seriously, why not come right out and tell us your own personal struggle. You've hinted at it enough in many threads/posts Why do you see those of us who really want to help you as being the enemy? As cold and callous as you may think we are, we simply look at numbers. That 41% attempted/suicide rate should scare you. It should scare your parents. It makes absolutely no common sense at all to perpetuate a falsehood because that suicide rate is still there. It isn't about saying things which you want to hear. It's about telling you the cold reality and trying to remove you from that 41%. No lopping off of a penis is going to do that for you. Life is precious, be it the unborn child in the womb, or the person who thinks mutilating their body is a good idea. For those if us who believe in true liberty, and that nobody deserves any special accord or treatment, it is a conflict for us. If you have the money to get your wee wee lopped off then you should be able to do that but, it won't cure you of the mental disorder which leftists have labeled "transgender" or the ever popular "dysphoria" pretty words to soften the truth, it's a mental disorder. think of homosexuals, which make up the majority of the 3.6% who live a deviant sexual lifestyle. Are we as a society really helping them by allowing them to play pretend and that same-sex sex is normal behavior? IMO, we're just patronizing them to quiet them down vs dealing with the actual problem.
If Howard Stern's boss can come back from stage 4 lung cancer, we still have somewhat of a snowballs chance in hell.
One of the things you need to learn when you come on this forum posing as a sexologist and psychiatrist is the difference between an anatomical feature such as a penis and biological characteristics. You are so busy lecturing others you can't even get the basic terminology down let alone understand the concepts you claim to understand. There is a difference between a psychiatric illness, a psychological disorder, a behaviour disorder. There is a difference between a neurological illness and a psychiatric illness at times and other times there is not. Not all psychological or behavioural disorders are mental illnesses. Physical characteristics by themselves do not automatically define gender. There are people born with two sets of genitilia one female and one male. There are some born with more hormones or other chemicals that actually impacted on the structure of the coils in the brain and make the brain in fact the opposite gender in functioning then the body which could have the physical reproductive organs of the other sex, There is a lot we now know about biology, neurology, physiology, psychiatry and sexology we did not know even 5 years ago You clearly have no clue about any of it and come on this forum mixing up the different medical and social sciences and trying to bait another forum participant who responded to you by trying to suggest he is bias because he is what, transgender, transsexual, gay? Go on spit it out? What were you labelling him as? Its precisely why I earlier on openly did the same with you as you do to others and use the exact same inference back. You want to infer people are gay, transgendered, transsexual, mentally ill because they do not discuss sexual identity disorders the way you do understand one thing-it goes both ways-and in your case your personal preoccupation with sexual identity issues is evident. Your need to continually blur the line between sexual identity disorder and homo-sexuality and equate them as thesame reflects your subjective feelings and projections that clearly originate from your sexual psyche which sees yourself confused about having homosexual feelings. You place it in almost every post. read them back.
Empathy is not the same thing as being transgender. For the record though, I'm asexual. It should scare you into realizing that the issue isn't with transgenders. It's why they're scared of society. Tell them they're freaks and wrong to want to do something, then that number makes more sense. No it won't. Telling people to love themselves is going to make that rate go down. Getting people into therapy will bring it down. Telling people that they have to hate themselves and lie will not bring that number down. There is no special treatment. It's just treatment. Psychology isn't a left wing ideology. It's a science. No. It's not. Mental disorder has an actual meaning behind it. You can't go about using that phrase lightly. So let me get this straight. You want to "cure" them of a "deviant sexual lifestyle" and then wonder why they have higher suicide rates. Your rhetoric is what causes people to hate themselves and hurt themselves.
I wish to deny you nothing. What I will never do is patronize you and tell you that wrong is right. 41% is a rate that should scare the bejeezus out of you. - - - Updated - - - then I offer you a mirror. As much as I may try to convince others, I am not a dolphin, or a bird. No eloquent words or entries into a book will make me a bird or a dolphin.
It does. That's why I'm here telling you that telling people to hate themselves is the reason that number exists.
Why did you make reference to a "dolphin" or a "bird". Does the the word "gay" scare you that much you need to replace it with"bird" and dolphin"?
EXACTLY and like our family member who took their own life, no surgery can fix that. lopping off a penis is not going to cure the mental issue You do not try and normalize mental disorders. Like I've said before, passing a law mandating that those with the mental disorder thinking they are a different sex can use any bathroom, does not help those people. The only thing it does is give a public perception of how "compassionate" the lawmakers are, when in fact, it's the worse thing they could be doing.
