The issue of puberty blockers presents a big challenge to people seeking them and those caring for them. The issue has been given a lot of coverage in the English news by one individual, Kiera Bell. Kiera took puberty blockers and transitioned as a teenager, regretting it at age 21. She has now gone back to trying to live as female but has had treatment, including some surgery, some of which are irreversible. She maintains that she didn't have the capacity to consent due to adolescence being a time of emotional difficulty. She won her case in court. She says that she was not given enough psychological support when making decisions.

The case above has had major repercussions for the thinking about puberty blockers and age of transition. However, some people are determined that they wish to have puberty blockers in particular because it enables a much smoother transition, as it pprevents the need to have treatment to reverse the effects of puberty.

It is questionable which people are in control, as having the 'tools for self-definition'? Is it the ones who conform happily to stereotypes or those who are gender dysphoric? It is a difficult area to think about, involving nature, nurture and free choice. There may also be dangers in overgeneralisations because each person's life experiences is unique.

It does seem to me that hypersexualisation is an aspect of Western culture. The context of this may be important in understanding why people develop transgender identities. This may be a useful area for thinking about, rather than simply viewing gender dysphoria as in terms of individual psychology.

I am inclined to think that a lot of the psychological differences between men and women are culturally significant more than anything else. Simone De Beauvoir argued that women are not made but become women. The sociologist, Ann Oakley, developed this in her analysis of the nurture aspect of gender development. Of course, there is still the critical role, which hormones have on the brain, and possibly some biological significance of the chromosomes too.

Your query about why do men have nipples is that all people have rudimentary aspects of the opposite sex. Not only do men have nipples but some have noticeable breast development, just as some women have facial hair. Many spend money on cosmetic procedures to reduce aspects of physical attributes of the opposite gender. Every foetus starts off as the same, before sexual differentiation takes place. In childhood, apart from primary sex characteristics, boys and girls look fairly similar until puberty.

I am still logged on, so I am wondering about nudity and masculinity and femininity. There are codes of dress and performance based on attire, and some exaggeration of gender differences. I wonder how this relates to the the concept of the naked self.To what extent does gender go back to biological aspects and cultural ones, and how are they blended in cultural and personal life?

I am about to go to bed, because it is after 1.30 am. However, I don't know about the Golden Record of Voyager 11, so I would appreciate you elaborating, especially its significance for gender, and I will read and follow it up tomorrow.

Gender definitely begins with reproduction. There is the question as to where, or how far this goes, in relation to 'what one is'. The search for identity may be far wider, but, nevertheless, most people have a basic gender identity independently. Some of the cultural aspects may be exaggerated.
.
For example, sometimes when I am just looking to buy a birthday card there seem to be divisions. When I was a child I can remember going to a birthday party of a girl who I knew and, buying a birthday card and present for her. Her mother complained that I had given a boy's card. I had simply chosen the card which I thought was the nicest one. In all aspects of life, gender is a codified form of expression and communication, which seems to operate independently of the basis of human reproduction.

Ideas of the 'perfect' male and female may leave many feeling lacking. I am not sure about your claim about whether 'very few straight men are actually men and very few straight women are actually women'. It is probably connected to transgender, although I am not convinced that the majority of people in magazines and movies are trans.

However, it may be that those who have found masculinity and femininity through conscious choice may have looked at its presentation and performance with greater precision. However, rather than simply being an area for trans people and gender deviant, it can be asked, more universally, what does it mean to be a man or woman?

I find it interesting that other species, other than humans, have gender as a form of performance. It does give rise to the essentialism of gender, as a biological imperative in nature.

I would argue that it is a complex interplay of biology and meaning. Authenticity of identity is about social meanings and interpretations. How one perceives biology and its significance may be important, as well as pragmatic concerns, as human beings exist in social structures and groups. However, the tension between biology and sociological aspects may exist, especially in relation to the understanding of biology in regard to sexuality, gender and social roles.

