Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

[Auraninja]

When you type in "transgender(ism) is a mental illness" in a Google search, you will get half of the results as typing "Autism is a mental illness".
Both of these are disorders likely caused by the lack of people being "neurotypical".

Disorders are not illnesses necessarily.

 

[Aromatic Mist]

Setting up a whole new toilet defeats the point of being trans though. The point is your brain is in the wrong body, and you want to live as the sex that your brain is.

When you type in "transgender(ism) is a mental illness" in a Google search, you will get half of the results as typing "Autism is a mental illness".
Both of these are disorders likely caused by the lack of people being "neurotypical".

Disorders are not illnesses necessarily.

^this

Also even if transgenderism was a mental illness it's a curable one via reassignment surgery, etc.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

When you type in "transgender(ism) is a mental illness" in a Google search, you will get half of the results as typing "Autism is a mental illness".
Both of these are disorders likely caused by the lack of people being "neurotypical".

Disorders are not illnesses necessarily.

Autism is a mental illness; I know from personal experience. I have autism myself. Just because it isn't "neurotypical" or a "disorder" doesn't mean it is not inherently an illness. Besides, by definition, mental illnesses do include mental disorders, and GID/Gender Dysphoria is indeed a disorder.

Setting up a whole new toilet defeats the point of being trans though. The point is your brain is in the wrong body, and you want to live as the sex that your brain is.

^this

Also even if transgenderism was a mental illness it's a curable one via reassignment surgery, etc.

I don't see why it would destroy the point of GID. If anything, you're just projecting your opinions on the disorder.

Edit:Also, mental illnesses aren't cured; they are only treated. If you get gender reassignment surgery, it is only something to treat it and doesn't cure it. No matter what, you are still biologically male and thus are not cured.

 

[Aromatic Mist]

I don't see why it would destroy the point of GID. If anything, you're just projecting your opinions on the disorder.

I'm just saying what a friend of mine who experiences bodily dysphoria says, and I'm very inclined to believe him at the moment as its a view point I've seen shared by a large amount of those in the trans community. Of course it's not all people in the community, it'd be impossible to account for everyone with GID's opinion, I was just putting forward the general consensus.

Also idk but assuming that most trans people would be okay with a compromise sounds like you're projecting your opinions on it.

 

[Auraninja]

Autism is a mental illness; I know from personal experience. I have autism myself. Just because it isn't "neurotypical" or a "disorder" doesn't mean it is not inherently an illness. Besides, by definition, mental illnesses do include mental disorders, and GID/Gender Dysphoria is indeed a disorder.

The historical reasons for regarding personality disorders as fundamentally different from mental illnesses are being undermined by both clinical and genetic evidence. Effective treatments for personality disorders would probably have a decisive influence on psychiatrists' attitudes.

This not only says that mental disorders are not mental illnesses, but separate phenomenon completely.

A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.

I guess a slight correction on my behalf, but accordingly, transgenderism is not even a mental disorder.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

I'm just saying what a friend of mine who experiences bodily dysphoria says, and I'm very inclined to believe him at the moment as its a view point I've seen shared by a large amount of those in the trans community. Of course it's not all people in the community, it'd be impossible to account for everyone with GID's opinion, I was just putting forward the general consensus.

Also idk but assuming that most trans people would be okay with a compromise sounds like you're projecting your opinions on it.

I'm not projecting it, I'm offering a compromise that could appease both sides. Whether or not the transgender community accepts it is their issue. Just because a considerable chunk disagree (that you do disingenuously called a general consensus) with the notion of a gender-neutral toilet room should not over-turn a majority that is for it, as that is not any form of democracy. A compromise is better anyways as people who are scared for their safety or their children's safety would be reassured that there aren't any problems in their point of view.

This not only says that mental disorders are not mental illnesses, but separate phenomenon completely.


I guess a slight correction on my behalf, but accordingly, transgenderism is not even a mental disorder.

A mental illness is a condition that impacts a person's thinking, feeling or mood and may affect his or her ability to relate to others and function on a daily basis. Each person will have different experiences, even people with the same diagnosis.

Both Autism and Gender Dysphoria does this. Source.

Mental illness refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.

Again, by definition, my problem and the problems that Transgendered folk deal with are because they are both a disorder, and this also would say that GID is a disorder because it affects the mood, thinking and behavior of that person. Source.

