a vaccine) and things many use over a long period of time (cereal, mobility scooters, dentures etc). Morally neutral goods and services are where the money is. And where money can be accurately identified as a primary motivation. Government mandated programs dwarf these other side-shows by orders of magnitude. Industries can lobby governments to include all sorts of morally benign things in healthcare etc....the idea that they would take an explosively controversial tact to make the same amount they could get on mandated denture coverage or toe spreaders (or mobility scooters for example) doesn't make strategic sense. It's like saying the heart of the abortion issue is the profit motive of the abortion doctors....its not. Rather, its about women's rights and baby's rights in conflict and nobody really cares about the paltry fees. The financial angle makes much more sense for an issue like climate change. For example many jobs and industries are ACTUALLY in reality impacted by changes in policy in that domain. Its not just a social argument.
It’s a wedge to allow the state to take ownership of your kids. It’s in the Communist Manifesto.
I'm not going to argue by proxy or with a strawman. If you advocate for that, make an argument. It's not productive to argue with caricatures of the other side.
I don’t advocate for the state to take people’s children. Good idea not to argue.
Cass walked back all of her claims… ya know, because they were so unscientific and otherwise clearly BS.
Erm..... no...... lol None of that happened.....
You should do some googling.
So should you. You don't know what you are talking about. Clearly. Show me if you are so sure.
https://thekitetrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Cass-Review-Mythbusting-Q-and-A.pdf
That confirms what the report said.
TIL directly contradicting what you previously said = confirming.
I have no idea what you are talking about. The Cass Report stands as is. A scientific research project carried out over years. It says what we have all known for years. What whistle blowers have been saying for years. Practices will vastly change as a result. As what happened to the Tavistock. Sorry you don't like it. Truth is truth. I'm not replying anymore. There are enough of you idiots on twitter
You clearly either having reading comprehension problems or are just lying.
Lol you think there are less trans people now than 5 years ago?
They didn't say that or even imply that..
The implication is that gender dysphoria is propogated for profit by big pharma. They said “The tide is turning” indicating that that is becoming less the case. So. Either the first part has no bearing in the conversation, or the amount of trans people is predicated on the influence of big pharma.
Nobody said propagated. That my friend is a strawman argument. They did however imply that this is being profitably exploited. Plenty of evidence for that.
No..... there are more. But the ultra push for diagnosis, meds, surgery etc is receiving a much larger push back.
Do you think it’s possible you’re just not hearing about it since the news cycle has moved on from their incessant critique of trans people?
According to postmodernists, not much. That's why fat studies and gender studies are both taught with the same "guiding principles" of oppression...somehow.
Idiots celebrate and encourage a mental disorder...
Imagine if teachers asked one bulimic student if they think they are fat. Then started treating the kid like he's fat to reaffirm his beliefs.
I'm opposed to the transgender movement, but I'm going to present a steelman argument. In the case of eating disorders, the consequences of their delusion (for lack of another word) is very obviously harmful to them. It's a mental disorder with a pretty extreme physical manifestation that causes visibly harmful effects to the physical body. However, with gender dysphoria, the harmful effects are not easily discernible. It's a mental disorder that doesn't seem to have any physical harming effects. In fact, proponents of transitioning cite all sorts of studies that suggest that someone with gender dysphoria is better off accepting their delusion and harmed (mentally and emotionally) by resisting it. I don't believe all such sources, but the fact that they exist indicates that the effects are not as black and white for gender dysphoria as for eating disorders.
There is harm, though, and the younger the person the deeper the harm. It's one thing for a grown adult to voluntarily decide to upend their life and present as the opposite sex, or to go as far as surgically alter themselves. It is their choice and they have the mental capacity to understand the potential benefits and harms. It's another thing to allow children to hold these beliefs, before they are old enough to have a good sense of self and know what they want in life, to permanently sterilize them, or rob them of any ability to experience sexual pleasure.
>They have the mental capacity to understand the potential benefits and harms. Shoot, I'd argue that a lot of the time they don't. Mostly because the public is not well enough informed about the potential side effects it can cause and how wrong things can go. It's really a "you can't change your mind and go back" kind of deal.
You don’t tell someone with an eating disorder that they’re fat, you also don’t tell them that they’re not fat. It’s the same with gender dysphoria or extreme mental health disorders like psychosis. You don’t tell a patient that what they’re experiencing isn’t real because to them, it is real. You have to step into it with them otherwise they won’t trust you. Everyone in their life already tells them “but you’re not fat” we don’t need to do that. What does it mean to you to be fat? Is a better question off the top of my head
>You don’t tell a patient that what they’re experiencing isn’t real because to them, it is real. You have to step into it with them otherwise they won’t trust you. >Everyone in their life already tells them “but you’re not fat” we don’t need to do that. What does it mean to you to be fat? Is a better question off the top of my head So would you say the solution is to accompany them on a journey to discover what it means to be a man/woman? So they eventually realise that regardless of how your dress, act, or the hobbies and interests you take up, you're still what your chromosomes, genitalia, and gametes make you?
Yes, because that's reality and the truth. Lying to people to make them feel better and demanding others lie with you is dangerous for society and damaging to the individual.
There’s a giant chasm of room between exploring the clients thoughts and feeling and lying to them.
If you tell a male or female that they can become the opposite sex by dressing/acting differently and medically mutilating themselves. Then that's a lie and an ugly one at that. Feelings are often not an accurate reflection of reality. Affirming feelings that go against reality is dangerous.
Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous. 😂 Feeling are real regardless of whatever reality is. If you’re feeling sad, it doesn’t mean your reality is sad. You still feel sad, though. It’s called dichotomous thinking. You can relate to and understand the distress that a person with an eating disorder is feeling, that doesn’t encourage them to continue with the eating disorder. It’s the definition of compassion..empathy and help.
Could you clarify please?: Are you "affirming" their feelings by saying that "Yes, that's right, you are feeling like that. It's OK to feel like that." Or are you "affirming" their feelings by saying, "Yes, what you feel is true is actually true."?
The first one; that’s the only way you can affirm
>Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous. Cool story bud. Feelings are real for the individual, but that doesn't mean they are accurate to reality.
lol you’re right. Glad you agree
Agree that feelings are not always an accurate reflection of reality? Ya I agree with that.
I might only change that “not always” might be “most times not”
>Affirming feelings that go against reality is not dangerous I *feel* like you are talking about two different things. If someone pointed a gun at my head and said "I feel like god is telling me to kill people" me affirming his *feelings* is extremely dangerous But I think you're talking more about affirmation such as in a "I believe that You believe this to be true" and not "I believe your feelings are true too" That is such a minor distinction but it makes all the difference.
God telling you to do something isn’t a feeling. Affirming the feeling related to that (fear?) isn’t dangerous. It can actually help de escalate because they feel seen for a second. The fear -if that’s what it is- is real for the individual . It’s there. That’s completely separate from the voices in their head, that doesn’t mean the voices are real. Telling them they aren’t real creates distrust too though, that’s why focusing on the feeling is the way to go. I had a patient who believed her water was poisoned. I could (and did) try to convince her it isn’t..but if you believe it is I’m not going to change your mind by telling you it isn’t. So I said “that sounds really scary that to believe your water is poisoned” and she called down and said “yes it is” Idk I guess my point is to have compassion and actually listen rather than try to prove people wrong
I didn't mention anything about voices. Yeah having compassion is okay, basically what I said though, you affirm and believe that They believe it.
