It's not accurate to consider regret a major factor. It's 1 to 2%.

There was an extensive and interesting discussion about transgenderism between @fdrake and @Isaac here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13830/positive-characteristics-of-females/p1

It's not accurate to consider regret a major factor. It's 1 to 2%. — Benkei

I straightforwardly mistrust those statistics (Zembla made some interesting programs about the topic). But then again, I'm not saying adults shouldn't be allowed to live in whatever way they desire.

I'm simply taking issue with blaming high suicide rates on "society" when that society is doing everything it can to be accomodating, while people are subjecting themselves to these kinds of extreme and irreversible procedures.

But yea, this is getting off-topic.

Being trans places one on the margins even if everyone is nice to you and you suffer no employment hurdles. Trans folk will watch their cis peers get married and have children while they have sterilized themselves and likely engage in some form of polyamory given monogamy doesn't really make sense. And then there's the issue of what happens when the beauty fades.

I still support an adult's right to choose and acknowledge that this actually could be the best path for some people. But I would not promote it. It is wrong to tell a child that they are the sole determiners of their identity.

However, when you start blaming a society that's bending over backwards to accomodate trans people — Tzeentch

In what way is society "bending over backwards"?

Not really. I don't hate or fear trans people - I support any adult's right to choose. — Tzeentch

Your rhetoric and reasoning suggests otherwise.

However, when you start blaming a society that's bending over backwards to accomodate trans people, I am not going to sugar coat things. — Tzeentch

Suger coat what? An argument you still haven't supported with anything other than that you think this is how it is? Who's really coming off as delusional?

When this thing that on the surface looks like it would destroy your mental health starts actually destroying people's mental health, how is that in any way surprising? — Tzeentch

Can I see some research and statistics on this destroying people's mental health or are you just gonna continue pointing out things you have no support behind?

This is your emotions speaking, and since it's an argument out of emotion, it is transphobic. Just like if someone wants to limit freedoms for homosexuals based on nothing more than they're "not gonna suger coat truths about how society accommodates homosexuals too much". Just like a racist cannot just say they aren't racists and then they're not, it's the behavior, rhetoric and conclusions made that defines who someone is.

If you have nothing but unsubstantiated causation without evidence statements and pathologizing remarks about transgender people, then that is simply transphobia.

And why not let a neutral analytical system (GPT-o1) review what you wrote and see what it finds when I ask it "How accurate is this text?"

Conclusion

The text contains several inaccuracies and misconceptions about transgender individuals and the effects of gender-affirming care. Current research supports that acceptance and appropriate medical treatment generally lead to positive mental health outcomes for transgender people. It's important to approach this topic with empathy and rely on evidence-based information to foster understanding and support. — GPT-o1

So, basically you're just pushing the same unsubstantiated ideas that can be found in conservative ideologies.

I straightforwardly mistrust those statistics — Tzeentch

How convenient it must be to just ignore what doesn't fit your opinions.

I'm simply taking issue with blaming high suicide rates on "society" when that society is doing everything it can to be accomodating, while people are subjecting themselves to these kinds of procedures. — Tzeentch

What you might not understand is that you are exposed to an observation of society through media. I absolutely doubt that you actually talk to or have insight into the perspective of transgender people and their experiences in society. Just because Disney+ makes shows with lots of LGBTQ+ characters in it, does not mean that society is doing everything it can to accommodate. Most of society consist of people like you, just like people during the 80s and 90s who believed whatever emotional nonsens they could think of and criticized society for accommodating gay people and that this would lead to mental health issues for these people.

This happens every time there's a societal shift into acceptance of previously stigmatized groups.
It starts out with raging hate, public outcries against the groups, then it transitions to official channels being more inclusive, while the public slowly change into what we see many do now; people who say similar things like "they can do whatever they want but not close to me", while later it goes into a false form of defense of these people, a stage in which the societal norm is to accept the group and in doing this, the previous anti-people will do what you do now, talk like you care about them, but still retain the same false claims and judgements as before. The dissonance becomes so obvious.