The fact that you're trying to normalize both disorders is quite disgusting; people like you lead to insignificant care for both groups because it is considered "normal". Being a social outcast for a few years and on the verge of criminal activity due to being an outcast is not normal. Someone with GID will have distress until they are treated, normally by hormones or gender reassignment surgery.

 

[Aromatic Mist]

I'm not projecting it, I'm offering a compromise that could appease both sides. Whether or not the transgender community accepts it is their issue.

You do realise that's contradictory, right?

Just because a considerable chunk disagree (that you do disingenuously called a general consensus) with the notion of a gender-neutral toilet room should not over-turn a majority that is for it, as that is not any form of democracy.

The majority of trans people I've heard from want to use the bathroom that matches their sex. A majority tends to tie into a general consensus. Tbh, I think gender neutral bathrooms is a good idea, especially for gender-fluid/genderqueer/etc people. But it's not good enough for the people who put blood sweat and tears into transitioning and being told 'lol nope you're not a real man/women, use another bathroom.

A compromise is better anyways as people who are scared for their safety or their children's safety would be reassured that there aren't any problems in their point of view.

Those people are scared because of a minority causing a majority of people problems. You can't account for every trans persons actions, and there's never going to be a perfect solution.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

You do realise that's contradictory, right?



The majority of trans people I've heard from want to use the bathroom that matches their sex. A majority tends to tie into a general consensus. Tbh, I think gender neutral bathrooms is a good idea, especially for gender-fluid/genderqueer/etc people. But it's not good enough for the people who put blood sweat and tears into transitioning and being told 'lol nope you're not a real man/women, use another bathroom.



Those people are scared because of a minority causing a majority of people problems. You can't account for every trans persons actions, and there's never going to be a perfect solution.

It's not a contradiction, if it was I would say that it will appease both sides. I said it could.

The majority you've heard from. Does that mean that all of them are against the notion of a gender-neutral bathroom? That's like me saying I that a majority of my Saudi friends support X terrorist group. Does that make all Saudies support X terrorist group, or the majority for that matter? Not to mention that in states who are socially backwards, allowing them in other bathrooms could easily enable harassment.

Also, you're missing the point. I'm not saying the transgendered folk would be the culprits, I'm saying that more people will be enticed to sexually assault or harass people because they can now claim they are X gender to get into the opposite genders' bathroom.

And no, these people are scared of people abusing a law to claim they are Transgendered to do whatever; not that the people in that group would be the culprits

 

[Auraninja]

I'm not projecting it, I'm offering a compromise that could appease both sides. Whether or not the transgender community accepts it is their issue. Just because a considerable chunk disagree (that you do disingenuously called a general consensus) with the notion of a gender-neutral toilet room should not over-turn a majority that is for it, as that is not any form of democracy. A compromise is better anyways as people who are scared for their safety or their children's safety would be reassured that there aren't any problems in their point of view.

Which is a form of discrimination. Phobia towards particular groups can be defined as fear or hatred. The lack of understanding leads to these problems. Dismissing this as a form of democracy undermines the efforts of previous minorities of achieving equality.

Both Autism and Gender Dysphoria does this. Source.


Again, by definition, my problem and the problems that Transgendered folk deal with are because they are both a disorder, and this also would say that GID is a disorder because it affects the mood, thinking and behavior of that person. Source.

I gave out the definition by a scientific organization, and you are countering it with an advocacy group. No offense, but the former wins out.

The fact that you're trying to normalize both disorders is quite disgusting; people like you lead to insignificant care for both groups because it is considered "normal". Being a social outcast for a few years and on the verge of criminal activity due to being an outcast is not normal. Someone with GID will have distress until they are treated, normally by hormones or gender reassignment surgery.

You got a better source here, but the context you used is vaguely interpreted.

You are using quite a sharp accusation against me, one that is unfounded. I stated that both may not be "neurotypical" Typical and normal, for all intents and purposes in medical fields, are synonymous terms. I have not stated them as being normal, but a tolerable difference. For your last statement, let me quote the APA again:

For these individuals, the significant problem is finding affordable resources, such as counseling, hormone therapy, medical procedures and the social support necessary to freely express their gender identity and minimize discrimination

This would be a matter of a need. People that are associating with another gender need to freely express there preferred gender because that is who they are inside.
Autistic people have their own needs. I have had my fair share of needs and accommodations to benefit from society.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Which is a form of discrimination. Phobia towards particular groups can be defined as fear or hatred. The lack of understanding leads to these problems. Dismissing this as a form of democracy undermines the efforts of previous minorities of achieving equality.