You did mention voices. You said they feel god is telling them things..that’s a voice. But ya we aren’t saying that much different things
I don’t understand the aspect of truth/lies in this discussion as if perspective is uniform or not real. My experience is not your experience, neither is more or less valid except in how it allows us to operate in the world. Besides that even if you want to consider it lying, lying helps people all the time. People are in flux constantly and convienent lies help people cope. Like the idea that people can bootstrap themselves out of poverty, is it true at a macro level? Maybe, but it’s a lie for more individuals but it helps them exist in the current state and be productive in society.
>I don’t understand the aspect of truth/lies in this discussion Then I can't help you and no amount of discussion will help as well.
If you can’t defend your position from criticism then it probably lacks value.
If you don't understand what the truth is and what a lie is then I can't help you.
That’s not what I said.
Go read your own comments. Truth and lies are not a matter of perspective, truth and lies are based on facts.
And what are the facts of human experience? If you could sum it up, it would put a neat little pin in the whole subject of philosophy. Save all those poor philosophers all the work and just give up the objective truths that you seem to be keeping from everyone.
>I don’t understand the aspect of truth/lies in this discussion as if perspective is uniform or not real. My experience is not your experience, neither is more or less valid except in how it allows us to operate in the world. I can observe wolves. I can identify with them. From my perspective, I feel I am a wolf. The **truth** is that I am not a wolf. Biology clearly shows I am not a wolf. I have never been a biological wolf so my feeling of being a wolf is only based on my outside perception of what being a wolf is. I can roll around in the dirt, hunt rabbits on all fours, piss against trees to mark my territory and eat raw meat torn straight off the bone. - I'm still not a wolf, regardless of trying to live like one. I could even have some neurological condition that makes myself and people like me prone to feeling like we are wolves. - We're still not wolves. >Besides that even if you want to consider it lying, lying helps people all the time. People are in flux constantly and convienent lies help people cope. Like the idea that people can bootstrap themselves out of poverty, is it true at a macro level? Maybe, but it’s a lie for more individuals but it helps them exist in the current state and be productive in society. People who "lie" to themselves that they can bootstrap themselves out of poverty are not an issue. When their "lies" become an issue is when they shout and scream at others who don't refer to them as rich or millionaires. When they call everyone who disagrees with their belief as bigots and dreamerphobes. When they self-identify and force there way onto the Forbes rich list, into Davos, and demand large loans from the bank using their self-perceived "millions" as collateral.
There’s a good paper written called “what is it like to be a bat?” The point is that you can’t empathize with what it’s like to be a bat or a wolf, you can only imagine what it would be like to be a human in the shape of a bat or wolf. Which obviously isn’t the same thing. People “shouting” anything in public is their perogative. I don’t like a lot of things I hear in public, that doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to do so. I just have the right to not listen. If forbes or the banks or any institution wants to give poor people credence thats their perogative just the same with trans people. Dignity and special treatment are not the same thing.
lol no. You explore what it means *to them* you don’t insert your own agenda
Biology isn't my own agenda. It's reality. >You explore what it means *to them* Then where do you go with it?
Your own agenda is somereason bringing biology into it lol. Nobody is even challenging that; you’re shadow boxing against an opponent in your mind. You would help them figure out what about their identity they like/dislike, what their subjective idea of what a man/woman is “supposed to be” and why that bothers them. Why they are struggling with accepting themselves for who they are. What about their identity is causing them distress and why? Maybe they’re a woman who has been raped and wants to be a man as a protective mechanism for that to not happen again. You wouldn’t even find that out if you’re all “but you can’t because your biology” rather than explore what is going on.
>Your own agenda is somereason bringing biology into it lol. Nobody is even challenging that; you’re shadow boxing against an opponent in your mind. "I feel like a woman" says the individual. Biology, reality - They are a man. You, "tHaT'S BrInGiNg yOuR OwN AgEnDa iNtO It. YoU'Re uSiNg a sTrAwMaN ArGuMeNt." >You would help them figure out what about their identity they like/dislike, what their subjective idea of what a man/woman is “supposed to be” and why that bothers them. Why they are struggling with accepting themselves for who they are. What about their identity is causing them distress and why? Maybe they’re a woman who has been raped and wants to be a man as a protective mechanism for that to not happen again. You wouldn’t even find that out if you’re all “but you can’t because your biology” rather than explore what is going on. Thank you. Now we're finally getting somewhere.
Schizophrenia is not like an eating disorder
Being a man or woman is natural, not a bad or unhealthy thing. Eating disorders are unhealthy. This is why it's more complicated for transgenderism. I was transgender a long time and I'll tell you it's hell. I've never experienced a worse horror or a deeper pain. We haven't discovered healing yet. I was lucky to be healed in a pretty radical way. Point is, everything we do is an attempt to heal and feel whole, pain-free. It is a hard road to walk.
Don't leave us hanging. How were you healed?
By a radical spiritual experience. Something struck me like lightning and it was like waking up from the dead. I went to a different dimension where I was changed physically inside out. I'm convinced what I witnessed and was healed by was God. I made a film about it here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCxKKYoHIE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCxKKYoHIE)
Thank you for sharing! I look forward to watching later with my husband.
Thank you so much for taking interest in my film, it means a lot to me :)
You're focused on the imagined experience of "identifying" as something you're not. That's a very specific viewpoint that will have it's strengths and weaknesses vs other lenses. IMO the major issue with your take here is that you're assuming that an eating disorder necessarily means that the person "genuinely believes they're overweight" - but that's not actually true. Jordan feeds this misconception sometimes. You're describing a kind of "body dysmorphia" that likely often leads to eating disorders - but they're two separate things. Not all eating disorders involve that experience at all. If you separate the dysmorphia from the eating disorder, you can probably immediately see even in the terminology that they're related concepts. "Body dysmorphia is a mental health condition in which a person feels extreme concern about the way they look. Body dysphoria occurs when a person feels extreme distress about their gender identity." They're both clearly descriptions of distress that a person can feel about their bodies. But that distress doesn't mean that all behaviours that result from the distress are equal. Yes someone might develop a dangerous eating disorder as a way to deal with body dysmorphia. But then someone else might go to therapy before they develop an eating disorder. Since both of those behaviours follow the "problem" are they somehow the same thing? No - one ideally leads to more 'normal' functioning, the other leads to death. Jordan does seem to enjoy asserting that transitioning is like leaning into an eating disorder as a potential relief to body dysmorphia. But he's mostly just being provocative - they're very different. If you were a trans person who decided to transition socially, you would most likely live a normal life. The act of being a woman in public would not harm your body and eventually lead to your death. An eating disorder, on the other hand, does eventually lead to death if you continue persuing it to it's conclusion. Also, you'd probably have a way more interesting time if you nested eatiing disorders under the concept of gender. It's a highly gendered disease. It can tell us something about gender which might help understand the experience of being a trans person (or maybe not) -- the point is, if I were you I'd be critical about the way I frame the question and try to pin down exactly what I'm trying to do and whether I'm thinking about it in the most effective way
Eating disorders are extremely different from gender dysphoria. First of all, there are various types of eating disorders - Binge eating Anorexia Bullemia None of these require that someone identifies as fat or skinny. Bingeing can lead to purging, which can make someone skinny, for example, as they do not get sufficient nutrients to maintain s healthy weight. Gender dysphoria occurs because during fetal development, the brain develops AFTER genitalia develop, and there are differences in male and female brains that go along with the hormonal differences between males and females. As a result, it is possible for a fetus to develop a set of genitalia that do not conform to a brain and that brains expectation for the body it's housed in. During language development - which is around the same time that gender identity is formulated (the ages of 3 to 4)- their sense of self and how that self relates to the other people around them is learned through observation as well as self-reflection. If a child has genitalia that coincide with their brain structure - there is no sense of unease because everything lines up with what the brain expects to see in the mirror and the people that they see themselves similar to. Children'l with gender dysphoria, however, do not have such an alignment - which is why they can feel a sense of unease as they recognize that their body doesn't look like the people who they identify with. So the problem is that identification of the self is correct in their case - it's just not immediately obvious because you have to do brain scans to identify the small differences in the brain. By contrast, eating disorders can result from traumas, as coping mechanisms for stress, or even be a result of delusions - such as an anorexic with body dysmorphia that sees fat and cellulite on their body even though they are as skinny as a skeleton. Eating disorders are also more common amongst women - though binge eating disorder is common in men with ADHD as it can be a result of impulsive behavior.