There is biology as a starting point and the societal factors come into play in the dynamics of social life. Ideas about gender and sexuality come into this. There may be contradictions and, also, values, which may even have a part to play in developing goals, and expectations. Also, the ideas of the differences between men and women may play a significant part, in goals and choices in personal life.

If the meaning of my thread question is unclear, I would add that I am trying to explore the ideas around essentialism, relating to gender and sexuality. I am also interested in social constructions and values and how these come into play in human interaction and relationships. How does masculinity and femininity come into this, especially in relation to personal identity?

To what extent are men and women different, or what it means to be a man or woman and how this question is explored introspectively? On the other hand, some may see men and women as being so different, so I am raising this as an area of debate, especially in relation to the role and understanding of biology in this. I am asking about the biological aspects of difference but also about the subjective meaning of this in personal and social life. What are the dynamics?

Some may take the view that it is absurd to think about turning all possibilities into dreams. What may be important is how different are men and women in the first place? The physical differences are such that physical changes, while not always one hundred per cent as completely as desired, are able to make looking like the opposite sex possible. You might try to change yourself into a butterfly and even, with the best science, you may come up against impossible obstacles.

One interesting comparison is between gender identity disorder and body mysphorphic disorder. I have seen both in clinical practice. Body dysphmorphic disorder can involve fixation on specific body attributes and a sense of the body being 'ugly' or 'wrong' in some ways. Generally, body dysmorphic disorder seems more amenable to psychological therapies, such as CBT. However, most gender dysphoric people have been through psychological therapies. However, to try to 'correct' it, especially by treating it as delusional, simply doesn't work, just as conversion therapy for homosexuality doesn't help at all.

Therapy may help is essential when it enables thinking about identity and choice. Yet, when it is used to oppose authenticity in sexuality and gender expression it may make matters worse.

You begin by speaking of respect for those with gender, but what you go on to say sounds like you think that by using chosen pronouns is collusion. Do you not see that it is about respecting choice? When people make choice of pronich ouns an issue it as like the gender dysphoric person is being regarded as delusional or psychotic. It seems bound up with materialistic fundamentalism.

What is the danger or threat which accepting the psychological 'truth' of such individuals chosen journeys? Is it because it exposes the way in which everyone's gender and sexuality is based on culturally and intersubjective mythic fantasy? The body is the basis for gender and sexuality, but how this is played out in real life is based on what the postmodern writer, Judith Butler, spoke of as 'performance'.

I am not wishing to go to far with the comparison about pretending to be monkeys and we will see if Agent Smith has any thoughts. However, I am serious in the idea of fantasy playing a significant role in the formation of identity, including gender identity. I find that more useful for thinking about gender dysphoria rather than those who simply dismiss such dysphoria as delusional.

This applies to sexuality as well. Children grow up fantasising about romance. This involves fantasy lovers and the beginning of sexual orientation in its root form, although, of course, what happens in real life, especially from puberty onwards and encounters with people and relationships is involved in the actualisation of this potential.

Obviously, the comparison between human beings and monkeys with that of masculinity vs femininity doesn't work completely because it is about a different species. However, there is the whole dimension of the human imagination. As a child, monkeys were my favourite animals. Also, apart from pretending to be famous rock stars, I used to pretend to be Galen from 'Planet of the Apes'. Of course, he was a 'talking ape' and was the one who was friends with humans rather than simply swinging through the trees.

The point is it all comes down to the human imagination and fantasy. Young children engage in make believe and this is likely to be important in the formation of gender. Children are affected by television and media images in thinking of social roles and who they wish to become when they wish to grow up.

In shamanic culture, there is a fantasised imagination of shapeshifting. This includes fantasised projection of becoming animals, along the line of dream imagination. I am not aware of shamans trying to live as animals but the shapeshifting does involve people experimenting with gender shifting in real life. Some gender experimentation, especially in the shamanic aspect of rock stars, such as David Bowie, may go back to the shamanic quest and it's mythology.
.