I gave out the definition by a scientific organization, and you are countering it with an advocacy group. No offense, but the former wins out.


You got a better source here, but the context you used is vaguely interpreted.

You are using quite a sharp accusation against me, one that is unfounded. I stated that both may not be "neurotypical" Typical and normal, for all intents and purposes in medical fields, are synonymous terms. I have not stated them as being normal, but a tolerable difference. For your last statement, let me quote the APA again:


This would be a matter of a need. People that are associating with another gender need to freely express there preferred gender because that is who they are inside.
Autistic people have their own needs. I have had my fair share of needs and accommodations to benefit from society.

Except it's not because they're transphobic or have a problem with transgendered people, it's because they're scared of people abusing the law to claim they're Transgendered for ease of access to easily-groomed minors and/or other problems. They have a fear of sexual predators. Agraphobia, if you will.

Also, it is not unfounded. I've dealt with people like you before. I haven't received proper care for a while because people that that "oh he has social problems but he'll get over it, after all other people who had social problems who weren't ASD/AD got over it" and my like was a train-wreck for a while. Meanwhile, people like you still advocate for the normalization of mental illnesses no matter the casualties, leading to people with ASD/AD committing suicide, becoming criminals, etc, and in those with GID, suicide or genital mutilation in extreme cases and depression in others. Depression is quantified as a disorder, and if not treating people with GID leads to depression, logically it means they probably have a mental illness or disorder. The reason many don't seem to exhibit these behaviors are because they, on the other hand, haven't been normalized to the point that they are being given improper care.

Also, the CDC also agrees with me. GID is a psychological abnormality in the regulation of psychological processes. And as aforementioned, mental illnesses affect mood/thinking/behavior, and thus means that GID = Mental Illness.

 

[Auraninja]

Except it's not because they're transphobic or have a problem with transgendered people, it's because they're scared of people abusing the law to claim they're Transgendered for ease of access to easily-groomed minors and/or other problems. They have a fear of sexual predators. Agraphobia, if you will.

The argument that I as well as many people have tried to convey is this: agraphobia shouldn't be applied to transgendered people. Fearing transgendered people is transphobia.

Meanwhile, people like you still advocate for the normalization of mental illnesses no matter the casualties, leading to people with ASD/AD committing suicide, becoming criminals, etc, and in those with GID, suicide or genital mutilation in extreme cases and depression in others. Depression is quantified as a disorder, and if not treating people with GID leads to depression, logically it means they probably have a mental illness or disorder.

You are getting extremely worked up on something I did not convey. Transgendered people should have the ability to realign their gender because it is a reasonable accommodation. I must ask, though, what are you trying to say about transgendered people? It's seems like a mixed message to say they should be treated to their preferred sex, but earlier, you said that people born one gender shouldn't have the ability to go to the restroom according to their preferred sex.

Also, the CDC also agrees with me. GID is a psychological abnormality in the regulation of psychological processes. And as aforementioned, mental illnesses affect mood/thinking/behavior, and thus means that GID = Mental Illness.

Once again, you are using a fairly good source, but your interpretation of it is reaching out. When I pulled out my sourcing, they were talking specifically about transgendered people.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

The argument that I as well as many people have tried to convey is this: agraphobia shouldn't be applied to transgendered people. Fearing transgendered people is transphobia.


You are getting extremely worked up on something I did not convey. Transgendered people should have the ability to realign their gender because it is a reasonable accommodation. I must ask, though, what are you trying to say about transgendered people? It's seems like a mixed message to say they should be treated to their preferred sex, but earlier, you said that people born one gender shouldn't have the ability to go to the restroom according to their preferred sex.


Once again, you are using a fairly good source, but your interpretation of it is reaching out. When I pulled out my sourcing, they were talking specifically about transgendered people.

Except my reason for not allowing people to go into bathrooms based on gender identity is based off of the potential for increased sexual assaults, meanwhile you're trying to say it is X because it either doesn't align with your ideals or you're trying to pin the blame because the people who argue it do not align with your ideals. A la Ad Hominen.

You didn't? So you're telling me you're not conveying that GID is not a mental illness or disorder, and thus normalizing an abnormality in psychological processing? This only leads to improper care, and seeing as you do believe that they should have this care, why must you contradict yourself and allow these casualties to exist?