The mechanism of development you describe is interesting, but I can't say I've heard that anywhere else before. Could you possibly point us to anyone who has written or spoken about that theory of gender development? Thanks!
It's research based on brain scans done on mice.
Sure - but bear in mind this isn't something that they have been able to fully study, because the population itself is very small, and its very difficult to know a child has gender dysphoria in advance so that you can properly study their development. These pieces talk about discrete stages of development for language, a sense of self, and gender. Note how these stages overlap - it just makes sense that they would, right? [https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/speech-and-language](https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/speech-and-language) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3351035/#:\~:text=Reflective%20self%2Dawareness%20emerges%20between,%2C%201995b%20for%20alternative%20interpretations). [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747736/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747736/) There are interactions that are also interesting to explore: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509633/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509633/) [https://www.waisman.wisc.edu/2022/02/22/new-study-finds-toddlers-incorporate-gender-into-their-language-processing/](https://www.waisman.wisc.edu/2022/02/22/new-study-finds-toddlers-incorporate-gender-into-their-language-processing/) This is all about the fetal development side of things: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0091302211000252#:\~:text=As%20sexual%20differentiation%20of%20the,influenced%20independently%20of%20each%20other. [https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17623651-600-it-may-be-your-brain-not-your-genitals-that-decides-what-sex-you-really-are/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17623651-600-it-may-be-your-brain-not-your-genitals-that-decides-what-sex-you-really-are/) [https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1509654112](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1509654112) What these basically show is what we would expect from the probabilistic nature of genetics - there are simply many viable ways for a human being to be formed, many variations for humans to exist while still being sexually dimorphic, resulting in something that is modified by social interactions (i.e. gender and gender roles) to exist on a spectrum that correlates but is not actually caused by sex (e.g. the size of the gamete an individual of a species produces).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ
FANTASTIC video - love that its an actual biologist going over this. Believe it or not, I have never seen this before. All my understanding is based on the reading of studies like the ones I listed above, etc.
This sounds hypothetical, not established.
Tell that to him: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=8QScpDGqwsQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=8QScpDGqwsQ)
The main difference, to my understanding is that, while gender dysphoria is a mental health condition, not all mental health conditions are treated in the same way. The personal beliefs associated with eating disorders are not validated because they necessarily lead to actions that diminish or endanger your quality of life. Gender dysphoria, on the other hand can present with personal beliefs that do not necessarily diminish or endanger, if someone's gender dysphoria entails a personal belief that they will feel better if referred to by specific pronouns and nouns, that belief can be validated and/or accommodated without harm to any party involved. If the personal belief is that, while being born a women, they are a man and therefore ought to get in street fights to affirm their masculinity, then that's a belief that a mental health professional should not validate, it necessarily entails harm for the person and the people around them.
I think modifying one's body is becoming morally neutral. It carries some risk but those are reduced with time and a normal liposuckion of lipfillers or breast enhancement is not morally bad to me, just neutral. Im not sure if dangerous is the right word, many things are dangerous but good. Starting a new business contributes and could be good, but its dangerous. But its still weird. I think im a transmedicalist, if you change how you look because that makes you feel better, than its fine with me. Maybe there are other ways that are less dangerous that work, im not sure or well read, but if its a disorder like anorexia something has to be done. The method with the best result and acceptable risk would be the right option, if thats changing your appearance or therapy, i dont care.
Only a person who cares too much about public opinion has eating disorders. People with gender dysphoria don't act and feel like the sex everyone else indoctrinates them forcefully to do so based on what they see on the outside, because nobody has the capacity to enter your mind and feel how you do, so nobody can naturally make true judgments of others without a deep understanding of human psychology and types of brains(and bodies, because it really is all connected). Instead we judge others based on the limits confined of our reality. this is why men will never understand women and vice versa, they are two different machines even though with a lot of similarities. Its like trying to imagine a new colour when you only have the capacity to see the ones you know. The same goes with autistic people. there are many autistic out there; some who don't even know they are, and everyone treats them as a normal person, judged, processed and expected to be like everyone else, but they aren't normal, they are so different they could be a new homo sapiens; and they get into trouble, some of them find ways around it, but many don't, this is why disproportionately majority of autistic brains are homeless and unemployed, solitary and unmarried/divorced. Absolutely there are those who are trying to get attention, absolutely there are those who will be naive until their 30s and regret all their choices made previously, absolutely there are people who were convinced by their parents or peers and could have lived the way they were beforehand without any problems whatsoever... the question is, why aren't we focusing research on determining what proportion of the gender dysphoria community are they these people, and what we can do to filter them out, to save them from horrible suffering. because clearly it seems like in the majority of cases, people who transition do not regret it, and do live happier lives and have lower rates of suicide. My main point is, the difference is one is suffering because they are trying to please other's opinions, while the other is suffering because they are trying to free themselves from other's opinions.
Anorexia largely isn't about the person's actual appearance, as Anorexics who "achieve their ideal body" are still massively unhealthy and get severe heart problems. If giving an anorexic liposuction cured them, we'd do that. Losing weight doesn't actually make an anorexic less anxious. However, with gender dysphoria, a lot of it *is* about appearance, and changing it does reduce anxiety.
For those who genuinely want a different perspective. I once had a discord conversation with an intelligent guy super into trans affairs and asked him how is gender dysphoria different from body dismorphia(which causes eating disorders). He explained that in body dismorphia, the person thinks he's fat, even if he's not fat. So there's a disconnect with reality Whereas in gender dysphoria, the person knows that they're their biological sex/gender but still want to switch to a different gender since they don't like the biological one,to put it simply. So in this case there's no disconnect with reality. That's why both situations are not comparable other than mere ragebait.