You do realise that the person you are debating with has absolutely no idea what he is talking about don't you and will regularly twist things to suit his own twisted ideology. Most people just leave him to wallow in ignorance.
Hence why your ignorance on the subject is blinding you. It's not lopping off a penis, it's SRS. It comes after a long time of hormones and therapy. That's why they don't do it right off the bat, and only if the person is okay with it. Actually, yes people try to normalize mental disorders. Instead of making it something to shun and be ashamed of, have them come forward and have them treated. Laws that normalize this make it so they can become comfortable with their bodies. Hating their bodies is the problem. Teaching them that it's okay and that there are options is the best approach. - - - Updated - - - Yeah I know. But if I choice to ignore people instead of verbally beat them down, I wouldn't be that good of a debater.
Don't get me wrong I never ignore ignorant people to do so would be paramount to accepting their ignorance as fact .. I just wasn't sure if you knew his standard modus operandi
First of all no one on this forum in discussions with you debating you is suggesting one "normalizes" a mental disorder. That is your projection. It is a nonsensical statement. One can not "normalize". That is your mistaken belief as to what medical or psychological treatments do. In therapy of treatment no one is "normalized". In your world and your thought beliefs, you belief there is "normal" and "abnormal" and what you define as "abnormal" is in fact abnormal. In the real world the methodology for determining whether someone has a psychological or psychiatric disorder or behavioural issue is far more complex. Every human has some kind or series of behavioural or psychological issues. We all adapt and maladapt to certain situations and issues. A psychological issue only becomes one that may need some assistance in coping with or managing if the person with it feels it is significant enough to require assistance dealing with. In regards to mental illness no one uses the word "mental" anymore.The proper term for a mental illness would be a psychiatric illness or disorder. The difference between it and a psychological issue, is that it can be defined using the DSM V diagnostic manual used only by psychiatrists and can not be understand let alone used by you. To a layman anyone would qualify for any illness under the DSM V. In reality to come up with a diagnosis under that manual a psychiatrist should take quite a lot of time ruling out certain illnesses with similar or parallel or inter-related symptoms. A proper psychiatric diagnosis might take days, weeks, months, years and doctors misdiagnose all the time as they are human and make mistakes. A person with a brain tumour can manifest psychiatric symptoms similar to schizophrenia such as hearing voices or smelling things or seeing things. They can also become deeply enveloped in delusional thinking, i.e., imagining they are Jesus, etc. Some symptoms can be brought on by early dementia, brain injuries such as concussions or the use of drugs, alcohol, exposure to radiation, toxic chemicals. In regards to someone with a gender identity disorder, that is their private issue. It is considered a psychiatric issue and has a diagnostic criteria in the DSV diagnostic manual, but psychiatrists don't "normalize' people with this disorder. A person can have more than one psychiatric issue. Someone who commits suicide may very well have more than one disorder. Chances are to kill themselves they also have some other disorder such as depression. The more you write the more it becomes clear you are angry at doctors thinking if they had not cut off this person's penis in your family and no one in your mind tried to "normalize" him and instead using your reason called him a deviant and mentally ill, he would have what? Not killed himself? What? What is your point? Do you have one other than to be angry at someone for killing themselves? Well? How would calling this person a deviant, or mentally ill and immoral done anything? Whoever this person is you claim to have killed themselves, if I take that story verbatim, it does not rationalize or justify your positions expressing anger and moral judgement. You in fact are showing what is called maladaption, an inability to accept what happened and instead of moving on, obsessing over it and wanting to use that alleged suicide to justify your anger, and your negative thoughts and perceptions about not just trans-gendered people but gay people. You clearly have unresolved issues as to this alleged suicide that you feel justified in externalizing and blaming gays and trans-gendered people for and that is irrational, illogical and if you want to point fingers, in fact, deviant behaviour. Healthy people don't blame others for their own unresolved feelings. Each day unfortunately people commit suicide for a wide range of reasons. Blaming others for that and seeing in others struggling your unresolved anger towards what you see as a failure to be tough on someone who died before they died, is not going to bring that person back. No psychiatrists do not "normalize" people or what you really mean to say probably is "molly coddle' people who you may believe are self indulgent, Its more complex then that. There is much you assume but do not understand about the person who killed themselves if in fact they did. For you to remain this angry this long and obsess over others who you think remind you of it means what exactly? That you spend the rest of your life morally judging transsexuals and gays? Really? Move on. Either go talk to someone about why you are still angry and learn to let go of your anger or cling to it but the reality is gay people and trans gendered people are not deviant because you say so-they have just as much a legal right as you to exist and your moral impressions of their life choices is absurd. You have a short enough life as it is-concentrate on your own life choices and stop obsessing over the life choices of others.