They’re not liars or delusional. The claim is that what is delusional is the belief that you can change sexes. I’ve seen no convincing evidence to counter that argument— but I’m open to hearing one. — Mikie

Gender identity and medical sex are two different things. But even so, if you check the Sapolsky video you can see how even medical sex is more complex than just what you have between your legs. Anyone who boils this down to purely their culturally biased ideas about gender and sex and who ignores the vast amount of research on this subject is clearly not engaging with it honestly. Putting the conclusion of "delusion" before the cart of actually doing the argument.

For instance, what Sapolsky talks about is that areas like the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc) and the amygdala shows a size and neuron density of the BSTc in transgender women have been found to resemble those of cisgender women. There are actual differences to our brain that has to do with our brain in relation to our bodies and in transgender people it's found that even if the chromosomes and organs align, their brain have conflicting functions, meaning, the brain and body have different perceptions of what sex it actually is. The XX and XY chromosomes direct the development, but since male and females are more similar than not, people fall on a form of gradient between the two, heavily influenced by the chromosomes.

If someone develops a brain that comes in conflict with the body's perception of its sex, is it delusional that the brain, which regulates emotions and is the seat of our consciousness is drawn to wanting a correction to get rid of the resulting dysmorphia?

What I see is, especially in relation to the topic within the election and conservative media is the same old dusty story of them looking at this as they did on homosexuality when it became more commonly accepted in society, and they believed this was a delusion that would corrupt children and societal values. All while none of them actually engaged with either research on the subject or ever even engaged with the gay community in a way of attempting to understand it.

What is more delusional, people who make absolutist conclusions without research backing it up, or people who follow what the research suggests and talk to the people it affects?

Open a new thread if you want to continue discussing.

Open a new thread if you want to continue discussing. — Tzeentch

It's related to Trump's stance and the conservative narrative that will become more common in the next four years. People like you will continue to spread further bs and be part of that transphobic movement. Your ignorance here is the proof enough.

So, basically you're just pushing the same unsubstantiated ideas — Christoffer

No, there are actually large reservations to be had with the figure posted.





This is probably the most highly-esteemed platform for investigative journalism in the Netherlands.

But of course I am just a "transphobe", blablabla... :yawn:

The investigation is primarily for children, not adults. — Christoffer

Yet there is still a screening for adults who seek to transition.

Non-binary has to do with gender identity, not biological sex. — Christoffer

Yes, and gender identity is the subject here not biological sex. We're moving past transsexualism (now often considered an outdated term) into transgenderism. Or are we going to insist that those seeking to transition possess the correct biological markers before allowing them access to HRT?

Conclusion on that is that parents and doctors aren't just letting kids do anything without proper investigation. — Christoffer

Proper investigation into what? That they're "really" transgender? That they were "really" born in the wrong body? The medical community creates the criteria. The question is really just whether they get their HRT. The surgeries come later.

This is probably the most highly-esteemed platform for investigative journalism in the Netherlands. — Tzeentch

The documentary is takes a critical look at the treatments, primarily focused on the Dutch treatements. It doesn't lead to the generalize conclusions you are making. The problem is that things like this becomes a foundation for conclusions that doesn't correlate with the specifics of the criticism.

Yet there is still a screening for adults who seek to transition. — BitconnectCarlos

Yes, and why do you think that is? Why do people who want a nose job get none such treatment but adults who want to transition need to go through years of investigation? Any other decision an adult makes about their bodies require much less investigation. Shouldn't people who do plastic surgery also go through a psychological investigation about their self-image, seen as this is a very existing problem in society? It needs to go in one or the other direction, make screenings of everyone looking for any changes to their bodies, or don't treat some different than others. Which way do you suggest?

Yes, and gender identity is the subject here not biological sex. We're moving past transsexualism (now often considered an outdated term) into transgenderism. Or are we going to insist that those seeking to transition possess the correct biological markers before allowing them access to HRT? — BitconnectCarlos

Non-binary can rely on an underlying bias towards a certain sex, but it's not equally common they do transitions. The foundation for transitioning is still based on the same experience of either alignment or not.

