Scientifically speaking.. there is no such thing as "transgender" , the layman's term previously used was "crossdresser"
I should think the concept of 'gender' requires self awareness, a trait pretty much the domain of humans. Animals live by function, mostly. Humans live by function and beyond, having a lot to do with the fanciful musings of the ego. Gender, for example. And ego is psychological. My point, as always, that gender is a phenomenon of the psychological, not biological, though influenced by it.
Except that your are not treating transgenderism. A person remains transgender no matter what happens to them. What is treated is the Gender Dysphoria. That can be treated and/or resolved. And not all transgenders need medication/drugs/hormones and/or surgery in order to alleviate the GD. Treatment can range from simply presenting all the way up to SRS.
The BOTTOM line is that trans is CONFIRMED to exist with DNA evidence! FACTS matter, your OPINION doesn't!
Yet more appalling ignorance of science demonstrated in the content above! Sad! https://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/10-animals-with-self-awareness.html
So biologically the only difference between men and women is the genitals? Since men and women get different amounts of testosterone and estrogen, is there some fundamental difference in the endocrine system? Hiw does the body know to produce and release testosterone over estrogen in men?
I think the word tyranny is thrown around too much these days. It’s a bit of a piss take on people who actually have lived in tyrannies
While it has indeed been confirmed that there is no one gene that is the source of homosexuality, that would not rule out the cause being hormonal in nature, which is what the post you responded to said. So bring up the gene could be viewed as strawman at worse. Regardless, the source could well be a gene activating or not activating when it was supposed to that causes the difference. There could also be other issues that simply aren't seen because they are not tested for. So no a lack of a "homosexual gene" does not prove that it is mental and not physical. I will agree with you here as there are those transgenders who would rather change their minds to match their body rather than the body to match the mind. But for now all with have is the physical transitioning to alleviate GD. Any therapies to date to alter the mind to match the body has done more damage than it has fixed. So at this point, unless you are advocating that they continue to suffer, then transitioning is all they have. This is actually a condition and it is related to GD. The question that is considered before a doctor will consider whether to accede to the request, is whether more harm is done by complying or by not complying. And no, neither you or I are qualified to make that determination. Only if you found an unethical doctor. An ethical one will first have you in counseling to determine why you want it gone and if it will do you more harm than good, or more good than harm. And that is the key. The fact that it might be more harmful to you, does not mean it won't do more good for another.
You do realize that that same argument can be used for why people are against such changes, right? Look at history and you will see how the current anti-LBGT movement is just like any other denying of changes in world view that have happened. Of course we can't prevent diseases by injecting weak versions of them into people. There is no way that the earth is moving around the sun. If man were meant to fly he'd have been born with wings.
So this is true even is the person with a penis in question has an XX chromosome pair? Even if the person with a vagins has an XY chromosome pair? And before you say that we are not talking about anomalies, yes we are very much talking about anomalies. Being transgender is an anomaly. Something I doubt you have done. Are you even aware of the function of the SRY gene, and how it can end up missing from a Y chromosome or attached to an X chromosome?
Ironically enough, such a condition is far more rare than any other intersex condition. But there are many intersex conditions where the external genitalia does not match the chromosome pair, or there are more than the standard two chromosomes.
As much as I am in agreement with your position, you are wrong. He has been providing quotes from your own sources and challenging you on those words, and you have been avoiding them, as best I can tell. They cannot be his opinions if he is quoting others from your sources.
When you go and take hormones and have a surgeon mutilate your genitals that is not a naturally occurring anomaly it's a mental illness.
We were able to observe that long before we determined there was no one "homosexual gene". We have not identified any consistent factors for transgenders. We have seen groupings, which probably indicates multiple vectors by which a person might be born transgender.
But it’s a start. It shows that sexuality in humans is flexible. It’s not like when you hear Ben Shapiro claim it’s like becoming a different species. If a person can grow both sets of genitals then what other situations can occur when a person’s sex is forming in the womb?
