Okay I feel I should be the fuckin Queen of England. I'm in the wrong body, please get me out of here and put me into the queen's body. Where's my throne as well? You need to learn to respect the necessity of meaning you scummy bastard.

That's what a transexual sounds like to a psychologist. That's clearly the sign of mental trouble, not of physical trouble. It requires a treatment for the mind, not for the body.

Missing the point-- giving you the Queen's body and throne are acts of empirical possession. Souls are not such a possession. They are regardless of it. Even if we don't give you the Queen's body or throne, your is so. The necessity of meaning is not a pass to get anything and everything. That is, as always, is a question of ethics.

And that's what the aversion to trans identity (as opposed to any actions such as surgery) amounts to. It's an ethical position trans identity ought not exist, rather than identification of delusion, mental illness or self harm.

That's why, for example, people like yourself attack trans identity, as opposed to medical procedures which carry expense an risk. You don't say: "Trans people are great, but they ought to avoid the expense an risk of medial procedures relating to bodily transition." Rather, you attack their very identity. They (supposedly) think "nonsense" about themselves and are deeply unethical for making social transition (e.g. being someone with certain clothes and appearance, pronouns, etc.,etc.). Most of all, they are the embodiment of evil for wanting people like you to recognise their identity.

That's why, for example, people like yourself attack trans identity, a opposed to medical procedures which carry expense an risk — TheWillowOfDarkness

No I have no problem with their identity. I have a problem with allowing my society to let them have access to barbarous means of harming their bodies. And I don't care how they live, so long as they live in a civilised fashion, like all other folks. If they start fucking around and behaving like animals, then I do mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDela4jNto

Look at these folks. These folks aren't simply some nice fellow progressives who like to live as they wish without disturbing anyone. They want to make everyone else accept and approve of their way of life, and they find their joy in disturbing and upsetting public order. Hence they deserve to be restrained, quite possibly put in jail, because they simply disturb and affect other people's lives negatively. We need to respect each other in society. These people, through such disgusting and uncivilised protests, disrespect everyone else in their society.

They want to make everyone else accept and approve of their way of life, and they find their joy in disturbing and upsetting public order. Hence they deserve to be restrained, quite possibly put in jail, because they simply disturb and affect other people's lives negatively. We need to respect each other in society. These people, through such disgusting and uncivilised protests, disrespect everyone else in their society. — Agustino

This means you have a problem with their identity. Part of the point is other ought to recognise trans identity as legitimate (i.e. someone is not delusional for being trans) and someone expressing it is no less valuable than a cisgender person.

Trans identity inherently disrupts our present public order. It destroys out ability to ground social position on the sexed body. Earlier in the thread, some were talking of the sex/gender split, as if each concept didn't have anything to do with each other. This is a red-herring employed to maintain the essential relationship between sexual biology and identity. By boxing off trans identity as about only the "mind," questions about the identity of the body are put to rest. Trans identity is allowed to be without disputing what the body means for identity.

But trans identity is also about understanding of the body in relation to identity. For people who fit the "born in the wrong body" narrative, for example, the body is sort of important. It forms part of their identity (the body the ought to have, the body they feel), which they express and want recognised. A respect for being identified as part of a sex category (people with an identity with a particular body) is at stake.

Accepting trans identity means blowing-up our essential understanding of sex and gender categories. It means we can't just look at a body and know which sex/gender category someone belongs to. Sure, we might know the body, but this doesn't tell us someone's identity. Social organisation dependent on the sexed body collapses. If we can't tell whether someone with a vagina belongs to the category of "male" or "female," we can't assign them to a "male" of "female" role on the basis of their body. As a concept, understanding and acceptance of trans identity destroys a major pillar of (current) public order and (for many people) identity (essential sex/gender and its ability to assign social roles).

Part of the point is other ought to recognise trans identity as legitimate (i.e. someone is not delusional for being trans) and someone expressing it is no less valuable than a cisgender person. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Why are these Nazis concerned with what I think? Do they see me going around concerned what other folks think about my identity?

I also do not wish to be seen as a close-minded bigot, but I suspect that if given the choice from the very start of life, most people would choose to be heterosexual and cisgendered, in the same way they would choose to be tall rather than short, strong rather than weak, intelligent rather than dim.

The reality is that not everyone is tall, strong, intelligent, heterosexual, or cisgendered, even if these would have been evolutionarily advantageous. It is an inconvenient truth that nobody seems to want to address publicly: not everyone is equal. Some people are indeed better suited to do things than others.

The righteousness of things will depend on what our goals are. If our goals are instinctual and bent on surviving in a pre-technological and pre-leisure community, then indeed those who are not suited to fulfill the necessary roles will be looked down upon.

But as the civil rights activists have pointed out, we no longer live in Darwinian communities. We no longer need to discriminate between appearances for protection. And we no longer need to be heterosexual or cisgendered in order to manage.

Because our collective goals have moved on from our ancestral instincts, we no longer need these obfuscating and discriminatory principles. So there's nothing wrong with being homosexual or transgendered. Although notice how most people would like it if you could be tall, strong, and bright, because it would benefit the community. Once again we have the subjugating nature of goals.

Because it impacts on their lives. What you think defines actions and culture which has a negative impact on them. You do not respect them as people who ought to exist. Instead of being viewed as people who ought to exist, you think them an error of the world, some state which ought to be different because it defies a perfect nature (i.e. not delusional).

And yes, they do see you concerned about your identity: your entire attack on the "progressives" is exactly that. You regularly scoff at the notion that anyone would make the demand that you abandon your particular identity-- "How dare the West demand people give their love of strongman leaders, traditions, etc., etc."