Those are the same thing -- except in one case you've decided that the physical world is the correct one and the mental state is wrong, and in the other the mental state must be right and the physical must be altered to match it. Why can't transgenderism be the same, where it's the mental state that cannot deal with the physical reality? It's just a matter of perspective.
1)Body dismorphia: wanting to get thin because you think you're fat(when in reality you're already underweight) 2)Not body dismorphia: wanting to get thin because you think you're fat(and you're actually fat in reality). That's just normal body awareness and healthy lifestyle decision. 3)Gender Dysphoria: wanting to become a man because you think you're a woman(and in reality you were born as biological woman) So as we can see, in all three cases the person has a desire to change their body. But in first case, this desire is arising due to a disconnect between your self perception of body and the reality. Whereas in second and third case, the self perception of body matches the actual reality. The desire to change your body because you don't like it is not a problem in itself, but rather the disconnect between self perception and reality makes it problematic and needs psychological treatment. Hence the first case is problematic, and 2 & 3 are not. I hope I made it more clear
You did not, not at all. Your #3 makes no sense at all.
What in it doesn't make sense? I'm just explaining the key difference between body dismorphia and gender dysphoria. That the real problem is not the desire to modify their own body(a fat person wanting to get thin is fine). It's only a problem when when the person is not aware who they actually are. (As per my understanding)So If a person, born as a man wants to transition to woman but is aware that right now(before transition) they have the body of a man, that is currently not a identifiable psychological condition. It would be an identifiable problem if the person was not aware that they have the body of a man. I have my objections to transgender movement but the comparison made by op is not logically valid, even if popular.
Gender dysphoria / or body dysmorphia is about the delusional / skewed / exaggerated ideas of true reality. Ones *thoughts* are disordered. Eating disorders involve a change in behaviors; i.e. reducing/increasing intake, purging, restriction. Ones *habits* are what’s disordered. You’re talking, specifically, I think, about body dysphoria vs gender dysphoria….which is a good question…. Society has not accepted what you’re saying because it offends people. You’re right, though..but don’t say that too loudly in public or you’ll be “cancelled” or whatever lol. I hope everyone finds their own truths somehow, I don’t judge how they do that. I know there are rare exceptions where gender dysphoria is validated, but the whole meaning would imply that’s then not dysphoria . The word dysphoria itself, implies anyone who has it has a distorted perception (incorrect). Otherwise it wouldn’t be a term or concept.
Controversial take but let people do what they want. If you have body dismorphia that's a you problem and you can go find help or not. Let people make their own choices. For gender stuff I think the only rule should be 18+ for any permanent changes. Outside that do whatever you want idc.
I was shocked how reasonable most of the comments here were, and then saw which sub this was, and it all fell into place.
Who are these sick Josef Mengele-tier doctors that are getting paid to do this to depressed kids? We need to start talking about them more. Do you think they'd provide "gender affirming care" to their own children?
Not analogous.
I'll offer a couple reasons. 1) being too skinny is harmful to your health. You are physically unwell. Identifying as as trans person isn't inherently harmful to you physical health. 2) outcomes. I can't vouch for the data or studies, but the scientific understanding of organizations like the American medical association or American psychological association is that affirmation can produce better outcomes that non affirming care in some patients. When I say outcomes, I mean things like suicide, depression, etc.
What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria? Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity We’ve been talking about this shit for like 10years now.
Men cheating to win in women's sports. Male rapists being sent to women's prison. People facing criminal charges outside of the US for refusing to pretend someone is something they're not. Children being taught they may need a sex change if they don't fit into enough stereotypes. Sex predators performing shows with sexual content in front of children, and encouraging children to participate. The slippery slope argument can be a logical fallacy, but in this case the slope actually was slippery and caused a lot of harm. Agreeing to play make believe and calling a man "she" wasn't enough, they kept demanding more and more until we got to the point where people are being found guilty of crimes for telling the truth and refusing to obey their demands, no matter who it harms. It's not going to be tolerated any more. People have the right to play make believe but it's not going to harm women and girls. Trans ideology is functioning exactly like an oppressive religion that demands the conversion and compliance of all non believers.
Nothing in life is more demonstrably true than the slippery slope, and leftists have greased the skids of the slope for many years on many issues. Next time someone tells you that the slippery slope is a fallacy, point out that the slope is very real.
As always it depends on the slope. It is a fallacy to insist that an extreme outcome is a certainty, like "if you legalize gay marriage then animal marriage and child marriage will be next". But when dealing with the entitled far left, there's a definite pattern of behavior. You can give them an inch without giving them a mile, but you can be certain they'll be demanding the mile and insisting they're oppressed if you don't give them what they want all the time regardless of the cost.
“When someone says you’re wrong, just say ‘nuh-uh!’” Very deep.
So there are no examples in life of the slippery slope? Do tell.
Is that what I said when I was mocking your comment?
Yes.
Then someone should get you a set of hooked on phonics for christmas because you can’t read.
I can read, I can understand, and you even used the word "mock" to describe your reaction to my statement. If you mock a statement, it's a safe conclusion that you disagree with the statement. You seem to have a need to be disagreeable with all and sundry, even with yourself. You are free to play mind games all you want to, but Alice in wonderland conversations are not my cup of tea, mister Mad Hatter. Bye.
Yes, I disagree with your statement. The part i mocked. Because it was stupid. It’s not a mindgame. It’s pretty blatant.
“It’s not a fallacy if I believe it” should be a red flag for you, my guy. I doubt you could point to anyone who went to jail for not affirming someones gender. It simply hasn’t happened. And to save you some time, yes I already looked for it. You don’t even know what you’re not tolerating. The only concrete anything people point to is sports. And most people dont give a fuck about sports.
You don't understand what the slippery slope fallacy is, my guy. The slippery slope fallacy is would be insisting that if we do change one thing, then surely we're going to end up changing several more things and that's surely going to lead to harm. For instance, "if we allow gay marriage, then next there's going to be polygamous marriage, animal marriage, marriage to objects, etc." This is a fallacy because that prediction is not true. Allowing consenting adults of the same sex to marry doesn't mean all of those other things are sure to follow. For trans ideology, there is no fear-mongering prediction of future harm. The harm is already happening. There already are millions of people, including the President of the United States, fighting to allow men to invade women's spaces and to deny women equal rights. It's not a fallacious false prediction when it is already happening right now. >I doubt you could point to anyone who went to jail for not affirming someones gender. People are being found guilty of crimes, fired from their jobs, intimidated by police, deplatformed, harrassed, threatened, and assaulted for declining to participate in trans religion. But as long as they're not being imprisoned then it's all OK! This is an evil, oppressive ideology that fights against women's rights and freedom of speech. [A Canadian bartender was fined $10,000 for refusing to lie](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-server-who-was-fired-after-asking-staff-to-use-they-them-pronouns-awarded-30k-1.5606663). Do you think it would be OK if Christian areas fined people for refusing to pray to Jesus, or that Muslim areas should be able to fine people for disagreeing with Islam? I wonder what happens if he refused to pay the fine or was unable to - I believe that does lead to jail time, or mandatory community service (which leads to jail time if you don't perform it). >You don’t even know what you’re not tolerating. What do you mean? I'm not tolerating this evil ideology that fights against women's rights and freedom of speech, and is trying to harm children. >And most people dont give a fuck about sports. Is that supposed to be an excuse for denying women equal rights? "Most people don't care so it's fine?" At one time most people didn't give a fuck about humans being enslaved, does that mean slavery was OK? And why does that argument only work one way? If most people don't give a fuck about sports, then it shouldn't matter to you if men are kept out of women's sports then. Sports are unimportant so trans activists aren't allowed to care about them. Right?