It is likely that there have always been gender dysphoric people but that it was only with medical advances that the approach changed. Because people could not have the physical transition it is hard to know to what extent they were. I know that different people have viewed Joan of Arc in various ways. The one writer who definitely wrote from a gender dysphoric, female to male point of view was Radcyffe Hall, in, 'The Well of Loneliness'. Virginia Wolf's 'Orlando' is also an interesting critique on gender. Some science fiction writers, like Ursula Le Gunn and Marion Zimmer Bradley also explore androgyny.

The arts have always been an area for the exploration of gender ambiguity. Recently, I saw some documentaries of 70s and 80s music and couldn't believe how feminine some of the men looked in bands like Sweet and Japan. And, of course there is Sam Smith, who couldn't be given a Brit award because they couldn't be fitted into the male or female vocalist categories.

In some societies there are alternative gender categories, like the Hijra in India and the berdache of North America. These groups incorporated those who had various physical intersex conditions and psychological ones, and the North Americans also spoke of some as being 'two spirit' people. It is possible to also see eunuchs as an alternative gender category. Their removal of the testicles was to enable singing not to change with the voice breaking, but it may also have been partly about androgyny.

The idea of androgyny may be the archetypal or mythical aspect of transgender. One Jungian writer, June Singer wrote a book on androgyny. However, she was not writing about transgender but mainly psychological androgyny. However, the transgender journey may be seen as connected to androgyny even though the person is wishing to change to resemble the opposite gender as far as possible. Cross dressers and non-binary may be seen clearly in relation to the idea of androgyny and the archetypal hermaphrodite.

I didn't know much about sex at age 5. Even when children told me 'the facts of life' at age 9, I refused to believe it until someone showed it written down in a book. The reason I realised that I was bi was because I realised that sometimes I had crushes on girls and, sometimes, boys, as well as teachers of both genders. However, I never told anyone this until about age 12.

The story is probably one which most people can relate to because it is so tragic and the person was male. It is not clear whether he committed suicide simply because there were some other issues going on in his, but it seems likely that what he had been through affected him significantly.

Also, where my parents lived, there was a transman, who got outed in his community. In distress he smashed a window in his local church. He got sent to Holloway(women's) prison and killed himself while there. This story shows the way in which outing people publicly can affect them so much and some people think that they have the 'right' to do so and,
there is also a lot of bullying.

The issue of where to place trans people is also a major one in prisons and hospitals. Some flexi gender facilities do ease the situation. It may involve staff thinking creatively to manage the situation. I know one manager who has asked potential nursing staff candidates at interviews a question about managing a trans scenario. Apparently, it really threw some of them and it may be that this was something that they never ever expected to get asked.

One of the most influential case studies about gender is one involving the sexologist, John Money, and a child who lost his penis in a childhood circumcision. A decision was made to give the child surgery and female hormones at adolescence to make the child female. For many years, this was understood, especially in sociology, as a success. However, in time it became apparent that the teenager was very unhappy and ended up having reverse treatment to become a man again. He wrote a book with his story and was planning to have an artificial penis constructed, but a while later he committed suicide.

It is a very sad story and does challenge the nurture approach to gender. A large factor was that in spite of feminising hormones, the teenager was still fairly masculine looking. One of the main ways in which the scenario has been viewed has been to make professionals more hesitant to make decisions about intersex children and to enable them to be more involved in gender choice.

The idea of people hindering progress in understanding is the reason why I started the thread. There can be extremism in both directions. So much discussion may involve unconscious projection. Also, there is so much information on the internet, some which may be more helpful than others.

When I was working in mental health care there were clear policies about how all people should be respected. This also involved training. Of course, it is possible just to pay lip service to it.Generally, it may be more difficult for people to be accepting of the LGBTIQ spectrum if they were brought up in a culture where it was seen as being unacceptable. I was brought up in Catholicism but never even realised that there were issues around gender and sexuality there until I came across certain attitudes at university. I do consider myself as bisexual and realised this when I was about 5 years old. My parents were a little homophobic but I never really discussed sexuality with them much. The youth club at my church had a lot of drinking and loads of affairs, although heterosexual ones. Funnily enough, the song 'Tainted Love' by Soft Cell was one of the most frequently played songs, but I am not sure if anyone there realised the gay connotations of the song.

