Transgender Discussion Thread III: Vote in our poll!

[Cekoviu]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate, I just thought for the sake of contrast I'd share this bit from a facebook post that has been making the rounds during the last month or so:

In the beginning, God created day and night. But have you ever seen a sunset!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Gorgeous. Full of a hundred shades of color you can't see in plain daylight or during the night.

In the beginning God created land and sea. But have you ever seen a beach?!?! Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Beautiful. A balanced oasis that's not quite like the ocean, nor quite like the land.

In the beginning God created birds of the air and fish of the sea. But have you ever seen a flying fish, or a duck or a puffin that swims and flies, spending lots of time in the water and on the land!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Full of life. A creative combination of characteristics that blows people's minds.

In the beginning God also created male and female, in God's own image, God created them. So in the same way that God created realities in between, outside of, and beyond night and day, land and sea, or fish and birds, so God also created people with genders beyond male and female. Trans and non-binary and agender and intersex, God created us. All different sorts of people for all different sorts of relationships. Created from love to love and be loved. In God's image we live.

God is still creating you. You are no less beautiful and wild than a sunset or a beach or a puffin. You are loved. You have a place here.

(The author is a nonbinary Lutheran pastor from Colorado).

Sigh with the exception of the last line it’s a bunch of bullshit. Pedestrian orology with no regard of established Christian concepts of sex/gender, and the moral components of each.

Better question: who gives a shit what either you or some random pastor think about a question that ultimately only God can answer?

[Cekoviu]

Not to shut down the adorable transphobia here, but could we maybe discuss being transgender rather than how you as a cis person feel about them transes?

You say that word like it’s supposed to mean something.

This is possibly the vaguest post I've ever seen here. What the hell does "that word" refer to? There are 28 different things it could be.

[Tarsonis]

Sigh with the exception of the last line it’s a bunch of bullshit. Pedestrian orology with no regard of established Christian concepts of sex/gender, and the moral components of each.

Better question: who gives a shit what either you or some random pastor think about a question that ultimately only God can answer?

Clearly us who are taking about it. How about you jog on with your belligerent self then, eh?

[Tarsonis]

You say that word like it’s supposed to mean something.

This is possibly the vaguest post I've ever seen here. What the hell does "that word" refer to? There are 28 different things it could be.

You know exactly what I’m talking about. “Transphobia” you say that like it’s supposed to mean something.

[Hediacrana]

Better question: who gives a shit what either you or some random pastor think about a question that ultimately only God can answer?

Well, personally, I give a shit, because as someone who is trans, nonbinary and Christian, hearing someone describe my existence as part of God's creation is like a breath of fresh air.

[Mercuriuseudoro]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment, and complain that I am "getting theological" when I directly address a Christian in Christian terms.

Now that you're getting all theological, I'll address you in those terms as well.

-

Mark 10:6 - 10:9

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Corinthians 6:9 - 6:10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Matthew 18:6

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

-

This is not something that I pulled off of Facebook.

[Hediacrana]

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment

Bless your woolly bloomers, honey, but you obviously have no clue where I'm coming from.

[Valgora]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment, and complain that I am "getting theological" when I directly address a Christian in Christian terms.

Now that you're getting all theological, I'll address you in those terms as well.

-

Mark 10:6 - 10:9

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Corinthians 6:9 - 6:10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Matthew 18:6

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

-

This is not something that I pulled off of Facebook.

Ah yes, the Bibble.
That sacred text written by man who some believe was inspired by God.

If God exists, I doubt he gives a flying fuck about whether someone is LGBTQ or has sex when not married or gets drunk and what have you.

Of course, using such religious arguments doesn't really work against those who ain't said religion.

[Mattopilos II]

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment

Bless your woolly bloomers, honey, but you obviously have no clue where I'm coming from.

As you know, every non-Christian and atheist secretly worries about impending doom from god and therefore apparently thinks the transgender thread is where we should gather to mourn our non-existent afterlife that we don't believe in but we are still scared about.... apparently.

[Felt Karpit]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment, and complain that I am "getting theological" when I directly address a Christian in Christian terms.

Now that you're getting all theological, I'll address you in those terms as well.

-

Mark 10:6 - 10:9

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Corinthians 6:9 - 6:10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Matthew 18:6

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

-

This is not something that I pulled off of Facebook.

They are just pulled off of god's facebook fan page obviously.

[Auzkhia]

Better question: who gives a shit what either you or some random pastor think about a question that ultimately only God can answer?

Well, personally, I give a shit, because as someone who is trans, nonbinary and Christian, hearing someone describe my existence as part of God's creation is like a breath of fresh air.

It's good to take validation whenever you can get it.

Personally, I have no skin that game, as an atheist, but I believe trans christians could easily reconcile their gender and faith. I never thought being LGBTQ in any sense was sin when I still tried to get into Christianity. Ultimately it didn't matter since it never made sense to me. But I think people can believe whatever they want, religion is a personal matter.

However, as a trans atheist, I never have to worry about such debates, but I support you and your choices

[NeoOasis]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate

Corinthians 6:9 - 6:10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

This is not something that I pulled off of Facebook.

>nor abusers of themselves
>nor drunkards

Yet there you were promoting the use of shrooms.

[Felt Karpit]

Well, personally, I give a shit, because as someone who is trans, nonbinary and Christian, hearing someone describe my existence as part of God's creation is like a breath of fresh air.

It's good to take validation whenever you can get it.

Personally, I have no skin that game, as an atheist, but I believe trans christians could easily reconcile their gender and faith. I never thought being LGBTQ in any sense was sin when I still tried to get into Christianity. Ultimately it didn't matter since it never made sense to me. But I think people can believe whatever they want, religion is a personal matter.

However, as a trans atheist, I never have to worry about such debates, but I support you and your choices

I know a lot of trans people that hold onto their faith while transition and even find religious communities to be accepting of them. I'm like you and more on the nontheistic side of things, so it isn't mine experience, but I think it is important to say that it is possible.

[Hediacrana]

However, as a trans atheist, I never have to worry about such debates, but I support you and your choices

I know a lot of trans people that hold onto their faith while transition and even find religious communities to be accepting of them. I'm like you and more on the nontheistic side of things, so it isn't mine experience, but I think it is important to say that it is possible.

It certainly is! One of my best church experiences in the last few years? Walking with my whole congregation in our local pride parade. Coming May, I'm going in full femme mode.

[Grenartia]

Prove it.

You first. But maybe you're not understanding what I mean. Gender is not completely unmoored from biological sex. The concept is inherently tied to the expression of biological sex in both the Id and the societal conception. While strict dichotomous gender roles and expression has been challenged in modern thinking, gender is still rooted in how biological sex is expressed. A transgender person is someone whose self expressed gender, does not match their biological sex. An "Agender" person is someone who doesn't claim to be of either gender (male/female) and usually expresses an androgenous gender, that is ultimately a compilation of gender traits to a varying degree, or in some a complete rejection of gender identifying traits (though usually still results in a compilation of gender traits).