How sweet, looking out for your fellow members. Not sure how this stays, though.... since the person you are obsessed with is not the topic.
Of course, I actually care about other people, perhaps that is something you should learn about. Ah yes the truth does often hurt, but never mind people like you are thick skinned enough to not notice the truth.
lots of words from you, no substance Perhaps you need to understand what it means to normalize something example- homosexuals live a chosen deviant sexual lifestyle. Playing along with "homosexual marriage" is an attempt to equate homosexual-sex with a normal, healthy, heterosexual marriage When a person claims to be a different sex than their equipment, normalizing them is creating "equal rights " bills and allowing them to shower with the opposite sex. In both cases, the problem of mental disorder is never addressed instead, the can is kicked down the road by trying to normalize them when they are anything but normal. They need psychological help, not to be patronized.
In regards to 1, perhaps what you need to understand is that there is no term in psychiatry or psychology referring to a process or methodology referred to as "normalizing". In fact the example you gave was not an example-it was a restatement of your subjective opinion that you feel that gay people are deviants. So you did not provide an example because you can't. there is no such a concept. What you have done though is to present your subjective opinion as a process which is illogical. You then went on to make another illogical statement when you stated; " homosexual marriage" is an attempt to equate homosexual-sex with a normal, healthy, heterosexual marriage." A homosexual marriage is simply a legal relationship between two members of the same sex who are consenting adults. It does not attempt to equate a sex act to a marriage. That is nonsensical. What you probably in fact meant to say was a homosexual marriage in your opinion is an attempt to suggest it is equal to a heterosexual marriage because it legalizes both types of marriages and you feel only one type of marriage is normal, i.e., the heterosexual one,because you assume homosexual sex between consenting adults in marriage is deviant but not sex between consenting heterosexuals in a marriage. Its interesting because using your analogy if a man decides to have anal sex with his wife in a heterosexual marriage or a woman chooses to have anal sex with her husband by strapping on a dildot, using your reasoning because they are in a heterosexual marriage its "normal". That is illogical. Sex acts between consenting adults take many forms whether they are straight or gay and some are the same and others different. The sex act itself is not the determinant as to whether its illegal, its the capacity and consent of the parties according to the law. The law does not presume to define what sex acts are acceptable between two consenting adults, you do. In your defective argument you assume heterosexual partners engage in "normall" sex but gays do not what ever that means in your mind. One must presume then from your arguement you have a list of what you consider deviant and non deviant sex acts between consenting adults who are heterosexual as well, otherwise your ridiculous analogy falls apart. So what is it. You now claim to define what is and is not an acceptable act of sex? Do you have a manual of Sec's acceptable sex acts? Is oral sex verbotten? Is cunnilingus and anal sex verbotten? Do tell. You seem quite preoccupied about what consenting adults do in their bed-rooms, why? Why the preoccupation and need to tell people what is normal and deviant sex? What do you think possesses you to keep trying to do that? Why would you think it rational to try control what sex consenting adults engage in. Is it their acts you try control or your own feelings? In regards to 2, that comment is bizarre. Now you use the word "equipment" for genitilia. Why? Does that word frighten you. Does the word penis make you nervous because you are presumably talking about a penis...using your reasoning if a person is born with both sets of genitilia either your theory explodes in your face or must mean a person with both sets can do whatever they want with whoever in a shower. More to the point where did you leap to the conclusion that a person seeking to change their gender wants to take a shower with the opposite sex? That makes zero sense. If a man wants to change himself to a woman, using your reasoning he's still a man therefore he would want to have sex with the same gender, i.e., another man. You seem at this point lost in your own analogies if one would call them that. When a person seeks gender reassignment, it actually hard as it is for you to believe, not based on who they want to have sex with but who they believe they are. The sexual object of their affection could be either gender or both hard as that is for you to fathom. You again mistake sexual practice preference with gender identity and that fundamental misunderstanding exposes the defects in all your comments and renders them all absurd. Your comment in 3, that a gender identity disorder is not addressed by reassigning someone's gender is again nonsensical. The very reason to reassign the gender is in fact to directly address the gender identity disorder. You just don't agree with that choice. You feel the only way to treat someone who has a gender identity disorder is to tell them they are mentally ill and tell them they must accept the sex they are born within and presumably treatment would require they accept how they were born and repress their feelings, thoughts and force themselves to be something they are not. That is an interesting assumption. Is that a choice in fact you made so you expect others to follow it? Where did you get the idea from people must be but one thing and you decide what that