In reply to your second post, the idea of consensus is an important issue for many. There is so much confusion around gender. In the past, girls who got pregnant outside of marriage were often institutionalised. Michael Foucault's understanding of the politics of sexuality is important. If anything, it may be that in the time of the information age, there ie lack of consensus. Diversity of sexuality and gender identity exists, but, also, diversity of views on the nature of diversity exists, which may create whirlpools of confusion and conflicts in social groups and impact on individuals, especially those who do not fit into the mainstream. Sexual desire and the body may be complex areas of identity for many in the twentieth first century.

The idea of instinct is important because even within animal populations there is diversity. The majority of people may conform to basics of heterosexuality and gender identity. The way people who don't are viewed may vary. In creating this thread, I am not simply wishing to think about the minority perspectives. However, I am wondering how tolerance and intolerance works. In particular, stereotypes may be one of the reasons why people struggle with identity issues.

I do see the whole construction of gender and sexuality as one of the problems arising from the tradition of Christianity and its conventions. I have known so many people who struggle in this context. As people move towards a less religious approach, in some ways there is a more tolerant attitude but I am not sure that some of the basic hostilities still remain with religious fundamentalism being replaced by essentialism as a form of scientific fundamentalism. The postmodern deconstruction and critical theory, including queer theory had its place, but these ideas are not prominent now, and there may be a complete mixture of ideas about sexuality, not just about LGBTIQ issues, but even ideas about sexuality and morality amongst heterosexual people.

I am aware that many don't think that gender and sexuality is constructed, and that view does come from a postmodern perspective. The issues are complex and I would not wish to gloss over nature and nurture. The basis for my own thread discussion is that there has been a fair amount of backlash in the area of LGBTIQ issues in the last couple of years. I was startled by the way in which threads on transgender, mainly opposed to people who identify as transgender, became so active and popular on the site.

I am not trying to start one of that kind, because I am not wishing to dig up transphobia, because I would get stressed out. It is significant that you, as a gay man, have replied. My intention was to try to start some discussion without trans and homophobic bias. Nevertheless, as my perspective is from this perspective as opposed to the opposite way round, it is likely that very few people will be interested. The moderators here are fairly open minded and do seek to prevent trans and homophobia.

I understand essentialism is a little different in the area of gender, with acceptance of gender from gay issues. Some may accept gay issues and be completely opposed to trans issues on the basis of essentialism. I am inclined to bracket the two together in relation to androgyny, which was the original meaning of Freud's idea of bisexuality. However, in spite of a move towards acceptance of the LGBTIQ spectrum in psychology, it is hard to know hoe the backlash towards trans issues, especially as there is so much bullying and violence towards sexual minorities is viewed. Essentialism may be used in various ways, and even though it may exist outside of religious thinking, it could easily be about reinforcing 'normality' even in the development of secular, totalitarian regimes.

In this thread, if anyone is confused by my intention, I am in favour of understanding the nature of the LGBTIQ spectrum. Some may be threatened by people who identify in various positions on this spectrum. I am concerned with looking at this in connection with philosophy and, understanding diversity in expression of gender identity and sexuality.

You are right to speak of boundaries. Prior to working in the mental health system, I didn't understand this and it is so important for oneself and others. I feel that going back to my early phase that I was a bit of a 'useless do gooder' because I wanted to help others.

When I invited someone with a lot of problems who I met in the library back to my parents home when I was 18 it was a disaster, as he kept coming on a daily basis. He used to spend time sitting drinking tea with my mother and her friends when I was at college duribg the daym My parents got involved and when he became homeless my father found him sleeping in a flower bed at 6.30 am and brought him back to our home. My mother arranged for him to go to a hostel shelter. Later on, he stole money from my parents. We also discovered that he had a psychiatric forensic history. He is married now but he often made phone calls to my mother.