While our expression of gender is understood to be much less determined by biological sex, the concept of gender is inherently rooted in the biological sexes.

Rooted? I'd call it more like a tiny thread linking the two.

I imagine several of the agender posters here will have several things to say about that.

That they may. I expect disagreement, this is a debate forum after all.

God, that's a lazy and stupid argument. That last sentence alone arguably implies that "red" shouldn't be a valid description of somebody's natural hair color, simply because it deviates from the statistical norm.

By this same logic, nobody who isn't a 20-something Han Chinese guy named Mohammed is valid.

I see the problem, you're conflating normal with valid. Just because something isn't "normal" doesn't make it invalid. Case in point with Red hair. Red hair isn't a normal phenotype, in the wholesale population. It's the result of a recessive gene pairing, thus making it rare. Granted due to the nature of breeding communities, Red hair is quite common in the anglo-community, but as a whole of the species it is quite rare. Same with blue eyes. However, this differs with intersex, because red hair is not the result of genetic defect. And I'm not appealing to some vague post modern idea of "defect is subjective." Red Hair is the result of successful gene paring, but of recessive traits. The genes correctly separated during meiosis, and correctly paired during conception.

What is typically referred to as intersex, is the result of several genetic or congenital defects that cause intersex.
such as:

"Congenital adrenal hyperplasia"
"Aromatase deficiency"
"turner syndrom"
"true hermaphroditism"

And these are just a few.

These do not constitute "alternative gene sequences" they are medically defined intersex disorders.

Nevertheless, there are forms of intersexuality that are results of alternative gene sequences.

The intersex community is an attempt to normalize the expression of said defects in public perception, the same way being deaf has been normalized. Like intersex, being deaf is objectively a deviation from the norm,

Sure.

it is a disability, a defect, a loss of normal human ability.

Elaborate.

A normalized culture of being deaf has developed due to a lack of ability to treat said disability, and because the defect does not invalidate the humanity of the individual. However, now that there is implants that effectually cure deafness, I suspect, and rather hope really that community will ultimately disappear. Not because they're evil or should be persecuted or are subhuman or anything, because they aren't but because we can effectually cure the ailment.

Hopefully deafness will go the way of polio.

Hopefully, we'll eventually be able to treat intersex disorders and eliminate it as well.

Yeah...about that. Doctors have been saying that for decades, and there's no shortage of intersex individuals who have been negatively affected by those attempts to "treat" them.

Then you have the time to "explain the birds and the bees".

Alright, see when a mommy and a daddy love each other, or make bad decisions....

Those are neither birds nor bees.

No, more like simply not arguing with points that I don't disagree with.

If you don't disagree with them, then you have to admit your position is wrong.

Only in the specific cases where the facts are on your side.

Biological sex classification is inherently related to their role in reproduction. Sterility, though preventing sexual reproduction, does not invalidate the biological sex of the individual, because biological sex is classified in relation to the species as a whole, not the individual. An individual or even most females being sterile would not make them not female.

If you say so.

It's not me, it's biology. And you just said above that you don't disagree with the points presented, therefor it's reasonable to deduce that you agree with me on this point. So where exactly do we disagree.

I'm sorry that my personal life doesn't allow me to respond to your blatant trolling on your time.

I'm not trolling, I'm engaging in a reasoned argument. You being offended by the argument does not make it trolling.

I never said I was offended by the arguments themselves. However, it is apparent that you (and the others who followed you here) have come here not to learn about trans people, but to invalidate our existence. That is trolling, even if the site allows it.

Tarsonis makes a good point, while gender and sex are not the same thing, saying the two are independent of eachother removes a lot of context from many issues.

In what way?

Tarsonis makes a good point, while gender and sex are not the same thing, saying the two are independent of eachother removes a lot of context from many issues.

Yeah, I'm trans and I'd have to say that gender and sex are correlated. Doesn't mean they're the same thing or they have to be equivalent, but most people of a certain sex will have a gender identity matching it.

I'll agree that's the way things currently are, but I strongly suspect the correlation isn't inherent to whether or not somebody has a Y chromosome, but due to social expectations and pressures.

Membership of e-hugboxes

If you've got something to say, then say it, DI.

Hot take: Biological sex is also a social construct. I know what people mean when they say sex and gender aren't the same thing, that's technically true too. The idea that certain sexual traits are male or female is the social construct. In colloquial speech, people often use sex and gender as if they are the same words, even they aren't exactly the same. Words change over time, though, so maybe saying sex for an identity could fall out of favor. New pronouns could come into favor, or maybe they never catch-on, and English speakers default to they/them, for gender-neutrality and the sake of non-binary people too. Other languages that use gender could benefit from that too. As an L2 German speaker, I could literally translate my pronouns, but the standard neutral response is use both he and she, I'd certainly like Xier/xien/xiem to become popular. Even if it just makes a small amount of people happy, I see no harm in adopting inclusive language. Maybe one day, gender neutrality in language won't be such a hot button issue.

The least that could be done would have a third sex marker on ids, or better yet, why does my state's transport department need to know either my gender or sex? As it stands, I consider it wrong, but the other option I feel is wrong too. The exact definition of my gender is a bit vague sometimes, that's not bad, but I at least know I am gendequeer and an androgyne for sure. Thus being referred to as male is wrong, but if you were to point out my body, to that I say, how can I have a man's body when I am not a man. Using sexual traits as a basis of identity is just weird, since identities are socially construct, we can't know how other animals identify themselves. The roles too come from society too, and there are universal roles or expressions either that are consistent in place and time. Gender is a very immaterial, abstract, even arbitrary concept, but for some it's a part of their personality that formed through social, inter-human experience. For me, being treated as genderqueer, is more pleasant.

By this logic gravity is a social construct.

For once, we actually agree.

Hot take: Biological sex is also a social construct. I know what people mean when they say sex and gender aren't the same thing, that's technically true too. The idea that certain sexual traits are male or female is the social construct. In colloquial speech, people often use sex and gender as if they are the same words, even they aren't exactly the same. Words change over time, though, so maybe saying sex for an identity could fall out of favor. New pronouns could come into favor, or maybe they never catch-on, and English speakers default to they/them, for gender-neutrality and the sake of non-binary people too. Other languages that use gender could benefit from that too. As an L2 German speaker, I could literally translate my pronouns, but the standard neutral response is use both he and she, I'd certainly like Xier/xien/xiem to become popular. Even if it just makes a small amount of people happy, I see no harm in adopting inclusive language. Maybe one day, gender neutrality in language won't be such a hot button issue.