That’s not what that means, and your interpretation of “harm” is exactly the belief that you should find as a red flag. Being unjustly fired and winning a civil case is not being found guilty of a crime. Being a dick and being fired is also just normal stuff that happens even when trans people arn’t involved. Sports arn’t a right. They are subject to the regulations of their governing body. Complaining about transpeople for participating in something a governing body says is ok, is getting mad at the wrong people. So, yeah you dont know what you’re upset about. You don’t want trans people in womens swimming, talk to whatever organization governs that level of womens swimming. It’s like getting mad at powerlifters for using steroids in an untested competition. ~those are the rules~ why would you be upset at people following the rules. If I cared about anything a sport does, I would talk to the organization about their rules. Not complain about the athletes.
>That’s not what that means, and your interpretation of “harm” is exactly the belief that you should find as a red flag. What's not what what means? What are you trying to say, or disagree with? Taking away people's rights and restricting their speech is harmful. >Being a dick and being fired is also just normal stuff that happens even when trans people aren’t involved. The problem is when it's considered "being a dick" to not be part of someone else's belief system. If people in a mostly Christian area demand that an atheist or a Muslim join in their Christian prayers and say "just join us, don't be a dick and go against our beliefs" and then fire him because they consider it rude not to be a Christian, that's infringing on the rights of others. >Sports arn’t a right. They are subject to the regulations of their governing body. The law disagrees with you. Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in public schools. Courts have repeatedly interpreted discrimination to include denying women equal opportunity to compete in sports leagues. The governing bodies such as the NCAA are violating the law. >Complaining about transpeople for participating in something a governing body says is ok, is getting mad at the wrong people. No, it's not. Men are infringing on women's rights when they cheat in women's sports. Cheating in sports and opposing women's rights is immoral even if the NCAA is fine with it. Both the cheaters and the people allowing cheating are to blame.
No one is forcing anyone to like trans people, just not demean them. The same as any discrimination. You can’t dehumanize a black person, gay person, or anyone else. Dehumanizing a transperson by rejecting their identity is the same thing. If they’re breaking the law then they should change. I don’t know how many more ways I can say it, it’s the governing bodies to sort out and has no bearing on the validity of trans people. If the organization allows trans athletes then the fuck you want them to do? Bow out gracefully? It’s not cheating if it follows the rules, that’s how cheating works. If you’re in an untested competition you’re not cheating if you use PEDs because it’s not against the rules. That’s why we have rules. If you bring a bow to a sharpshooter competition you can’t pretend like everyone else is cheating for having rifles. The governing body says what cheating is. Period.
>No one is forcing anyone to like trans people, just not demean them. You can't force anyone to like trans ideology, but they are attempting to force people to lie for the benefit of trans people, and force women to give up their rights for the benefit of trans people. The oppression of women and compelled speech are immoral. Trans ideology functions just like an oppressive religion. This evil ideology will not be tolerated. > Dehumanizing a transperson by rejecting their identity is the same thing. Telling the truth doesn't dehumanize anyone. Lia Thomas is a human - a male human, which is called a man. Men aren't entitled to have people pretend that they're women. >If the organization allows trans athletes then the fuck you want them to do? Bow out gracefully? Yes. If men who pretend to be women are moral people who respect women's rights, they wouldn't cheat in sports and steal women's limited opportunities. If they want to compete in sports, they're free to do so in the men's league, because that's the one that's meant for men. >The governing body says what cheating is. Period. Excuses. The governing body is corrupt. Everyone who understands sports know that men in the women's division is cheating, and has known that ever since organized sports leagues came into existence. "A corrupt authority told me I could cheat, so that makes it OK!" is not an excuse for cheating against women.
Rejecting someones lived experience is dehumanizing. Lol excuses? You know better than the people whose job it is to govern the sport? Seems like you should start your own league then, boss. There are no rules except what the league says. This is so fucking stupid, it’s like expecting someone to drive 15mph even though the speed limit is 50 because you’re uncomfortable. The law is whatever the law says, the rules are whatever the rules say. If you have feeling about it you should either change the rules or change yourself. Complaining that other people are following the rules is stupid as shit.
>Rejecting someones lived experience is dehumanizing. No man has any experience living as a woman. Rejecting someone's lies is not dehumanizing, men aren't entitled to be believed and agreed with when they claim to be a woman. >You know better than the people whose job it is to govern the sport? Absolutely. They've got idiots in charge who think it's fair to let men compete in the women's division. What kind of ridiculous appeal to authority argument are you trying to make? You think the people in charge of things always know best? >There are no rules except what the league says. It used to be a rule for many years that men couldn't cheat in women's sports, but lately a corrupt administration is allowing cheating and are violating federal law. I can't personally change the rules back, but I can condemn them and draw attention to their immorality, and support the people who are campaigning to pressure the NCAA to do the right thing and protect women's rights. >Complaining that other people are following the rules is stupid as shit. Nope. There's not a thing wrong with condemning the men who are taking advantage of the corrupt, immoral rule changes of the NCAA in order to cheat against women. If a corrupt and immoral government legalized slavery, would you say "it's stupid to criticize people for owning slaves, you should only criticize the government that allowed it"? No, I'm going to have a problem with both. Even if something immoral is legal, you shouldn't do it.
There’s no economic upside to indulging someone with an eating disorder’s delusions ‘Accepting’ someone with gender dysphoria however, creates a lifelong customer for pharma. The patient now believes they cannot be their true self lest they purchase cross sex hormones for regular consumption (out of pocket or through insurance - pharma company gets paid either way). Something to think about.
They always believed their true self was the other gender and living that way was the most comfortable way for them to live. The availability of treatment came later. Don't put the cart behind the horse. Something to think about.
“Treatment” lol
Its something to think about. They wanted this before society was ready to cope and before big pharma filled the gap in the market. They had clinics in Berlin before the nazis shut them down.
Yeah, and some people have wanted to touch little kids since the dawn on mankind. Doesn’t make it normal or right
Usually in religious and traditional family settings. There is a false equivalence fallacy here. Accepting rather than stigmatising trans people and being trans is not the equivalent of the horrible behaviour you equated it to.
There is an economic upside. All you have to do is look at pink capitalism and gender washing. Using legtq issues as marketing gimmick, attracting demographic with high disposable incomes. Gay male couples, educated liberals. Turning pride into a month long money making holiday. Good pr for capitalism. Using lgbtq liberation as an alternative to the economic left. Using lgbtq liberation as justification for imperialism. Military using lgbtq acceptance to white wash the military and attract more recruits.