And yes, it is intended to be a mixed message. They should be treated as their preferred sex, but they shouldn't be able to go to the gender their identity is and have an option to pick a gender-neutral bathroom so as to not enable predators from getting people by claiming to have GID. Though, perhaps splitting the men's and women's room to include a room for transgender folk might be a better option (half goes for transgendered people and half goes to the others, specifically two different rooms containing the toilets, etc).

Also, whether not it may not talk about Transgendered folk or not shouldn't tarnish what it is saying. Someone with Gender Dysphoria/GID exhibits signs of psychological dysregulation, as ascribed by the CDC, and can lead to distress if not properly cared for. Not to mention it is in the DSM-5, which is a a diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders. Here it is. Someone who is transgendered has Gender Dysphoria, which is indeed a disorder. Gender nonconformity =/= transgender person.

 

[Auraninja]

Except my reason for not allowing people to go into bathrooms based on gender identity is based off of the potential for increased sexual assaults, meanwhile you're trying to say it is X because it either doesn't align with your ideals or you're trying to pin the blame because the people who argue it do not align with your ideals. A la Ad Hominen.

What you are saying does not have suitable grounding. According to this source, what you are saying is not even correlated.
Segregation is the ideal of bigoted people. Why should the ideals be solely placed on me if many people think it's morally wrong?
And Ad Hominen means accusation at the person than the idea they have, I have reprimanded bigoted people because of their ideas.

You didn't? So you're telling me you're not conveying that GID is not a mental illness or disorder, and thus normalizing an abnormality in psychological processing? This only leads to improper care, and seeing as you do believe that they should have this care, why must you contradict yourself and allow these casualties to exist?

I haven't really contradicted myself as I will explain later in this post. I don't really understand how I "allow these casualties to exist".

And yes, it is intended to be a mixed message. They should be treated as their preferred sex, but they shouldn't be able to go to the gender their identity is and have an option to pick a gender-neutral bathroom so as to not enable predators from getting people by claiming to have GID. Though, perhaps splitting the men's and women's room to include a room for transgender folk might be a better option (half goes for transgendered people and half goes to the others, specifically two different rooms containing the toilets, etc).

Gender neutral bathrooms would have to have multiple people, since not all localities can have one-person bathrooms. Your next statement reflects a "separate but equal" fallacy.

Also, whether not it may not talk about Transgendered folk or not shouldn't tarnish what it is saying. Someone with Gender Dysphoria/GID exhibits signs of psychological dysregulation, as ascribed by the CDC, and can lead to distress if not properly cared for. Not to mention it is in the DSM-5, which is a a diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders. Here it is. Someone who is transgendered has Gender Dysphoria, which is indeed a disorder. Gender nonconformity =/= transgender person.

Yet the very source you posted had this to say:

Part of removing stigma is about choosing the right words. Replacing “disorder” with “dysphoria” in the diagnostic label is not only more appropriate and consistent with familiar clinical sexology terminology, it also removes the connotation that the patient is “disordered.”

Therefore, according to your source, GID people are not typically disordered.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

What you are saying does not have suitable grounding. According to this source, what you are saying is not even correlated.
Segregation is the ideal of bigoted people. Why should the ideals be solely placed on me if many people think it's morally wrong?
And Ad Hominen means accusation at the person than the idea they have, I have reprimanded bigoted people because of their ideas.


I haven't really contradicted myself as I will explain later in this post. I don't really understand how I "allow these casualties to exist".


Gender neutral bathrooms would have to have multiple people, since not all localities can have one-person bathrooms. Your next statement reflects a "separate but equal" fallacy.



Yet the very source you posted had this to say:


Therefore, according to your source, GID people are not typically disordered.

I did say potential, implying it could happen, and there is still the fact that people will be worried about that kind of thing. And no, it is ad hominen because you're accusing at the person because you don't have their ideals or they are afraid of said thing.

And yes, you did. You even go on to say that because they wanted to change it from disorder to dysphoria due to stigma, that it must be not a disorder. It is still a disorder, otherwise it wouldn't be in the book (which is a diagnostic manual for mental disorders). They changes the words because it removes a stigma and is more appropriate with other sexual terminology, aka political correctness.

Anyways, I'm off.

Not to mention, they are a minority. I'm not going to force a business to build an entire bathroom just for them because they are a very slim minority. If they made a very sizeable chunk of the population, say 10%, I would say go on ahead and make the bathrooms the same size as other genders. However, they are much lower. On the regards for splitting bathrooms to have two separate rooms, one being for GID and the other for others without it, I said half for both.