The least that could be done would have a third sex marker on ids, or better yet, why does my state's transport department need to know either my gender or sex? As it stands, I consider it wrong, but the other option I feel is wrong too. The exact definition of my gender is a bit vague sometimes, that's not bad, but I at least know I am gendequeer and an androgyne for sure. Thus being referred to as male is wrong, but if you were to point out my body, to that I say, how can I have a man's body when I am not a man. Using sexual traits as a basis of identity is just weird, since identities are socially construct, we can't know how other animals identify themselves. The roles too come from society too, and there are universal roles or expressions either that are consistent in place and time. Gender is a very immaterial, abstract, even arbitrary concept, but for some it's a part of their personality that formed through social, inter-human experience. For me, being treated as genderqueer, is more pleasant.

I’ve mentioned the xier/xiem/xien issue with a friend who happens to be studying to be a linguist, and as we were talking he essentially said that xier/xiem/xien is not going to become popular simply because people are told to use this word. They’ll become popular if they become part of the casual lexicon, if people actually start to use these words by themselves. New words and phrases travel around, some of them become popular and some do not. This is not one that has spread to widespread use, to my knowledge or his.

And this is at least part of the reason why most people who use gender neutral pronouns in English use they/them/their. Its already in the language, people know how to use it, and they use it in a singular context all the time (even if they don't like to admit it).

The “durr durr I expected more from a Yale grad” argument again?

In case you missed it, he opened himself up to it when he said "hurr durr are you sure you passed high school biology?". Entirely fair game, Lumi.

Also, pretty sure accusing someone of trolling is against the rules, if you think he’s trolling then report him.

I repeat my earlier statement: "However, it is apparent that you (and the others who followed you here) have come here not to learn about trans people, but to invalidate our existence. That is trolling, even if the site allows it."

Also, don't you have me on ignore?

There is a HUGE problem with your terminology here and it's not even that you're implying biological sex exists: "girl" and "boy" are not equivalent terms to "male" and "female". Yes, XX is the chromosomal makeup for a genetic female, but girl and boy mean "young human with a gender identity equating to male/female", not just "male/female." You cannot use them as synonyms, because girl and boy are sociological terms while male and female are (in this case) biological terms.
Auzkhia is correct in stating that biological sex doesn't exist as a monolithic structure -- there are many different things that may be considered your sex for medical or biological purposes, not simply genes. For endocrinological purposes, I would be considered female because that matches my hormone distribution, but for genetic analysis, I would be considered male.

Uhhhhhh as far as I know “boy” means “male” and “girl” means “female”. If the doctor takes the baby out the womb and yells to the mom, “IT’S A BOY!” it’s because he knows that the genetic makeup of the baby means they are male.

Actually, if memory serves, they don't make that determination based on genotype, but rather, phenotype.

“Boy” and “girl” can be used for both sex and gender, and it’s rather pedantic I think to police people’s language over something so small.

Methinks the only reason you think its "so small" is because it doesn't affect you like it affects us. Walk a mile in our shoes, and then see if you still think that.

Most people probably aren’t thinking about when they’re having a casual conversation.

Maybe that's part of the problem.

In fact if you were to walk up to someone and say, “Um, no that’s not a ‘boy’ you’re referring to, it’s a ‘male’,” I’m pretty sure you’d either get a weird look or a slap.

Actually, I'm pretty sure most of us would just say "You can't know for sure that's a boy unless they can tell you so without being pressured."

As for Latinx, I might be wrong but I think that's mainly just a writing word and it's not actually meant to be pronounced, though I've never heard anyone try to say it.

I have. Its not really that awkward, and as I understand it, it exists to reduce sexist biases in the language, and to make room for trans people.

I think the singular they is the only good fit for English as a universally acceptable pronoun, but other languages will actually have to come up with something new; for example German can't use "they" as a gender neutral pronoun for reasons I explained above.

As for Latinx, I might be wrong but I think that's mainly just a writing word and it's not actually meant to be pronounced, though I've never heard anyone try to say it.

Pronouncing the word "Latinx" is practically undoable due to how illogical it sounds.

No its not. It rhymes with "thinks".

At the very worst, "Latin" IS the gender-neutral term, no need to slap an X at the end.

Except, that adjective is, AFAIK, reserved for shit related to the language and other things related to the Roman Empire, with the slimmest of exceptions for "Latin America". You don't call somebody from Central or South America a "Latin".

In any case, this is a threadjack.

Uhhhhhh as far as I know “boy” means “male” and “girl” means “female”. If the doctor takes the baby out the womb and yells to the mom, “IT’S A BOY!” it’s because he knows that the genetic makeup of the baby means they are male.

No, it's not. Doctors don't perform karyotypes immediately after birth, they look at the genitalia of the baby, which do not necessarily have to be the same as what the genome of the baby would imply. The fact that doctors assume the gender of a child based on their genitalia is a huge issue, but it does not mean "boy/girl" and "male/female" are interchangeable.

Most people probably aren’t thinking about when they’re having a casual conversation.

And that's a problem.

In fact if you were to walk up to someone and say, “Um, no that’s not a ‘boy’ you’re referring to, it’s a ‘male’,” I’m pretty sure you’d either get a weird look or a slap.

Why would I do that? "Boy" is still a useful term, but my point is that "boy" and "male" are not synonyms. If you were to call a 60-year-old man a "boy", you would certainly be the one to get weird looks, while calling him "male" is perfectly normal, if clinical.

I'd just like to say that I typed my response to Lumi before I saw this post. I'd also like to say that I don't consider using "male" and "female" in place of man/boy or woman/girl, isn't just clinical, its down right creepy. Then again, that's mostly because everytime I hear somebody say "female" when they mean "woman" or "girl", I instantly hear this.

Have any of y’all ever wished y’all knew y’all were trans as young children, if y’all didn’t, and like were able to raise a fuss and change something? I kinda wish I actually knew about trans people as a kid, so I could’ve known more about myself and implored my parents as a young child more.

Honestly, yes. Maybe then I'd be transitioning right now, as opposed to being in some kind of endless purgatory of waiting to be able to start.

Have any of y’all ever wished y’all knew y’all were trans as young children, if y’all didn’t, and like were able to raise a fuss and change something? I kinda wish I actually knew about trans people as a kid, so I could’ve known more about myself and implored my parents as a young child more.

I categorically reject the notion that an adolescent child is capable of legitimately understanding the complexities of gender identification, evaluating their own Id and superego, and creating a valid gendered ego of themselves.

As a young adult into adulthood? Sure.

Exactly my earlier point. You're here to deny our validity. And psychology and medicine both agree that even kids as young as 3 can know they're trans. And no amount of outdated Freudian babbling will change that.

And that is why the strongest intervention given to children is medication to merely delay the onset of puberty.

Aka child abuse

No, the opposite is child abuse. Conversion therapy, too.

It is only child abuse if it is forced upon the child without their consent.

And what 9 year old is capable of adequately making that decision, understanding all the info about the procedure, and making informed consent? With the exception of the sheldon coopers of the world, 0.