Proper investigation into what? That they're "really" transgender? That they were "really" born in the wrong body? The medical community creates the criteria. Do we allow a child to transition if their parents say no? — BitconnectCarlos

The investigation is both medical and psychological. Most children have some confusion about their gender, it's part of growing up. Investigation is about trying to differentiate if this is such common confusion or being a more fundamental case of transgenderism. I'm not sure what makes you think children are put into transitioning just haphazardly.

What criteria do you suggest we follow other than the most up to date research?

For example, let's stop the ongoing trend of nose jobs. The regret rate among patients is at an average 16.4%. Since this leads to mental health issues such as "Body Dysmorphic Disorder", depression, anxiety and "Post-Surgical Dissatisfaction" with many returning for correction that only deepens the problems, I suggest that we should ban nose jobs in society.

Why isn't this an equal issue in society seen as how many go through with it? Why aren't we looking into these mental health issues? Why is it that transgender people gets this much critique? Why is it that the dissatisfaction rate or regret gets unproportionally large empirical room compared to almost all other treatments? Why is the satisfaction rate and the mental health improvements among transgender children ignored or overlooked while the extremely low regret rate gets all the attention? The critical examination has only concluded the lack of extensive long term data. It's not at all enough for the kinds of conclusions you make. Especially seen as the data so far points in the other direction.

This specific sub-topic started with the fact of the general public's inability to make reasonable conclusions based on their lacking ability of statistical understanding. The interpretations of statistical data leads to the conclusions they want to make, primarily because it is focused in on specific numbers, not within context or with surrounding factors taken into consideration. In this case, the lack of long term data in research becomes empirical evidence for why children shouldn't get treatment. Even though we have observations of declining mental health among children who didn't get treatment. The regret rate among the group going through treatment is around 1%. A 0% rate is statistically impossible, but 1% is remarkably low in statistics. If you focus in on the 1% and get their regret voiced out, you can make a good case against treatment through emotionally loaded arguments, but it would be a skewed argument that do not portray the general reality of transgenders situation.

but adults who want to transition need to go through years of investigation? — Christoffer

Now that is cruel. In the US you can get HRT after a 45 minute consultation (although it varies state by state). Making a suicidal population wait years to be "trans-vestigated" before given access to HRT is cruel.

Non-binary can rely on an underlying bias towards a certain sex, but it's not equally common they do transitions. The foundation for transitioning is still based on the same experience of either alignment or not. — Christoffer

Ok but non-binary people do transition and they have just the same right to as transwomen or transmen. They just want to feel more in accordance with their non-binary gender identity and I don't see the problem with that.

And virtually all of us have male characteristics and female characteristics.

Most children have some confusion about their gender, it's part of growing up. — Christoffer

Now that is surprising to me if true. I wonder whether this is true across time. I don't recall this being much of a thing decades ago. We've always had feminine boys and masculine girls.

Investigation is about trying to differentiate if this is such common confusion or being a more fundamental case of transgenderism. I'm not sure what makes you think children are put into transitioning just haphazardly. — Christoffer

You ever consider maybe there's no clear cut line between the two? I've seen experiments where children take a sleeve of oreos over $10,000. I simply don't trust their judgment especially when it comes to very major life issues like going through puberty and maintaining their fertility. A child simply can't look decades down the line like an adult can. A child can see the here and the now. They can regurgitate ideas that have been taught to them and appeal to them. They cannot understand themselves because the brain doesn't stop developing until the mid 20s and they are not fully formed.

EDIT: It is different if we are talking about a child of 16 or 17 rather than 6 or 7.

The problem is that things like this becomes a foundation for conclusions that doesn't correlate with the specifics of the criticism. — Christoffer

The foundation of my opinion is intuition, and I am unashamed to admit it.

I don't expect anyone to take it seriously, but alas here we are.

Intuitions lead to investigations, and, lowe and behold, investigations lead to indications that something is fishy.

For example, let's stop the ongoing trend of nose jobs. The regret rate among patients is at an average 16.4%. Since this leads to mental health issues such as "Body Dysmorphic Disorder", depression, anxiety and "Post-Surgical Dissatisfaction" with many returning for correction that only deepens the problems, I suggest that we should ban nose jobs in society.