one thing is and you decide that by saying if someone has a penis, they must be a heterosexual? Sounds like you now confuse gender identity disorder and its treatments, homosexuality, heterosexuality, place them all in one lump category that you define by one's genitals and more importantly a list of sexual acts you define as acceptable although you have not provided that list yet. Your coment "they need psychological help not to be patronized" is interestling a patronizing comment. You presume "they" whoever that is, presumably gays and transgendered people, are in need of psychological help simply because they are gay or transgendered. That in itself is in fact a patronizing assumption. Secondly to date in all your comments you have never suggested what kind of psychological help you need. I would argue one can only infer from the words you have presented that your idea of treatment is to call transgendered people and gays mentally ill, immoral and deviant. You have never suggested anything but that kind of name calling. I mean I suppose one could read into such comments, your further treatment ideas would consist of showing gay men and men who feel they are women pictures of naked women and repeating after you, " I am tingly", "I am tingly", but I am not sure that will be of much help. I would suggest you advance a very maladaptive concept of sexuality whichsuggests you treat sexuality as unatural and something one must learn to do because of a tl "law of normalization" you created that you feel all must follow. Uh thanks I will pass. In fact I can only assume from your continuing references you continue to project on others your own sexual beliefs that sex is unatural, forced and something demanded of others and not based on personal desires. I disagree. I believe sexual preference and desires is for the individual decide and they are not my business until such time as they engage in the molestation of children, violence, or non consensual sex.
and there you go again trying to impose your partial morality upon a certain segment. You called it child molestation. Why, because you think the child cannot grant consent due to being a minor? I then must again toss back the unborn babies who are killed because they are not given a choice nor grant consent. So, if a woman is allowed to grant consent to have the unborn baby killed, then a parent must be allowed to grant consent for their children to have sex. It would be consistent with the leftist beliefs you hold. That is why the homosexuals who rented their adopted young boy for sex with other homosexuals should not have been tried and convicted. Morality is not something that you can do in half measures. Here's a tip; less is more. Writing long-winded posts does not mean that you are well heeled in the topic at hand. It simply means that you wrote a lot of words. If you can't get your point across in a few sentences then you obviously do not grasp the topic.
In regards to 1a, I have never argued society does not have the right to impose moral standards in its criminal laws. What I have argued is that in certain cases such as with under-age children, sexual violence, child pornography and sexual exploitation society does have a moral responsibility to step in and regulate. What I have also stated however, is that I do not believe the state should get involved in regards to the sexual behaviour between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own home and I disagree with your moral assumptions that being gay or transgendered is immoral, evil, deviant. You also went on to make this bizarre assumption that the issue of child molestation and the capacity fo a child to have sex and abortion are related to the same argument you claim to present. You made this bizarre illogical statement that said; "if a woman is allowed to grant consent to have the unborn baby killed, then a parent must be allowed to grant consent for their children to have sex." First off the person carrying an embryo after being impregnated if we use the terminology correctly could be an adult of legal age or a minor. The laws concerning making medical issues including abortion for children under legal age are not the same as with adults. Secondly, you have made the assumption an embryo is a child. I appreciate for people like you the concept of an embryo and the concept of a child are one and the same. I doubt anyone will be able to explain to you the difference and I certainly would not bother but how you equate a parent giving their minor child the right to have sex with a woman deciding how she wants to deal with her body is bizarre. In one instance we have presumably an adult with full capacity dealing with her own body, and in the other we have a minor being told by her parents she should have sex with an adult? How bizarre. Did you even give thought to what you wrote? It is my position that a minor who is pregnant should be like an adult who is pregnant being given in private the range of full options from keeping the embryo to full term and remaining its parent, to giving birth to it and giving it up for adoption to aborting it. Those options in my opinion are a private one between the carrier of the embryo and her doctor and her loved ones and it is not your business, the state's business or my business. No unlike you, I do not believe a child of 12 who is raped by her father is obliged to go full term with that embryo because you say so. For that matter I do not claim to tell any women raped and pregnant they must go full term. For that matter I do not presume to make decisions for mothers and their loved ones when faced with an embryo where if it goes to full term may be faced with severe deformities, pain, etc. I am no preacher. I don't barge into the sanctity of a doctor patient relationship or the relationship between husband and wife, or two intimate partners or a family and