I undoubtedly believe they can make that decision, in much the same way as a kid with terminal cancer can make decisions about how they want their funeral and memorials to be handled.

Jeez, Tars, you're acting like they're doing the fucking surgery itself at 9. All they're doing is giving the kid the option to hold off on puberty until they can be sure the kid can consent to actual hormone therapy. There's no serious ill effects from it.

In what way?

Artificially suppressing puberty, for a child who cannot reasonably make a decision about their gender identity, is nothing short of unethical. It's not like simply hitting pause on development as people make the claim. It can lead to developmental issues later on life.

Proof it.

Further more, studies have repeatedly shown that gender dysphoria usually doesn't persist past adolescence.

That's a misrepresentation if I've ever heard one. While its true, there's also the fact that there's nothing irreversible even happening until it can be safely determined that the kid is truly dysphoric.

Essentially, once they actually hit puberty, most children's genders conform to their sex. Which means that more than likely said child with "grow out of it" during puberty. Suppressing puberty actively blocks this correction.

That requires linking gender dysphoria to the biological processes behind puberty. You don't have the data required to make that determination. In all likelihood, the "grow out of it" is due to actual age, not puberty kicking in.

The notion suppressing puberty is good medicine is nothing short of ideological nonsense, that flies in the face of observable fact.

If that were true, then the medical community wouldn't allow it, because it would fly in the face of established medical ethics.

Guess who's out to her family?

Related: guess who's being made to see a therapist because she's apparently mentally ill?

If you've read this far, congrats on getting this far. Also, congrats on coming out. Make sure you get to choose the therapist you go to (and do your research to make sure you're not getting sent to a gatekeeper or a conversion therapist).

Then watch as the therapist validates you and tells your family they're wrong for thinking you're mentally ill.

What are the studies that you speak of?

And suppressing puberty for a child ain't unethical.
For one: they are used when children begin puberty too young - if their bodies start to change before the age of 8, they are prescribed puberty blockers.
They are also a safe medication.
"Dr. Courtney Finlayson, a pediatric endocrinologist at Lurie Children’s Hospital, said, 'We have a lot of experience in pediatric endocrinology using pubertal blockers. And from all the evidence we have they are generally a very safe medication.'"

Also:
"'That’s really what these pubertal blockers do,' Dr. Rob Garofalo told FRONTLINE. Garofalo is the director of the Lurie Children’s Hospital’s Gender and Sex Development Program. 'They allow these families the opportunity to hit a pause button, to prevent natal puberty … until we know that that’s either the right or the wrong direction for their particular child.'

Doctors who use puberty blockers say they allow children who experience gender dysphoria — the feeling that they’re in the wrong body — the time and space to explore and settle on their gender identity."

Quotes are from: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/arti ... d-unknown/


"Puberty blockers are commonly used for the transgender community. In this community, puberty blockers are used to provide transgender youth with time to further explore their identity, while halting the development of their predisposed sex characteristics caused by the onset of puberty.
...
Puberty blockers serve the transgender community by giving future trans men and trans women more time to solidify their gender identity, without developing secondary sex characteristics. If a child later decides not to transition to another gender, the effects of puberty blockers can be reversed by stopping the medication. Another function of puberty blockers is that it gives the future transgender individual a smoother transition into their desired gender identity as an adult."
- Wikipedia

You see, this would’ve made my extremely stressful puberty start a lot easier. If I’d’ve known to try to get blockers, maybe my life would be a lot easier now as a prepubescent questioning teen than a midpubescent teen who’s developed firm convictions because of how painful puberty has been. And the damage done in the wrong puberty to bodies like mine can’t be undone, while blockers simply delay puberty, meaning the only permanent effect is the child entered puberty later than their peers.

As I recall, puberty blockers can still work mid-puberty, to hold off the more advanced developments.

Find me a definition of child abuse which states that giving hormone blockers to an early teenage child with their consent is child abuse. I'll save you some time: you won't find one.

I’m pretty sure “9-years-old” isn’t “early-teenage-child”. 15, maybe.

Well, then again, most 9 year olds aren't even starting puberty. That's just a number Tars pulled out of his ass for shock value.

What are the studies that you speak of?

https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-con ... -rates.pdf
Study found that roughly 2/3rds of observed children desisted.

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/ ... TATION.pdf

Study found that 88% desisted.

And suppressing puberty for a child ain't unethical.

In and of itself no. Neither is killing. But, I'm not speaking of it without context, were talking specifically about suppressing Puberty for children diagnosed with GD.

For one: they are used when children begin puberty too young - if their bodies start to change before the age of 8, they are prescribed puberty blockers.

Good, but we're not talking about that now are we.

They are also a safe medication.
"Dr. Courtney Finlayson, a pediatric endocrinologist at Lurie Children’s Hospital, said, 'We have a lot of experience in pediatric endocrinology using pubertal blockers. And from all the evidence we have they are generally a very safe medication.'"

That's not as air tight as you think. Gender suppressants have been shone to be mostly safe in and of themselves, and when prescribed in cases of accelerated or early puberty, they effectively correct the development of the child.

But, that's not what they're being used for in the cases of GD. They're being used to unnaturally prolong adolescence as a part of a long term treatment plan. They problem there is the body doesn't stop developing just because puberty suppressants are introduced. It's not a veritable pause button so to speak. Children continue developing without the natural development that occurs during puberty.

Currently, the main concern is bone density and the likely hood of developing osteoperosis later in life, but the reality is we don't have much research into the effects of long term puberty suppressants, because that would be highly unethical in the normal sense. Using it to treat GD is a relatively new medical practice, and we won't know the long term effects until adequate research can be done.

Also:
"'That’s really what these pubertal blockers do,' Dr. Rob Garofalo told FRONTLINE. Garofalo is the director of the Lurie Children’s Hospital’s Gender and Sex Development Program. 'They allow these families the opportunity to hit a pause button, to prevent natal puberty … until we know that that’s either the right or the wrong direction for their particular child.'

That's a very unethical statement to make, mainly because it's all theory and little fact. As I said long term puberty suppressant is a very new form of treatment, and the long term effects are still unknown.

Doctors who use puberty blockers say they allow children who experience gender dysphoria — the feeling that they’re in the wrong body — the time and space to explore and settle on their gender identity."

Quotes are from: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/arti ... d-unknown/

Also from that article:

"However, the use of puberty blockers to treat transgender children is what’s considered an “off label” use of the medication — something that hasn’t been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. And doctors say their biggest concern is about how long children stay on the medication, because there isn’t enough research into the effects of stalling puberty at the age when children normally go through it."

"However, doctors caution that estrogen and testosterone, the hormones that are blocked by these medications, also play a role in a child’s neurological development and bone growth.