My mother also did volunteer work at a hostel after she stopped working. She was handing out free clothes there. She really liked this but she was not given any training at all and had difficulty understanding boundaries when she was out in the town. She used to know so many people who used to bombard her with their problems.

I completely agree that homelessness is a torture and it seems that many simply don't care. I am trying to find new accommodation at present and it is extremely difficult. The reason why I have to find accommodation is that my landlord has left the country and it turns out that he is not the real owner of the house and it had been a sublet. The landlord who has left the country had not been paying who he was meant to be paying and wishes us to find somewhere else because he plans to renovate the house.

There are also so many rogue landlords about. A few weeks ago I almost signed a contract. Then, I found a link with many dodgy clauses, including one of agreeing not to be on the electoral role or claim any benefits. It seems that many landlords wish to find ways of not being known by the council because once they are, they have to abide by so many rules.

Homelessness may vary in different parts of the world, and I know that it is particularly bad in London. About a year ago I was at a station at an end of the line after the tubes had shut. There was a shelter there with seats and it was full of people trying to sleep even though there were clear divisions between the seats, making it impossible for many to lie down. There were some older people too. Homelessness has increased over the last few years and the lockdown situation seems to have exacerbated it. Of course, many do care as well as many who don't but it is an increasing problem. It probably coincides with a much wider division between the rich and the poor in the first world. Those with disabilities are especially affected, especially those which are more hidden.

Anyway, I am glad that you found some help for the person you were concerned about. That is because in each unique situation there will be nothing done if everyone walks away. The morality is also connected to compassion and conscience rather than simply rational logic.
.

Hello!
The moral dilemma which you describe is a tricky one. It is one which some may be able to relate to and others may dismiss completely. I remember when I first came to London as a student I used to get to know and involved with people with so many problems. It was in a rough area of London and I had some into where I was living and I even tried to persuade a landlord to let someone have a room but he wouldn't. I got to the point where I stopped having these people into my room as I was worried that I would lose my accommodation and some people advised me that it was not safe for me to have such visitors.

When I began my mental health nursing I moved to a different area and I do go back to that area sometimes. However, I have never seen any of these people and don't know what has happened to them. I wonder if they were found places to live or if they remained left on the streets and died. They were of varying ages and I suspect that many had mental health issues and other complex ones.

The individual you are describing does sound in a bad way and who should be responsible is a good question. It is probably different from Nazi Germany because it is not so much about torture but more one of neglect, and it may be a real one of our time. Communities have broken down and some have no one. In some ways, people have become more like numbers. While some seem to manage to get help others seem to fall through the net and be left, almost as invisible.

I can understand your predicament and my parents used to get involved with some who had great difficulties. It became very stressful. Moral concern is important but boundaries are important because if you got into problems you may find that no one in your community is there to support you.

When I write on this site I feel like I am 'pretending' to be a philosopher. That doesn't mean that I don't take philosophy seriously but I try not to take myself too seriously, even if at times I have got wound up by forum interaction. Philosophy is one of the disciplines which is so intense at times, but I do think that enjoying it is important too.

Perhaps, the title of the thread should have been called 'Word Salad' or a 'Salad of Ideas'. It's a bit like when I got put in the position at work in a hostel where I was a bit uneasy about having to organize supper. A colleague recommended me to make a Jungian cuisine, with plenty of shadow.

As far as reptilian brains, I understand that the earliest stages of the development of the child are similar to reptiles. It may be about the core structures which are the foundations from which the evolution of sentience arises..It is at the centre of the mind and body problem, which may give rise to the various ways of thinking, ranging from those which evoke the idea of the supernatural to the physicalist models. The spectrum of many possible explanations may be where the imagination comes in, including forms of magical thinking and dangerous forms of thinking.
.

On a symbolic level, perhaps all human beings have a shapeshifting reptile side, with the reptilian aspects of mind on some ways. It may relate to the lower or primitive aspects of the evolutionary pathway and how it still a basic aspect of human nature which is still apparent at some stages of human life.