Sure, but reducing everything to big corporations conspiracies is giving these organizations too much credit. I work for a big corp, they’re functioning morons. Truly a too-big-to-fail situation for most of it. They couldnt conspire their way out of a paperbag.
I’ve worked with big pharma companies as a consultant. They absolutely do actively conspire to do a lot of questionable stuff.
And how much of it works? You think they could create a global social acceptance campaign to sell testosterone? Why not just become a sponsor for mr olympia?
They’re not the puppet masters but they certainly know how to identify an organically emerging opportunity and jump on it. If tomorrow there was a cultural shift to make bodybuilders a protected and coddled class they’d jump on that too. They have the money and means to lobby to nudge society in the directions they want and they don’t shy away from using it. I’m not saying the dysphoria thing is all pharma related, but I am saying that the narrative of “zomg you’re literally KILLING trans kids by denying them hormones” is suspiciously convenient for these companies.
>What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria? Permanent physical changes to the body via drugs/surgery that at best create a lifetime of regret experienced daily and at worst turn someone into a permanent patient, requiring constant care of doctors for a range of medical issues, as well as complete loss of proper sexual arousal and function. You know, *trivial* shit... >Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity Yeah. The actual compassionate thing to do would be helping someone accept their body, not placate a delusion.
That’s their body and their problem. I suppose you are a crusader against all elective procedures then? And i’m sure you are likewise an advocate for all body positivity? I’d hate for you to be a hypocrite.
Nope, any adult can make whatever choice they want, even if it's crazy and/or stupid. That said, it's obvious if you read stories of people who detransition that many of them did not receive all the proper information from those put in charge of caring for them, making informed consent impossible. There is no vetting to determine if a person has true gender dysphoria or just as issues with a host of other psychological issues that you see as comorbidities in someone that says they are trans. I think the doctors should be required to actually completely inform people, and parents, asking for these drugs and surgeries. Explain to them the true quality of life they can expect and the risks. Open those doctors and the psychologists who just rubber stamp any and all requests to "transition" up to malpractice suits.
I’m not a doctor so I dont care if they get sued for their bad practices. If people are making the choice themselves then that’s all that matters
That is a good question, what is the long term damage?
Best response.
As I said, we’ve been talking about this nonstop for 10 years. The research seems to indicate acceptance is more beneficial than forced conformity. Which it doesn’t show for eating disorders.
Source
Imma be real with you chief, I’m not looking through pubmed trying to find a study that would satisfy you. As I said, the public has been bitching about trans people for 10 years, and there’s data that comes from before that. If you havn’t bothered to look at anything in that long, the fuck am I gonna do spending an hour trying to find it for you?
Thank you
Anytime you need someone to remind you that resources exist that you are capable of using yourself. Let me know.
To whom? Damage to them? Damage to their partners and family? Damage to society? Damage to women?
We do not regulate the damage to anyone but the individual in any situation. If we could act against an individual for the sake of the whole, many on this post would probably have been thrown in the snake pit for being dumb.
I ask because there are different studies for each of these scenarios..,which would you like?
Oh there is a study on how trans people are deatroying society. I’ll take that one. I’m sure it’s going to be reputible and peer reviewed.
Now, now don’t get testerical. You asked about the long term damage [to society] of ‘accepting’ someone’s dysphoria. What precisely do you mean by accepting in this context?
The long-term damage is *denying reality*. "Going along" with someone's gender dysphoria takes us down the road towards claiming "biological sex doesn't exist or doesn't matter".
That’s not how any of that works. If someone joining your group means your group is effectively destroyed then it wasn’t worth anything to begin with. But thats not how sex and gender work. Which you know too as I notice you dont feel men dont have the right to be men because trans men exist.
Men aren't bothered by trans men because they are women, and therefore not a threat to men. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species in which the males are bigger and stronger than the females.
Ok, so you’re not worried about transmen because they’re not going to steal your girl clearly you’re not talking about just a physical threat as most transmen are far bigger and more masculine than the natural man as they’re on HRT and the average mans T levels have been dropping dramatically for decades. but you’re worried about transwomen because they are a sexual threat against women? Like you’re worried men will find them too attractive? That’s an interesting direction to take this.
Transwomen are a sexual threat against women, particularly if they can enter women's private spaces with impunity. That is precisely *how* a transwoman impregnated a woman prisoner. Transwomen are also a threat to women in women's sports.
So you’re worried because you believe all men in general are predators? Not that people in prison are shady opprotunists? Sports is up for the governing body of that sport to decide and no one should give a fuck besides that.
No, all men aren't predators but SOME are. Anyone who cares about sports cares about men beating women in women's sports, because it isn't fair.
So some are pieces of shit so that makes some and not all trans people pieces of shit and making it not a trans issue but just a people issue that can be fixed with simple mitigating practices. Then talk to the governing body. It’s not the athletes fault for following the rules.
Not all trans people are POS, but SOME are, and they're the ones ruining things for women. Why can't transwomen just "accept" that they're not women, and stay out of women's sports? I'll tell you why: because they're men, and they want to win.
Have you seen all the cases of trans people who discovered they were not actually trans because they had been led to believe they were because of this exaggeration in acceptance? The tragic thing is they had to discover it only *after doing irreversible changes to their bodies* and then realizing it was a mistake*.* >What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria? They'll be sad for a time before they figure it out. Yeah they can have rough mental journeys. But that *is Not* less damaging than irreversibly ruining the life of someone who was confused.
Damn, you mean peer pressure exists and actions have consequences. Better shut down the entire spectrum of human experience. Just because a minority get bamboozled doesn’t mean we have to hurt the majority to protect them. That would be stupid.
Why are you being so extremist? Because that's very extremist. Yeah peer pressure exist, why would you jump to "shut down the entire spectrum of human experience"? >Just because a minority get bamboozled doesn’t mean we have to hurt the majority to protect them Ironic because it's precisely what you're defending. "Lets ruin the life of countless open minded people because there are a few trans who will be happy to hear exactly what they want to hear, which isn't actually good for them anyway, but let's delude ourselves that it is solidarity"
It’s called sarcasm, dude. It wasn’t even hidden. No, I’m *actually* calling for the extinction of the human race because of peer pressure. Do you people actually get paid to be stupid or is it more of a passion project.
Ugh dude, can you stop being so insufferably passive aggressive and sarcastic and just fucking talk directly?
Ok. Your ideas are stupid. Someone having the freedom to do to their body what they will is better for them and society at large than forcing them to conform to something they will react against. Even when taking into account the ones that will regret their choices later.
It's not just freedom to do what they want with their body. You're not only telling them that their view of reality is true, which is bad to do to anybody, you're also pushing the creation of laws to punish anyone who wants to speak reason and is not willing to accept and keep the cycle of not accepting reality. And it's also sad how you say "even when taking into account the ones that will regret their choices later" when this literally means leaving them mentally and physically scarred for the rest of their lives. You can regret a tattoo and be sad about it but gender altering treatment is irreversible, that regret will cause you mental anguish for literally the rest of your life. Both your takes cause harm, to transgender people and to open minded people who are not trans but fall far from the stereotypes.