“We do know that there is some decrease in bone density during treatment with pubertal suppression,” Finlayson said, adding that initial studies have shown that starting estrogen and testosterone can help regain the bone density. What Finlayson said there isn’t enough research on is whether someone who was on puberty blockers will regain all their bone strength, or if they might be at risk for osteoporosis in the future.

Another area where doctors say there isn’t enough research is the impact that suppressing puberty has on brain development.

“The bottom line is we don’t really know how sex hormones impact any adolescent’s brain development,” Dr. Lisa Simons, a pediatrician at Lurie Children’s, told FRONTLINE. “We know that there’s a lot of brain development between childhood and adulthood, but it’s not clear what’s behind that.” What’s lacking, she said, are specific studies that look at the neurocognitive effects of puberty blockers."

What we have is physicians playing loose and fast with medication, using it in a manner that hasn't been vetted, and the long term effects are not known. While Off label usage isn't a particularly new practice (Viagra was a blood pressure medication after all), in this instance they are driving blind. They don't know the long term effects of it, and they cannot in any intellectually honest way, say that it is absolutely safe.

"Puberty blockers are commonly used for the transgender community. In this community, puberty blockers are used to provide transgender youth with time to further explore their identity, while halting the development of their predisposed sex characteristics caused by the onset of puberty.

This is of course ignoring that, as the above studies show, going through puberty effectually causes most GD diagnosed kids to desist.


...

Puberty blockers serve the transgender community by giving future trans men and trans women more time to solidify their gender identity, without developing secondary sex characteristics. If a child later decides not to transition to another gender, the effects of puberty blockers can be reversed by stopping the medication

Theoretically. While that is how it functions with children with early onset puberty, the long term effects on young adults is not researched or known.

. Another function of puberty blockers is that it gives the future transgender individual a smoother transition into their desired gender identity as an adult."
- Wikipedia

But at what cost? It prevents the onset of puberty which would cause most GD to desist, which means in favor of easier transition, you're effectively trapping most GD kids in a state they'll grow out of in natural course. As such I make no apologies for considering this use of puberty suppressants highly unethical, at this time. As such I see it as veritable child abuse.

And the concern trolling rears its ugly head again.

While we're at it, lets concern troll for other things. Giving kids with cancer treatment is child abuse, because the survivors generally have heart disease, to say nothing of the adverse effects of chemo itself.

Treating childhood cancer leads to heart disease and premature death. Therefore, giving treatment to kids who have cancer is child abuse. QED, by Tars' logic.

Sounds like they did not take it as well as one might have hoped.

Yeah, not quite lmao.

A real therapist who will support and help you or one who will try to "convert" you to being cishet? There's a strong difference.

I don't think they'll send me to a conversion therapy center, my mom would never allow that. My dad, he just...

He sees this as a phase. Something that's arisen in the past few months, something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

Still. Seeing a therapist is the first step to transition, anyways, so just make sure you're not going to one who's shitty on trans issues, and you can hopefully kill two birds with one stone.

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrarily distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex."

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that?

What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc?

Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

Its almost as if not being bullied by people is a good thing...

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrary distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex - so that they can conform with those arbitrarily roles."

This never made sense to me.

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that? What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc? Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

You're beautiful just the way you are.

Considering we are not licensed, experienced therapists with an appropriate medical provider/patient privilege with the individual in question we probably should not make a recommendation as to what they should do about the issue, beyond seeking out an appropriate professional to consult.

Basically this.

Or maybe people who want to cut their genitals also want to cut their wrists because it's part of the same general discontent?

You aren't going to have less sterilized people / dead people because you moralize about how people should be nice to people who want to sterilize themselves and eventually kill themselves because of the depression of having no family or romantic future.

Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of normal people to win the battle against their own instinctive reaction to people who sterilize themselves and kill themselves, you should spend your energy asking why people even want to do this.

Since it's a new thing with no historical precedent, but which is suddenly popular, it's reasonable to conclude that it is the product of a new culture or a new chemical environment, but that it is not really innate to the human condition. People certainly weren't doing this, or thinking about doing it on any scale fifty years ago.

Bullshit. First reference to the term "transgender" in academia? 1965. First use of "transsexual"? 1949.

Just for giggles, google Joseph Lobdell. Transman born in 1829. Or Billy Tipton, born in 1914 and transitioned so completely that almost no-one realised until his postmortem. First recipient of a vaginoplasty surgery? Dora Richter. 1931.

Its almost like we live in a queerphobic society that has, until recently, attempted to erase or cover up the existence of anyone who wasn't cisgender or heterosexual.

The subject of this thread is a dangerous ideology which targets children, preys upon their insecurities and encourages them to go down a road where they end up alone and unattractive. It's really very cruel to be encouraging young people to commit suicide, especially when we used to just not do this, and it didn't cause us any problems.

Absolutely fucking false.

But but modern degeneracy

There is nothing stopping you from just asking your favorite search engine how the prevalence of this behavior has multiplied in the last decade.

Its almost as if people being freer to explore and express their identities allows them to be free to deviate from previously enforced norms.

That last part is a very valid concern, given that transgendered individuals who do not have assistance are in fact disproportionately far more likely to commit suicide or other forms of self harm.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/

We need to move past the assumption that seeing a therapist makes one crazy if we are to improve mental health. So long as this is a reputable, properly licensed therapist it should be beneficial. Also receiving therapy is generally a prerequisite to receiving chemical and/or surgical treatment.

Of course this assumes the therapist is a proper therapist trained and experienced in dealing with these issues.

Have they chosen the therapist already? If so you probably should research the therapist to make sure they are legitimate. And if they have not chosen one maybe research and pick one.

Then present it to them as someone who can help you and help protect you and all. If you say something like “I really think seeing Dr. X will make me less likely to suffer serious harm and possibly death” you can probably at the very least guilt them into accepting your choice.

I refuse to let them pick a therapist that I haven't researched and approved first. They've at least given me that concession.

Excellent!

Could you choose to sleep with and be in a relationship with a man? I am assuming that you are male.

Yes, I could choose to do this, and any other man could choose to do this.

I just don't want to, and most men don't want to either.

Why don't you want to? Why do most men not want to? Why do some men want to?

Having to use modern reproductive technology instead of just making babies spontaneously is harder - so I guess you agree with me that being transsexual is hard mode, life with added difficulty.

Transgender people are ranked much lower in the sexual marketplace because most normal people are much more interested in a normal person of the opposite sex than in a transgender person.

Transgender people are much less likely to be in stable relationships.

All of your arguments here basically asking me "what is statistics" and you should know that already.

The average outcome of a transgender person is one of significantly less relationship stability and less sexual marketplace value.

Why the fuck do you judge someone on their "sexual marketplace value"?

My money's on an incel.

Well this shit has gone off the rails....

You dragged the people causing it into this thread.

Well this shit has gone off the rails....