Why isn't this an equal issue in society seen as how many go through with it? — Christoffer

Yea, why isn't it? I would say the normalization of cosmetic surgery is a serious issue, actually. I can't think of anything more damaging to say to a young person than "You are, indeed, not good enough and we should mutilate you to make you better".

Do note that I said nothing about bans, but I'm glad my argument sounds authoritative enough that it would merit a ban. Just something to think about...

Why is it that transgender people gets this much critique? — Christoffer

I don't remember the last time "society" was being blamed for the high rates of suicide among recipients of cosmetic surgery.

That, and the fact that transgender viewpoints are finding their ways into children's classrooms which is obviously not where they belong.

Fwiw, from a 2019 thread ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/336888

@Mikie

FeelTheBern
https://theintercept.com/2024/11/12/trump-harris-democrats-working-class-voters/ :fire:

:up:

It’s compelling. But who really knows? I don’t. I feel like Bernie would have done better, but he would have had the entire Democrat establishment after him— twice as much as that short window in early 2020 when he looked like he would win the nomination after Nevada, and there were 3 or 4 op-eds in the NY Times every day just trashing him, with idiots like Bret Stephens losing their shit about him being the nominee and vowing never to vote for him EVER, even voting for Trump if he were nominated.

Given that, who knows if he would have pushed through?

I agree. Bernie would probably have comfortably won against Trump, even back in 2016, just because he is a normal man with normal views and seems to possess a moral backbone (a rarity in politics).

I spent some time wondering why the Democrats went with circus candidates instead of him, but then the obvious conclusion came: Bernie is just as big of a threat to the neocon establishment as Trump is.

2024: Sometimes the sheeple vote for wolves instead of sheepdogs.

e.g. 53% of White women again chose a "Your Body, My Choice" misogynist by playing the "White Power" (MAGA) race card.

addendum to:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/945715

@Amity @Mikie @Benkei @Maw @Wayfarer @Fooloso4 @Vera Mont @Baden

21Jan25: MAGA¹ America officially becomes an oligarchic (corporatist) kakistocracy.²

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/945323 [1]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakistocracy [2]

I look forward to the EU stepping into part of the power vacuum being created.

I'd support a USE.

What? And end up with the same insanity as the USA? No thank you. We do need to make some hard choices on industry. Vertical integrated industries for anything space- and self-defence related. Import duties on anything not produced in line with our sustainability and human rights practises as that simply creates an unfair competitive advantages compared to EU producers; and simply start producing a lot more ourselves again with no reliance on anybody else but the EU states.

What? And end up with the same insanity as the USA? — Benkei

It's cool, we're better than them. I'd suggest letting the Scandinavians take the lead, they seem to know what they're doing.

What would the US population think if this came to pass?

https://people.com/donald-trump-mentions-third-term-house-gop-meeting-8744857

Well, he certainly can't be elected again. That would require a constitutional amendment which ain't happening.

A grey area is if he is nominated as Speaker of the House (which doesn't require being a congressman), and then having the President and Vice President resign.

So don't worry, there might be a way to get Obama back.

Well, he certainly can't be elected again. That would require a constitutional amendment which ain't happening. — Michael

Trump basically has dominance over most parts of the US government. So why won't that happen if people support him in it? It's not a natural physical law that it wouldn't happen and right now it seems he doesn't have much blocking him if he wanted to change it.

A constitutional amendment requires two-thirds of both houses and three quarters of the states.

A constitutional amendment requires two-thirds of both houses and three quarters of the states. — Michael

What governs that ruling? I mean, what governs the form in which amendments are decided?

I'm just saying, what would stop someone if they would do anything to stay in power? What rules actually applies, especially having the supreme court in your pocket and hints at uprooting other fundamentals?

Well, if you're talking about practical enforcement then I suppose it's the armed forced which has the final say.

Well, if you're talking about practical enforcement then it's whoever the armed forced listen to. — Michael

Basically, I'm wondering, how far can Trump stretch his power until the population and other government authorities had enough. Around 27 years ago, a blowjob was too much for the public and politics to handle, but now we have a president that seems to push things further and further. So when will people say enough is enough? What's the line? The actual line that is. At which crossing it would result in removal by force.