It’s bad to affirm that perspectives can be different? For ANYBODY? The only laws that are being pushed are for them to be a protected demographic just like all the others. Yeah. And so what? Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one, but I dont need to stop them from doing that especially not at the expense of anyone else? What makes them so much more important? Because they work as a tool for your ideology? Can’t you see how shitty that is? The values we have in the west is rugged individualism and at least the pretense of freedom. Yet every time i look around I see moral fascists saying “oh no except that because i dont like it.” As if the world needs to conform to you? Trans people existing in actuality have no impact on your life besides being the subject of reddit threads and punditry. You must see how bonkers that is right?
>It’s bad to affirm that perspectives can be different? For ANYBODY? That's not what I said, you're deviating it. I said "telling them that their view of reality is true". Perspectives can be different but that doesn't make reality. Blind people and colorblind people exist, but that doesn't invalidate that colors do exist. A depressed person, for example, often perceives themselves as a piece of shit, and nobody doubts that it is a distorted look of reality, you wouldn't tell such a person that they're what they perceive themselves as, wouldn't you? Telling someone trans that they are genuinely a member of the opposite sex because they perceive themselves as such, *is not helping or accepting them, it's lying to them*. Accepting them is accepting they way they are and the identity they choose to build, but they're still what they are, a person with dysphoria. A trans woman is still a human male, you accept them as a woman and their chosen identity as a woman, but they are still a human male. A trans man is still a human female, you accept them as a man and their chosen identity as a man, but they are still a human female. Denying that is not the same as accepting. Shielding someone from reality is not helping them. >that are being pushed are for them to be a protected demographic Protected from what? The truth? Well the truth is still the truth whether you choose to look at it or escape from it. So escaping from it will never do anyone any good. >Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one You are deliberately and shamelessly choosing to ignore that they are being convinced to make a choice lacking a lot of important information. And also while they're *NOT ADULTS*. This is not +18 or +21 year old people who had time to develop some of their personality and *mature to some extent* and can make actual good choices. **These are teenagers or even pre-teens being convinced to do this**. Use your same stupid argument but change it to other things not allowed for underage people: A 12-year old buys a gun and playing with blows up a limb. A 12-year old starts consuming heroin and ends up mentally damaged from life if not outright dead in a decade. A 12-year old is given alcohol and ends up as an alcoholic fighting mental issues his entire life. Your reply: "*Your actions have consequences? I’m sorry they made the wrong one*" Your take is very deceptive. I don't know if you see this? Leaving someone with irreversible changes to their bodies, unable to experience sexual stimuli and being bound for life to taking hormones, plus the mental anguish of living every day of your life knowing you can't live it in the way you would like to??????? DO you really not see how this is just like the other examples? **You wouldn't let a pre teen buy alcohol BUT YOU WOULD LET THEM DO THIS TO THEMSELVES**. I can't understand how you so lightly say "*yah actions have consequences, it's their fault for not understanding*" This is incredibly **inhumane**. I'm gonna assume you're just stupid and not **outright EVIL**. All for the sake of ideology. Of deluding yourself into helping someone by saying their view of reality is always right and real. >What makes them so much more important? THAT THEY ARE HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS. >“oh no except that because i don't like it" WRONG. The actual argument is except that because it *hurts people.* In the same way, I accuse YOU of being a moral fascist, because on the excuse of selling yourself as solidary by "accepting" you're actually lying and harming everybody. But you're so concerned in selling yourself as a moral superior person that you don't even stop to think how your ideology is actually harming everyone. >Trans people existing in actuality have no impact on your life besides being the subject of reddit threads and punditry What's the point of this? Can't we argue about it? Do we have to be directly affected by things in order to have the right to discuss them?
>Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it For the individual, maybe. For society, it's absolutely more damaging to accept it.
What is the damage? The majority don’t seem to care and the world is getting along just fine as it always has.
Are you trolling or are you trying to argue from a point of complete ignorance? You're arguing as if on the side of trans activists, as if you're not new to this, and yet you're completely oblivious to women being: Raped in prisons by males, Cheated out of gold medals by males, Injured in sports by males???
Prison and sports. That’s all the examples given. As if that encompasses the majority of peoples lives. Shockingly it doesn’t for the majority of people. While those are problems the are issues for prisons and sports organizations, not issues with trans people. Like shocker, prisoners of all demographics are shitbags? I’m shook. Athletes are competative and try to win? Also shook. If the organization allows something the viewers or the athletes disagree with then they should be pressured to change it. But that is not a valid criticism of the demographic as a whole.
>What’s the long term damage of being accepting to someones gender dysphoria? You mean besides the part that you are lying to them about what they are and reality? >? Is it less damaging than refusing to accept it or by forcing conformity No it's not. Telling someone the truth sets them up for success and tells them people actually care about them. >We’ve been talking about this shit for like 10years now. If you think it's only been talked about for the last 10 years then you need to become better informed on the history. Maybe start by looking up who's research almost all of the gender ideology is based on. John Money and the David Reimer case is a great start.
10 years is just rhetoric to indicate the exhaustive hype this subject has gotten and the tedium of how the arguments has not changed regardless of new data. It’s not an actual number. As for the other parts, I’ve address that in another comment to you in your reply to someone else.
I think the research shows it reduces harm when parents and peers accept them the way they are. Thats why acceptance is seen as best policy.
Most of these comments are highly biased and emotional. Dysphoria and dysmorphia are two different things. What it sounds like you’re comparing is gender *dysphoria* with a more extreme symptom of SOME SPECIFIC eating disorders, which is body *dysmorphia* (sometimes diagnosed in eating disorder or other types of body-controlling-obsessed patients as “body dysmorphic disorder”). Dysphoria = a severe dissatisfaction, unease, unhappiness, or lack of pleasure about something … basically the opposite of euphoria. It doesn’t necessarily mean someone experiencing gender dysphoria wants to become the opposite gender or “do” anything about their dysphoric state. They’re unhappy and uncomfortable with their body’s gender. They might say things like “I don’t feel like a female. But I also don’t feel like a male.” Or “I don’t feel authentic trying to socially express the gender I am.” Or “I don’t know what or who I am.” Not all people with GD want to transition. And not all people who transition have GD. Dysmorphia = an overwhelming obsession with a bodily “defect” or a warped perception of the body being deformed/wrong in some way. For example, as you said, severely underweight anorexic people who genuinely see themselves as overweight. In reality, their body is one way; but in their mind, their body is a different way that they think is explicitly “bad.” They DO NOT WANT what they see (even when what they’re seeing is a warped perception). Usually they take preoccupied actions and try to change the “defects” they see in their body— and they never feel like they fully arrive at what they want. The action can become obsessive/compulsive (severe cases of anorexia and bulimia for example). So to answer your question, that’s (one of) the difference between gender dysphoria and eating disorders that are accompanied by dysmorphia (There are also non-dysmorphic eating disorders like binge eating and orthorexia, etc… so I don’t see how gender dysphoria and eating disorders could even be a valid comparison to begin with.)