claim to tell them what to do. I do not believe that is the role of the state. You clearly feel you belong in the life decisions of others and have the right to impose on them your personal moral beliefs. I do not. I would like any woman to know minor or adult, if they are pregnant, what their full range of options are, but for me, it is their body and not mine, and ultimately they must decide and that becomes a matter between them, there God if they have one and their doctor, not you, me or anyone else. I also believe that the laws we have to prevent child molestation are not in any way, shapre or form, related to the issue of abortion. In response 2, you said morality can't be implemented in half measures...says who you? You think morality can be expressed in all or nothing terms. Then you expect others to make that same assumption. People like me believe morality is not black and white and it changes and flexes depending on each fact situation. You believe a law is rigid, does not flex, and there is only one way to impose it, I do not. I come from a long line of reformists who were trained when we read a holy book or Talmud, or law, that there can be many meanings and the application of that law depends on each fact situation and engaging in compassion, common sense and tolerance not just rigid, inflexible, unforgiving, absolute black and white pronouncements as you believe morality is to be exercised. Thanks but you stick to your fundemantalist approach, I choose to live a life that rejects precisely the fundamentalism you advocate precisely because of the reasons I state. Your reference to homosexuals renting a boy to other homosexuals advances this incorrect notion that a homosexual and pedophile are one and the same. An adult that rents out a child to any other adult is a criminal and a pedophile and belongs in jail. Your decision to call such people homosexuals is interesting. Now your agenda is to equate not only abortion to some twisted believe if we allow abortions we must allow child sex, but that pedophiles and homosexuals are the same. The more you respond the more bizarre your responses become. You clearly have no idea what the psychiatric profile of a pedophile or ****ophile is. Now finally you told me to write less. Well no doubt I know you have a short attention span and lose me after the first sentence but all I have done is respond directly to your misrepresentations, illogical statements and bizarre analogies. Life can not be reduced to a black and white sentence for you. Your attempt not to control what I say by trying to limit it won;t work, just like your attempt to smeer all gays and transgendered people as deviants or pedophiles. Now you be very careful who you label as well. This ridiculous misuse of "leftist" to describe my beliefs is par for you. Guess what you could not be more dead wrong if you tried. The notion of the state imposing morality is a liberal or leftist one. It is in fact a conservative position, or even a libertarian position I advance when it comes to imposing laws and sexual morality. In fact I make the classic arguments of Edmund Burke on these matters. I doubt you know who he is let alone Locke, Bentham, Volitaire and Robspierre but in fact it is their views thrown about in such debates. You have no clue what my political ideology is. My views are actually those of the Canadian and American Psychiatric Associations and I do have a feminist bias as I believe laws can impact on women in an unintended negative and unfair manner in certain cases because of a gender bias by the people drafting the laws. That does not make me anything other than someone smack in the middle of the road neither left or right but taught to see both sides of an argument and to see many variations and possibilities and exceptions when applying laws. Its how I was trained. I chose to study and get post graduate higher training in law and psychology. It doesn't make me better than you, smarter than you, but it explains why I do not take sides and believe knowledge should be used to help us heal not divide ourselves. The more I have learned the less I realize I know and that does not frighten me. When I look at someone, I am humbled by their life struggles when they stuggle to be honest with who they are and forgive themselves. That is my bias and its why I defend any gay or transgendered person or anyone who says to me, this is what I am. I accept people as what they are not what I want them to be. With some people it means I look them straight in the face and tell them they are a sociopath and belong in shackles and with others, they are free and need to learn for forgive themselves and accept who they are. I take each person as an individual. I do not claim to be perfect so I sure as hell don't judge others. I trust it makes my positions crystal clear why when you call gays deviants I will challenge you. The same stereotypes you use against gays were used to gas my people to death. I identify with gays as a collective of people who were born a certain way and in that sense one might say are chosen to be that way and they have nothing to apologize for. I defend gays the same way they have defended me for being Jewish in the face of ignorance and the same way I would defend a Christian's right to believe what they do. If you want to believe what you do, I will defend your right to your beliefs-go over the line and call gays or anyone else criminals or pedophiles, I will challenge you the same way I would a Jew or Muslim or anyone else. It would also interest you to know there are gay people who talk of transgendered people the way you do of gay people. The thing we all have in common is our ignorance. All I can do is admit mine.
this (original) piece of crap should just do everyone (including himself) a favor and suicide. He obviously will never have a life, so why bother to pretend that he does?