Yes, it is about seeing ideas and meanings in patterns, like synchronicities. It may also be about subliminal aspects of perception. However, it is possible to get carried away with the 'subconscious', and it may lead to delusions in some instances. Freud spoke of hallucinations as being about dreaming while awaken.

I went through a phase of reading David Icke, and I see such books as a way of devil's advocate consideration. It may be that conspiracy theories are dangerous in the way they create fear. The most strange idea David Icke has is of the British Royal Family being shapeshifting reptiles in a literal sense. The one idea which he does suggest though, which is shared by many, is that Princess Diana's death was not accidental.

The language of fortune-tellers can be regarded as 'occult' and misleading. I have known people who have gone to see fortune tellers and ended up being extremely distressed. That is most likely if they are given warning of something bad which may happen. I think that most people I have known who have gone to see fortune tellers go with the hope of reassurance but get the opposite. I dare'nt think what a palm reader would make of my life line. It has so many twists and strange broken bits.

I did go through a time, when I was a student, of consulting the I Ching. That was often a source for contemplation but it became a bit addictive. I used to find I was consulting it before doing so many things. Once, another student did a Tarot reading for me and she was freaked out by the reading as she thought that it was the most fearful deck she had seen. I wasn't that bothered by it though and ended up trying to reassure the girl. It is surprising just how many books are written on fortune-telling and even stocked in libraries. I have also known a few people who have been to seances.

I really think that it is time that I should read Spinoza! I did try a couple of times but found it hard to concentrate, which I do find frequently with some philosophy from past eras, and it may be the way they write. Of course, Nietzsche's writings are eloquent, like poetry. With some of the older writing it can be that there is lack of concise summary. However, it may be that the attempt to summarise which has become a way of 'word salad', trying to compress too many ideas together at once.

It may be significant that connections and interconnections are more important when the idea of an anthropomorphic creator fades, especially in concern for effects in the world of life. Generally, the shift from deontological ethics to consequentialism, including utilitarianism followed this pathway. Going back to Kant, who was critical in this juncture, in separating reason on the a priori and the a posteri, as the empirical, began by pointing to human beings as ends rather than means. This distinction is important and is the beginning of an emphasis on the tangible effects of action in the real world. It was part of the humanist focus, with or without religion, but as the emphasis on social existence is the key domain, as opposed to in relationship with God, awareness of effects of action has become more important as a form of social ethics.

I was rather surprised when reading the writing of Spinoza to discover how much was about cosmology. However, in a way, it makes sense because in order to think about how to live, it is about understanding one's subjectivity into the context of others' subjectivity. In this way, subjectivity and the shared aspects of understanding, or intersubjectivity are interconnected with the understanding of objectivity. So, subjective experience is all about existence in relation to a reality wider than oneself, so it may not be possible to consider oneself without the wider aspects of existence. This may be partly why the consideration of effects of everything one says or does is interconnected with other beings.

Here, it may be important to ask the purpose of philosophy. Is it about how to live? This is connected to the way in which understanding is based on metaphysics or basic formulations or descriptive ways of understanding, in conjunction with meaning and values. The problems which are perceived in these various ways of thinking about human experiences, including splits, may also be looked at and evaluated according to priorities, especially in logic or understanding conceptually, in relation to politics and ethics. To some extent they come together in a synthetic understanding of life, but at the same time, it is about embracing the various dichotomies and their priorities in the various aspects of philosophy..

I can remember going to see an occupational health doctor once and he wrote a report, which read like a 'word salad'. The funny thing was a copy of it got sent to a senior manager on her mobile phone. I got called in for a meeting about it because she was so puzzled by it. I didn't know her that well and she was querying aspects of it and I didn't know what they meant exactly. It was like trying to work out a secret code.

With regard to 'word salads' it is partly about the subjective meaning of the author and also what another may read into it, especially the ambiguities. This applies to life in liberal society in general because people exchange ideas and express themselves, often with a lot of fantasised ideas about what is communicated through the haze of words and what they represent. It probably leads to a lot of distortions, misunderstandings and even belief in shared understanding where none exists.