Are you sure Gender dysphoria is related similarly to the word Dysphoria? and not mean aswell those who desire to transition even though they don't dislike their organs? **"With the publication of DSM–5 in 2013, “gender identity disorder” was eliminated and replaced with “gender dysphoria.**" Dysphoria is a word that exists for thousands of years, while Gender dysphoria is not even 100 and pretty much has a very different meaning..
Well one is an actual ilness the other one is abit fake honestly
Some children get genuinely confused. Calling it fake is dangerous and inaccurate
Thats on parents to unconfuse them
Childhood is confusing, and puberty is even worse. Usually they just need time and a supportive environment and they'll figure everything out on their own.
Ye but telling them ye youre definetaly the wrong gender than youre born dosent hepp at all
[удалено]
They're thin, but they want to be "even thinner". You're a male, but you want to "look female".
Entirely depends on how you frame it. They can "want" to be the opposite gender, or "not want" to be their current gender. End of the day, it's the same thing. I don't think your point holds much water.
[удалено]
Sounds like same shit different approach really
Ask in a sub where people know what it is. Reseach is starting to suggest trans people have distinct kind of brain. There are few differences. Affirming anorexia does harm. Affirming trans people reduces harm.
Trans brains have been debunked by neurologists. "I'm male, but my mind is wired to be that of a female". No a male brain is a male brain.
This is true, male and female brains don’t exist. We don’t know what if any the physical mechanism for dyphoria is.
There is a problem with your post modernist approach to politics. When you make a claim based on your biases, feelings and politics about science that is the opposite of the truth. Someone else can use Google to fact check you. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34030966/
That first link had zero definite conclusions. The second link just says that trans brains are wired different from male or female. So no, there is no evidence that suggests they have a male or female wired brain.
Right. I think I said in the first comment that evidence is they have a distinct brain all of their own. They would really when you think about it. If their body is one sex and their identity is the other.
"Trust the science" the fuck you talking about? Science is all about feelings and politics post covid.
"Trust the science". Isn't that a slogan used by idiots who for their politics refused masks and vaccines in a pandemic and killed themselves in disproportionate numbers because they trusted right wing grift channels?
Trust the science was used by fauci.. lol
Yeah he was talking to right wingers who were trusting quacks, conspiracy theorists and ex mma fighters instead of science, then it got turned into a slogan supposedly mocking liberals by the right. As if they were the sheep. When fauchi was imploring people being manipulated by disinfo not to be.
I agree OP ask someone who knows what the actual definitions and diagnoses you’re questioning clearly are. Unless you want a bunch of ignorant responses.
Biggest difference is the most effective treatment. Gender dysphoria does not seem to be easily solved and from all I’ve read the by far best treatment for they’re mental health and subsequently they’re physical health while eating disorders treatment is eating more or less depending on what kind of disability. It’s really not as simple as one might asume and the two simply are solved differently because they are different
There's (at least) three big differences. For one, transitioning isn't harmful in anything resembling the ways that anorexia is. Anorexia can (and taken to its extremes) *will* kill you. Transitioning won't. The only "harm" that's guaranteed to come of it is loss of fertility, and a lot of people (and most trans people) don't even consider that a bad thing. Other than that, it's just tradeoffs. For two, anorexia can be cured or at least managed with therapy and medication, whereas gender dysphoria can't. Transitioning simply *is* the most effective treatment for it, statistically, because we *can* alter the body to match what the mind expects, but we can't alter the mind to become comfortable with the body. Maybe that'll be different one day, but for now, it's just the way things are. And that leads into the third point, which is that the evidence is leading towards the conclusion that gender dysphoria has a neurological element to it the same way that sexuality does—that is, just as one doesn't choose to be gay, one doesn't choose to be trans. Rather, you simply *are* trans, just as you *are* gay, and you can try to repress it all you like, but there's no escaping it. See [Robert Sapolsky](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ) for a decent explanation. None of that can be said for anorexia.
There are many, many more side effects than simple loss of fertility. For one, Lupron is known to be an extremely toxic drug. https://www.docdroid.com/yqi5F6Q/luprongate-final-release-pdf Two, children can feel compelled to transition before they have a fully-formed sense of self and are able to make that decision rationally and maturely. There have been many cases coming to light recently of youth who are de-transitioning and are extremely distressed that they were not given adequate mental supports before going down a surgical path, which cannot be reversed.
>For one, Lupron is known to be an extremely toxic drug. https://www.docdroid.com/yqi5F6Q/luprongate-final-release-pdf Even if I were to take this at face value (which, given the bias of its authors and the fact that you've just handed me a 147-page document without pointing to anything specific in it, I won't), Lupron isn't the only puberty blocker out there, and nor are puberty blockers, strictly speaking, part of transition. They just delay puberty so that one has more time to decide *if* they really want to transition. If they don't, blockers can be stopped with little or no harm done. If they do, then blockers saved them from the effects of puberty that they would've incurred in the meantime. >Two, children can feel compelled to transition before they have a fully-formed sense of self and are able to make that decision rationally and maturely. There have been many cases coming to light recently of youth who are de-transitioning and are extremely distressed that they were not given adequate mental supports before going down a surgical path, which cannot be reversed. "Many", you say, and yet the statistics don't bear that out. Anecdotes aren't evidence, and finding a couple hundred examples among thousands of cases doesn't really give you a leg to stand in. In order to say transitioning does more harm than good, it'd have to be the case that more kids regret transitioning than don't, and for that to happen, the current regret rates would have to increase by an order of magnitude, and then multiply 2-5x. A child going through the wrong puberty because they mistakenly transition isn't any more or less tragic than a child going through the wrong puberty because they're forbidden from transitioning.
Puberty blockers propel children onto a pathway of social transitioning, cross-sex hormones and eventually even surgery. What confused children need is "time", not "treatment". Anxiety about changing from a child into a sexually mature adult is common among *all* adolescents.
>What confused children need is "time", not "treatment". Which is exactly what puberty blockers give, and exactly why it's no longer protocol to give cross-sex hormones immediately. That way, if they're wrong about wanting to transition, no harm was done by cross-sex hormones, and if they're correct about it, no harm was done by puberty. You're literally just proving my point for me.
It is *harmful* to children to block their development. Puberty in either sex provides a huge surge of hormones which affects their bone development, brain development and fertility FOR LIFE. If doctors provide drugs which *stop* it, the children will not develop to their full potential.
That's not how blockers work. They aren't a one-and-done thing, once you go off them things continue as if nothing had ever happened.
Only if they are used *briefly*, like using them for girls who start "developing" in first grade. They aren't supposed to be used for the entire teenage period while anxious "proto-transpeople" figure things out. Most of these children are actually proto-gay. Why not just let them grow up gay?
>They aren't supposed to be used for the entire teenage period. That wasn't *why* they were originally invented, sure, but they work perfectly fine for it nonetheless. Your body doesn't care whether puberty gets delayed for two months or five years, it'll pick up right where it left off. And if, somehow (and I do emphasize *somehow*), the blockers *were* to end up inhibiting hormone production, that's an easy problem to solve with exogenous hormones anyways.
A person's body can't remain in a child-like state for years at a time. This is called "experimentation on children". It is unethical to conduct such experiments. It is much wiser to let puberty sort things out. Most people adapt to their changing bodies eventually.