Kind of wondering how you managed to stay in the character limit. I will be doing a lot of deleting to avoid that myself. It's a valid enough question. Especially given the people who are homosexual or transgender, but lie to themselves that they are straight or cisgender. It is perfectly logical that the self deception can go both ways. I find this to be one of those statements that shows a very limited view, because it dismisses FtM transgenders as existing. Either that or makes an implied claim (probably unintentional) that FtM are not lying to themselves, just MtF. Acknowledging that this argument can be used in the opposite direction, being honest about the topic doesn't mean that you are right. At best it simply mean that you truly believe what you do. I even supported you on that aspect. Not agreeing with you, but noting that you are actually quoting from actual source material This is a debate even among the professionals. However, there is also a lot of studies in various physical medical fields where are indicating a basis for transgenderism. Granted, but we can also say the same thing about emotions. Highly subjective and they can only be actually be declared by the individual experiencing them. We can guess what another is feeling by what we see, but that is both still subjective as to what cues we are noticing, and our knowledge of the person. Not to mention those who have learned to school their expressions to convey other than what they are actually feeling. And yet emotions are something that are actually there, regardless of how subjective they are. So there is no reason to assume that gender is not the same way. I do not see where the two views are incompatible such that they are two different views. I first see a conceptual error in a seeming assumption that there have to be the same number of genders as there are intersex conditions, on a one to one basis. There could be more or there could be fewer. Half the problem would come in the determination of what actually is the gender of man and woman as opposed to the sex of male and female. Follow up from that that two people could be claiming the same thing as far as their genders go, but are applying different labels, making a false doubling of the number of genders. We also have to determine what is the actual deciding factor for sex. Usually in these threads you will have one group of anti-trans saying genitals, and another group of anti-trans saying DNA/Chromosomes. Is the sex only male or female when both genitals AND Chromosomes align? If you start with male/female as your sex categories, then intersex becomes the new category. Even if you are not treating intersex as the "new category", there can still be new intersex conditions that arise. Likewise with gender, man and woman are your poles, and anything in between is your "new category". In the end it is a question of how far you want to go down in subdividing to be a category instead of a subcategory or lower. Anyone who tries to claim that transgender/non-binary or homo/bi-sexual are anything other than anomalies is an idiot. But then so is being left handed or being albino. That doesn't mean that those conditions do not exist. And remember that we used to think that being left handed was a negative and didn't exist per se', and tried to force left handed people to be right handed. I don't see the trying to force LBGT to be cis/hetero as any different. Now take that the other way. What if there were people who thought that you looked feminine enough that you had to be a woman, and not that man that your sex and gender make you? Will you accept that a portion of society will not see you as a man, not agree to the male pronoun for you? You do know that we have had cis women who have been mistaken as men, right? To the point where they have been confronted in restrooms and even ejected because someone felt they looked too masculine.
Incorrect. Transsexual was the previous term. Crossdressers and transsexuals/transgenders have always been separate types of people. A cross dressing man doesn't claim to be other than a man. Unless you are talking about a person who doesn't bother to learn the difference, similar to how people will call panthers other than jaguar or leopard. For the record, a "panther" is either. A "panther" is a jaguar or leopard that is melanistic, i.e. black all over. But a jaguar and a leopard are still separate creatures.
Um, no. There is no one genetic/DNA profile out there for transgenders, any more than there is one for any sexuality out there.
Either a link or the post number where you already linked to that. In fact there are theories that epigenetics play more of a role in being transgender than genetics. And while there are about 30 gene variants that have been identified as possibilities, there has not been confirmation. Nor will there be I will bet. I really doubt that there is any one cause. Some could be due to genes that failed to activate when they should or activated when they shouldn't have causing the body to develop one way and the gender another. A person could be a chimera from a male/female fraternal twin pair, and thus the brain is literally one sex and the genitals the other.
You avoided my question. I referred to people who are, for one example, born with a vagina but have an XY chromosome pair. Is that a man or a woman? If a man, then why would you have an issue with SRS for him? If a woman, then are you claiming that chromosomes are not what makes one a man or woman?
First of all, sexuality usually refers to one's sexual preferences. So you start with seeming to be confused about what you are talking about. Secondly, I think you are misunderstanding what a hermaphrodite is. I am unaware of any documented person who was born with both a functional penis and a functional vagina. Some enlarged clitorises have been mistaken for a penis (especially since the tissue is the same and just forms differently between male and female. Also, when I say functional, I am not necessarily talking sperm or egg generation, which are developed from the gonads. I am strictly looking at the external genitalia. Here is a good article on true hermaphrodite. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3418019/
It's very simple if you have your penis your Man if you have a vagina you're a woman. Let me ask you a question... How many of these so-called transgenders have this chromosome anomaly you speak of? Do you think the majority of transgenders have it or is it just a tiny little fraction?