 

[Auraninja]

I did say potential, implying it could happen, and there is still the fact that people will be worried about that kind of thing. And no, it is ad hominen because you're accusing at the person because you don't have their ideals or they are afraid of said thing.

There is potential for assaults to happen with red heads. The reason I say this is because there has been no conclusive evidence with the prior correlation.
Again, ad hominem would be attacking the person directly, rather than their position. The term is usually meant for erroneous insults.

And yes, you did. You even go on to say that because they wanted to change it from disorder to dysphoria due to stigma, that it must be not a disorder. It is still a disorder, otherwise it wouldn't be in the book (which is a diagnostic manual for mental disorders). They changes the words because it removes a stigma and is more appropriate with other sexual terminology, aka political correctness.

Some contend that the diagnosis inappropriately pathologizes gender noncongruence and should be eliminated. Others argue that it is essential to retain the diagnosis to ensure access to care. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is under revision and there may be changes to its current classification of intense persistent gender incongruence as "gender identity disorder."

The other topic that I wish to address is that this argument has been more about semantics than anything. It would be pointless to be engrossed in words if we don't conceptualize the ideas.

Anyways, I'm off.

Whether or not you want to reply to this is your choice. Do what you will.

Not to mention, they are a minority. I'm not going to force a business to build an entire bathroom just for them because they are a very slim minority. If they made a very sizeable chunk of the population, say 10%, I would say go on ahead and make the bathrooms the same size as other genders. However, they are much lower. On the regards for splitting bathrooms to have two separate rooms, one being for GID and the other for others without it, I said half for both.

Stating that they are a minority is almost self-defeating. If people are not dignified as part of a population because they are different, then that only proves that we need to accommodate those people.

 

[bobjr]

Politicians have had more incidents with bathroom assaults than trans persons. Should that mean we need to ban them from bathrooms?

 

[Pikachu52]

They changes the words because it removes a stigma and is more appropriate with other sexual terminology, aka political correctness.

Referring to something as political correctness is a hyperbolic and meaningless statement that is being overused by conservatives to win arguments where they have not facts. Worse than that it is the label used to demonise persons, political parties, positions that benefit minorities and oppressed groups of people and to justify the mistreatment of those minorities. The term political correctness does not have any objective or clear meaning, it's applied only an arbitrary and subjective manner. The reason to remove Gender dysphoria from the diagnostic manual as mental illness is because a) Gender dysphoria isn't an inhabitation and b) it's an invalidation of trans people's gender identities. Gender is not a mental illness.

Not to mention, they are a minority. I'm not going to force a business to build an entire bathroom just for them because they are a very slim minority. If they made a very sizeable chunk of the population, say 10%, I would say go on ahead and make the bathrooms the same size as other genders. However, they are much lower. On the regards for splitting bathrooms to have two separate rooms, one being for GID and the other for others without it, I said half for both.

There is no suggestion that business need to build new bathrooms. The entire bathrooms issue is a non-issue. Conservatives are using bathroom panic to demonise transgender people because bathrooms make people feel disgusted and vulnerable, hence the imagery makes it easier for people to see transpeople as less than human. Transgender people simply want to be able to do what Cisgender people already have the privilege of doing, using the bathroom in which they feel safest.

 

[U.N. Owen]

Referring to something as political correctness is a hyperbolic and meaningless statement that is being overused by conservatives to win arguments where they have not facts.

Hate to break it to you, but all parties use the political correctness card. From expelling students from using bubbles and eating pop tarts to censoring textbooks, it's been used since the Dark Ages.

 

[Pikachu52]

Hate to break it to you, but all parties use the political correctness card. From expelling students from using bubbles and eating pop tarts to censoring textbooks, it's been used since the Dark Ages.

I have only ever heard the term "political correctness" used by politicians and media outlets that are right leaning, and usually it's done to defend the status quo or to attack minorities and their needs. Regardless of who is using it though it's a vacuous, arbitrary and subjective strawman.

 

[U.N. Owen]

I have only ever heard the term "political correctness" used by politicians and media outlets that are right leaning, and usually it's done to defend the status quo or to attack minorities and their needs. Regardless of who is using it though it's a vacuous, arbitrary and subjective strawman.

I am not condoning the use of political correctness. I am merely correcting false information. It's been used since the Dark Ages and it won't stop.