It is supreme moral cowardice to attempt to co-exist with an ideology that encourages the sterilization of children. Giving opposite-sex hormones to angsty teenagers and castrating them is "off the rails."

No, the truly supreme moral cowardice is misrepresenting the struggle for trans equal rights as...whatever the fuck you just said.

You know, at least in spite of all of these theoreticals, my relationship with myself will undoubtedly be much better. On like going from a ‘maybe I’ll try and see if I can make it through tomorrow’ level to ‘hey well at least we’re somewhere’.

Look I’d make an ugly man by most metrics anyway, so if the choice is between being an kinda ugly man and being a kinda ugly woman, I’ll chose being the one that doesn’t make me slowly die spiritually.

This brings me back to my thesis.

-

1) It is unfortunate for you, and other people in your situation, that you have to go through some process that involves becoming sterile, expensive and risky medicine, and widespread social rejection, in order to have a better relationship with yourself.

It would be better for you, as a person, if you could just have a good relationship with yourself, without going through these hurdles.

Concern trolling aside, that's not possible.

2) It is a new thing that people are experiencing this. There did not used to be anywhere near this number of people who had such poor relationships with themselves.

Demonstrably false.

So far, no one has refuted this thesis,

Until now.

so I'll just move ahead from that point.

Firstly, this should make us ask why this new thing is present in society, since it is affecting people negatively.

Its not a new thing, its existed for thousands of years (and plenty of non-western civilizations have accepted and embraced people like us). Only recently have we as a species been able to actually do anything about it, and only more recently than that has western civilization (which because of colonization, has exported its bigoted ideas to every corner of the globe, such that even societies that used to be accepting of trans people are now unaccepting) begun to reverse its previous unacceptance of trans people. This opening up has allowed more people to better explore, embrace, and express their gender identites.

Secondly - I mean, please understand that I'm not trying to be an ass here,

You're definitely doing a terrible job of it, and the fact that you realize you're being perceived as one makes me think that perhaps you are trying to be one.

I just genuinely don't think that "obesity acceptance" or "smoking acceptance" or "X problem acceptance" is healthy for society,

Nobody that I'm aware of is trying to promote "smoking acceptance". However, the thing with obesity acceptance is that the currently-narrowly accepted set of possible human bodies is too restrictive compared to the set of possible human bodies which are healthy, and that this overly restrictive set of expectations actually creates unhealthy outcomes in people (see: anorexia and bulimia, among other conditions), and specific to being fat, the human body explicitly evolved in order to efficiently process every bit of nutrition it consumed, and to store any excess for times where no nutrition can be found. As such, any meaningful and long-term weight loss attempts are effectively impossible without surgical intervention or torture, and not even proper diet and exercise can be relied upon. To say nothing of fat non-acceptance encouraging and incentivizing searches for new diets to try and achieve meaningful and long-term weight loss, many of which are unhealthy in their own right.

TL;DR: Fat acceptance is only a thing because the alternative causes far more harm than being overweight itself causes, and smoking acceptance doesn't exist at all.

I'm pretty sure it actually creates more people with X problem by permitting it.This shouldn't be seen as a lack of compassion for people who are already in that situation.

Except that's the general outcome anyways.

Why do you have a bad relationship with yourself? I just don't get it. Can you explain that to me?

Gender dysphoria is hard to explain to people who don't have it. But, the best way I can describe it (at least for me), is something like this:

To me, my body is just the skin that I'm in, a vehicle for my soul to move around on earth. I'm entirely certain I've had past lives as a woman, I could adapt to being one, but I've adapted to being what I am, instead, because I'm just not fussy about it. My body is meat-clothing, and the one I have works. I just prefer to spend my energy on the outside world, rather than trying to redefine myself. I'm not at war with who I am - I'm sure I was born in this body for a reason and it doesn't make me uncomfortable to conform to my sexual role.

Why not just see things that way, and suffer less? Why aren't you good enough the way you are?

The problem isn't "you're not looking at it right" or "you have bad self-esteem". To say otherwise is vastly misrepresenting it, and incredibly insulting to those of us who have to deal with it.

Genuinely curious to read the answer.

Well, now you have it.

It is indeed a symptom of the modern era where we have the luxury of considering mental health, when only a century ago life was a short and brutal thing for many that left little time for reflection. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that there has only been found one lasting resolution to gender dysphoria, that bring to transition. Every year, the psychological community comes more in consensus that other proposed solutions either do not work at all, or provide only temporary relief to the detriment of the long-term. I tried to see things that way—that’s how I got through childhood. But eventually, by my Christian theology, I had to come to see my body as part of me, not just a meat-puppet that my otherwise detached soul uses as a medium. And when I came to understand that my body was as much a part of me as my soul, problems arose because my mind is fundamentally incompatible with my body. The hormonal makeup does not suit my mind, nor does the recommended physical structure suit it. That said, I view my body as a microcosm for my mind, in a way. And part of the human condition is to change your environment to suit yourself. Living in a male body for me is akin to human scraping out a living in the arctic. Could I survive in a male body? Perhaps, if I grit my teeth and were dedicated solely to existing for the sake of existing, but it is impossible for me to thrive as it is. The conditions simply aren’t livable in the slightest. Transitioning isn’t easy in any sense of the word, but it does create a new environment. Even though it is initially highly damaging to the close circle if the family disagrees, I’d much rather be the person I know I ought to be than what anyone else says is natural. My natural state is whatever I feel most adept in, the state I thrive in. And the state I’m in right now is anything but.

All that said, I do understand gender dysphoria is extremely difficult for some people to make sense out of, and even the scientific community only broadly agrees on the existence of it, and general trademarks. We don’t know what causes this, but we know something that helps. And I’d rather do something that helps and live with the consequences than live my entire life the same detached machine I was when I was younger. I’d rather lose every single person in my family, and every last one of my friends than lose myself. I can find other friends, but I can’t find another me.

And before anyone brings up again that we don’t know what exactly causes gender dysphoria, it isn’t for lack of trying on our parts. But we don’t have too much in the way of resources, so most research is done as observation from the outside, which on some accounts can be beneficial to the scientific process. On the other hand, trans issues, such as the long-term effects of puberty blockers, useful distinguishing factors in childhood(if any), and, most importantly, perhaps, the deepest roots of gender dysphoria, are still tragically underresearched. I’ll be the first to acknowledge that we don’t know enough. And the case, however unlikely I may consider it, may well be that everything we know now is wrong, and that there is something very different at work. But whatever the case may be, we can’t learn more without trying, and trying sometimes may mean making mistakes. I’d rather take the chance of making a mistake and know I’ve made one than live my entire life suppressing something and never knowing what could’ve been.

What a refreshingly candid, honest, and personal reflection. NSGeneral doesn't have enough of this. Kudos.

I think this thread needs more of this kind of thing, to help people understand the feelings and issues that are at stake, and to understand that merely saying "just learn to be comfortable in the body you have" doesn't help.

Exactly.

I mean you've just been parroting MGTOW talking points about sexual value determining one's worth as a person. There's a degree of hurling rocks inside a greenhouse here.

Honestly, where's the fucking lie, though?

Frankly I think the more reasonable route would be to chip away at some of the unnecessary expectations we have of men and women. I’m speaking from the perspective of a southerner, mind you.

I’m trying to keep most of my personal views on gender as a concept out of it because my personal views are largely religious based. Much as I believe them, “cause God said so” doesn’t really pack the punch I’d like in a debate.

At least you're honest.

I suppose I gots to clarify I don't mean that's not a rad discussion and you all seem very intelligent on the matter, but that I don't think modern society can really use the input of these books, even more recent ones like the book of Mormon, to address a problem that's only really been brought to the mainstream and been heard in a fair way in the past what, 20-60 years?

Not an unfair question really, but only means somethin if you’re irreligius and/or view the past as “backwards.”

For us religious folk, these 2000 year old writings are veritable truths inspired by the Creator of the universe. So they’re applicability doesn’t have an expiration date. The struggle of the modern theologian is applying these ancient texts to modern concepts, and the cutting edge of that right now really is the issue of the (for lack of a better word((by all means someone provide one if there is one))) Queer.

Just say "queer people".

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate, I just thought for the sake of contrast I'd share this bit from a facebook post that has been making the rounds during the last month or so:

In the beginning, God created day and night. But have you ever seen a sunset!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Gorgeous. Full of a hundred shades of color you can't see in plain daylight or during the night.

In the beginning God created land and sea. But have you ever seen a beach?!?! Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Beautiful. A balanced oasis that's not quite like the ocean, nor quite like the land.

In the beginning God created birds of the air and fish of the sea. But have you ever seen a flying fish, or a duck or a puffin that swims and flies, spending lots of time in the water and on the land!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Full of life. A creative combination of characteristics that blows people's minds.

In the beginning God also created male and female, in God's own image, God created them. So in the same way that God created realities in between, outside of, and beyond night and day, land and sea, or fish and birds, so God also created people with genders beyond male and female. Trans and non-binary and agender and intersex, God created us. All different sorts of people for all different sorts of relationships. Created from love to love and be loved. In God's image we live.

God is still creating you. You are no less beautiful and wild than a sunset or a beach or a puffin. You are loved. You have a place here.

(The author is a nonbinary Lutheran pastor from Colorado).

God, I fucking love that post.

[Grenartia]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate, I just thought for the sake of contrast I'd share this bit from a facebook post that has been making the rounds during the last month or so:

In the beginning, God created day and night. But have you ever seen a sunset!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Gorgeous. Full of a hundred shades of color you can't see in plain daylight or during the night.

In the beginning God created land and sea. But have you ever seen a beach?!?! Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Beautiful. A balanced oasis that's not quite like the ocean, nor quite like the land.

In the beginning God created birds of the air and fish of the sea. But have you ever seen a flying fish, or a duck or a puffin that swims and flies, spending lots of time in the water and on the land!?!? Well trans and non-binary people are kind of like that. Full of life. A creative combination of characteristics that blows people's minds.

In the beginning God also created male and female, in God's own image, God created them. So in the same way that God created realities in between, outside of, and beyond night and day, land and sea, or fish and birds, so God also created people with genders beyond male and female. Trans and non-binary and agender and intersex, God created us. All different sorts of people for all different sorts of relationships. Created from love to love and be loved. In God's image we live.

God is still creating you. You are no less beautiful and wild than a sunset or a beach or a puffin. You are loved. You have a place here.

(The author is a nonbinary Lutheran pastor from Colorado).

Sigh with the exception of the last line it’s a bunch of bullshit. Pedestrian orology with no regard of established Christian concepts of sex/gender, and the moral components of each.

Of course the Catholic would disapprove of something said by a Protestant.

Not to shut down the adorable transphobia here, but could we maybe discuss being transgender rather than how you as a cis person feel about them transes?

You say that word like it’s supposed to mean something.

It does say something. Cis simply means you're not trans. And pointing out that you're a cis person taking up literal space in a trans space, detracting from us discussing our issues so that we have to explain Trans 101 to you and debate every single ethical implication with you for the 10,000th time, is a valid point to make.

inb4 you complain about "cisphobia" or something like that, allow me to point out, we're fine with cis people in this thread, and we're even fine with cis people asking questions, as long as they're not concern trolling. But we're sick and tired of having to explain the basics for the millionth time, for having to justify our own existence in our own thread, etc. In much the same that you are almost certainly sick and tired of having to debate atheists and people of other religions in the CDT.

This is possibly the vaguest post I've ever seen here. What the hell does "that word" refer to? There are 28 different things it could be.

You know exactly what I’m talking about. “Transphobia” you say that like it’s supposed to mean something.

Apparently, there was some matter of debate in what you were referring to, since I had a completely different understanding of what you meant.

Also, yes, transphobia means something. Why do you think it doesn't?

Better question: who gives a shit what either you or some random pastor think about a question that ultimately only God can answer?

Well, personally, I give a shit, because as someone who is trans, nonbinary and Christian, hearing someone describe my existence as part of God's creation is like a breath of fresh air.

Same, honestly.

[Grenartia]

Seeing that we're back to the never-ending 'theology and trans' debate

It's quite telling how so many people crawl out of the woodworks to recoil in searing pain at the reminder of their impending Judgment, and complain that I am "getting theological" when I directly address a Christian in Christian terms.

Now that you're getting all theological, I'll address you in those terms as well.

-

Mark 10:6 - 10:9

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Corinthians 6:9 - 6:10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Matthew 18:6

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

-

This is not something that I pulled off of Facebook.

Literally 50% of the verses you quoted were either mistranslated or taken out of context, and the rest don't even address anything in this thread.

Also, considering the facebook post was from an ordained minister, I'd say it carries a bit more weight than you're implying it does.

[Grenartia]

However, as a trans atheist, I never have to worry about such debates, but I support you and your choices

I know a lot of trans people that hold onto their faith while transition and even find religious communities to be accepting of them. I'm like you and more on the nontheistic side of things, so it isn't mine experience, but I think it is important to say that it is possible.

It certainly is! One of my best church experiences in the last few years? Walking with my whole congregation in our local pride parade. Coming May, I'm going in full femme mode.

God, I love going to my church. If only I didn't have to work on Sundays.

[Luminesa]

“He was asking for it,” isn’t an excuse. Considering that half the website has, “Put sex and gender are different in your sig if you passed biology!” in their sig, one could say technically said individuals would be making the assumption that people who didn’t know the difference failed high-school biology. Though at the same time that’s not a personal attack on anyone in particular. “Durr hurr you Yale grad!” is a personal attack on a single person and doesn’t add anything to the conversation, no matter how many excuses or one-word responses you make to say it does.

It’s small because if I call you a “girl”, and I am aware you are MTF trans, I’m referring to you by the gender you prefer, not by the biological sex by which you were born. If I say in the same breath, “Oh my half-sister had a baby girl yesterday, look at this cute picture!” I’m referring to the biological sex of the baby, who is too little to have any say on their gender when they’re two days old. If I say “they”, either I don’t know your sex, I don’t know your gender, or you’re androgynous and I’m referring to you as such. Context helps, and most people understand context when it is given. If they don’t, kindly explaining oneself helps. Getting angry and saying, “NO THAT’S MY SEX NOT MY GENDER,” really doesn’t. The world probably could use more kind individuals.

[Grenartia]

“He was asking for it,” isn’t an excuse.

If he's going to resort to that tactic with me, then I should be able to resort to it with him. Unless he has a special right to because you agree with him.

Considering that half the website has, “Put sex and gender are different in your sig if you passed biology!” in their sig, one could say technically said individuals would be making the assumption that people who didn’t know the difference failed high-school biology. Though at the same time that’s not a personal attack on anyone in particular. “Durr hurr you Yale grad!” is a personal attack on a single person and doesn’t add anything to the conversation, no matter how many excuses or one-word responses you make to say it does.

And him saying what he did to me isn't a personal attack on me? Or is it ok because you both reinforce each other's worldview?

It’s small because if I call you a “girl”, and I am aware you are MTF trans, I’m referring to you by the gender you prefer, not by the biological sex by which you were born. If I say in the same breath, “Oh my half-sister had a baby girl yesterday, look at this cute picture!” I’m referring to the biological sex of the baby, who is too little to have any say on their gender when they’re two days old.

Why does the sex of the baby need to be specified at all? Who the fuck other than the kid's doctor, needs to know whether the kid has their genitals on the inside or the outside?

If I say “they”, either I don’t know your sex, I don’t know your gender, or you’re androgynous and I’m referring to you as such. Context helps, and most people understand context when it is given. If they don’t, kindly explaining oneself helps. Getting angry and saying, “NO THAT’S MY SEX NOT MY GENDER,” really doesn’t.

Implying most of the time, we aren't explaining, and that we're acting in accordance with your strawman.

The world probably could use more kind individuals.

Then practice what you preach, be more kind, instead of maliciously reporting me at the drop of a hat.

[Greater Westralia]

Literally 50% of the verses you quoted were either mistranslated or taken out of context

Can you provide some sources please? As a Christian I think it's pretty important if something I thought was a given was interpreted incorrectly.

[Luminesa]

“He was asking for it,” isn’t an excuse.

If he's going to resort to that tactic with me, then I should be able to resort to it with him. Unless he has a special right to because you agree with him.

Considering that half the website has, “Put sex and gender are different in your sig if you passed biology!” in their sig, one could say technically said individuals would be making the assumption that people who didn’t know the difference failed high-school biology. Though at the same time that’s not a personal attack on anyone in particular. “Durr hurr you Yale grad!” is a personal attack on a single person and doesn’t add anything to the conversation, no matter how many excuses or one-word responses you make to say it does.

And him saying what he did to me isn't a personal attack on me? Or is it ok because you both reinforce each other's worldview?

It’s small because if I call you a “girl”, and I am aware you are MTF trans, I’m referring to you by the gender you prefer, not by the biological sex by which you were born. If I say in the same breath, “Oh my half-sister had a baby girl yesterday, look at this cute picture!” I’m referring to the biological sex of the baby, who is too little to have any say on their gender when they’re two days old.

Why does the sex of the baby need to be specified at all? Who the fuck other than the kid's doctor, needs to know whether the kid has their genitals on the inside or the outside?

If I say “they”, either I don’t know your sex, I don’t know your gender, or you’re androgynous and I’m referring to you as such. Context helps, and most people understand context when it is given. If they don’t, kindly explaining oneself helps. Getting angry and saying, “NO THAT’S MY SEX NOT MY GENDER,” really doesn’t.

Implying most of the time, we aren't explaining, and that we're acting in accordance with your strawman.

The world probably could use more kind individuals.

Then practice what you preach, be more kind, instead of maliciously reporting me at the drop of a hat.

The parents probably would want to know the sex of their baby, actually? And maybe their friends? You know, people like to know these things? They have big reveal-parties and baby showers and whatnot? I mean geez, make it sound like a war crime to share pics of your new baby girl on Facebook. If you’re annoyed by it, well...don’t use Facebook I guess? I don’t, but I think Facebook is a big-data-collecting scam.

I suppose it’s malicious if you feel every single action is an act of spite against you?

[Felt Karpit]

Considering that half the website has, “Put sex and gender are different in your sig if you passed biology!” in their sig, one could say technically said individuals would be making the assumption that people who didn’t know the difference failed high-school biology.

This is very interesting considering the sig I see the most is "⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧". And that does not imply people failing highschool bio.

I was going to write a complicated thing explaining why this doesn't imply that people failed highschool bio, but I also don't know if people actually have straight up "Put sex and gender are different in your sig if you passed biology!". If they have that weakens my arguement, but if they haven't then it would just be you mischaracterizing the sigs people have. So here's my short form of me explaining why at least logically, your statement is untrue based on the sig I actually see people having.

Though with the first one, it says nothing about people who don't know sex and gender are different. Mostly because the two premises are connected by an "and" so people copy and paste it simply if they both passed biology and know sex and gender are different. This means it is completely possible for someone to pass bio and not know sex and gender are different, because at least in this case, with the premises given, one does not imply the other. They are merely two statements existing in the same universe.

[Felt Karpit]

If he's going to resort to that tactic with me, then I should be able to resort to it with him. Unless he has a special right to because you agree with him.



And him saying what he did to me isn't a personal attack on me? Or is it ok because you both reinforce each other's worldview?



Why does the sex of the baby need to be specified at all? Who the fuck other than the kid's doctor, needs to know whether the kid has their genitals on the inside or the outside?



Implying most of the time, we aren't explaining, and that we're acting in accordance with your strawman.



Then practice what you preach, be more kind, instead of maliciously reporting me at the drop of a hat.

The parents probably would want to know the sex of their baby, actually? And maybe their friends? You know, people like to know these things? They have big reveal-parties and baby showers and whatnot? I mean geez, make it sound like a war crime to share pics of your new baby girl on Facebook. If you’re annoyed by it, well...don’t use Facebook I guess? I don’t, but I think Facebook is a big-data-collecting scam.

I suppose it’s malicious if you feel every single action is an act of spite against you?

My big issue with gender reveal parties is that they we're once just a little part of a baby shower and now they are super obnoixis and their own thing.

Also, it's pretty messed up, because deep down it's just a baby genital reveal party.

[Twilight Imperium]

Jesus fucking actual Christ, Grenartia. Please write posts and not goddamned abominations.