That's, well, pretty bigoted.

You aren't wrong about people wishing not to be trans. Some trans people say exactly that. Sex/gender dysphoria is a horrible experience.

The problem is you take it to be a question of being a capable human, rather than avoiding something that's horrible. Just because a trans person has a horrible experience of dysphoria, it doesn't necessarily means they are incapable of task or less fit to survive. To experience something horrible doesn't mean you are some how useless and unfit for anything else.

Transgenderism should be treated as a mental disorder. Not indulging them in their own dangerous ailment.

Regret, unhappiness and suicides, even after surgery--studies says many remain traumatized


Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population.

There is no conclusive evidence that sex change operations improve the lives of transsexuals, with many people remaining severely distressed and even suicidal after the operation, according to a medical review conducted exclusively for Guardian Weekend tomorrow.

But the left has a ingenious solution for these problems, just increase the minimum wage.

Because it impacts on their lives. What you think defines actions and culture which has a negative impact on them. You do not respect them as people who ought to exist. Instead of being viewed as people who ought to exist, you think them an error of the world, some state which ought to be different because it defies a perfect nature (i.e. not delusional). — TheWillowOfDarkness

If they're so weak that they can't even take someone thinking differently than them, they are suffering of a mental illness. I live with many many folks in this community for example being opposed to my identity as you would say (though that's probably the wrong way to put it) and I take it. It's not that hard. People are different, they don't have to think like me, nor approve of and live like me.

You regularly scoff at the notion that anyone would make the demand that you abandon your particular identity-- "How dare the West demand people give their love of strongman leaders, traditions, etc., etc — TheWillowOfDarkness

Yes but I don't scoff at the notion that other people must approve of my identity and think it's the right and only way of being. I go on being who I am and don't give a shit about what others think. They should do the same.

Dont worry, The Willow of DARKNESS will bring his shadow around soon and tell you how these transexuals you cite are more suicidal after surgery because of folks like you, who don't approve of their real identity

Just because a trans person has a horrible experience of dysphoria, it doesn't necessarily means they are incapable of task or less fit to survive. To experience something horrible doesn't mean you are some how useless and unfit for anything else. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Nor did I intend to imply this. I meant that in a bygone age, transgenderism would not have passed the status quo, as we had different goals back then, such as reproduction and gender-designated social roles. In today's day and age, we have much more freedom to be an individual instead of a cookie-cutter derived from evolutionary need.

Compare this to the case with women. Feminists will often speak of the past age in which women were suited to do different sorts of things than men. They didn't hunt, nor did they usually fight over mates. But in the present day we have no such need for these gender roles.

The worry I had was that I would be called out as a bigot simply for saying some people would rather be someone else than who they are, because they perceive the alternative to be superior. Which I suspect is actually more of a product of their environment than some inherent essential human psychological urge. A gay man might wish to be straight because he lives in an environment of anti-gay sentiments. If he grew up in a progressive area, however, this might be different. It all depends.

Not true, you've been railing against the "progressives' all over the place. You scoff at the notion of a world which is run on their principles. You no less argue people ought to follow your identity than trans people or anyone supporting them. You've said people ought to live and think like you countless times on this board-- witness your exclamation of glory that people in the West were finally waking up to the scourge of "progressivism," which would end our culture obsession with permissiveness. You give bucketloads of shit to what people think. You aren't sitting back and saying: "Ehh, it's fine. People can value and think whatever suits them."

Dont worry, The Willow of DARKNESS will bring his shadow around soon and tell you how these transexuals you cite are more suicidal after surgery because of folks like you, who don't approve of their real identity — Agustino

Well, it's is a factor. But Emptyheaded's argument is a pretty good reflection of the problem of seeing it in terms of a "mental illness." It fools us into thinking trans identity is something we give a magic pill to cure.

Medical transition is misread as something that meant to make everyone's lives fantastic. It's not. At best, it is imperfect. Is it any surprise that some people who desperately feel they ought to have a different body sometimes aren't satisfied with a (comparatively) poor copy of what they envision? Or that any satisfaction derived from transition doesn't necessarily amount to a cure to any or all mental illness someone has? Emptyheaded thinks he is showing the foolishness of trans identity, but all he's doing is showing the mistake of thinking of it as a mental illness to be cured and the ignorant expectation this raises.

I think professional psychiatrists are a bunch of cuckoos pretty much. I think the way in which they work, having multiple and different patients, and spending relatively little with the patient in actual real life circumstances makes them completely unaware of what a patient actually goes through or how to help them. The ideal is an Aristotle walking around with a young Alexander. That's what a psychiatrist ought to be, and that's the one I trust. — Agustino

This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read.

I meant that in a bygone age, transgenderism would not have passed the status quo — darthbarracuda

Not only not passed the status quo, not even existed! To what extent transsexualism existed before it was conceptualized as a thing (normal or pathological), is hard to say. There aren't any physical characteristics of transsexualism. It's an oddity of humans that we can feel all sorts of things, and act on our feelings with great satisfaction, (or be greatly distressed) but not recognize what we are doing and feeling until we have a label/term/concept which fits the behavior.

"Transsexual" or "Transgender is a recent "'liberation' movement"--the 'T' added onto the GLB: Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual movement for GLBT.

Had Christine Jorgensen been committed to a mental institution and been given shock therapy and a lobotomy in 1951, instead of estrogen therapy and a penis-ectomy, and had a sex change industry not grown up at several large medical schools (like the University of Minnesota), we might not be having this discussion. The "transgender movement" might have been stillborn, and lots of people would have found other obsessions. other problems to focus upon.

Had the American Psychological Association decided in 1972, "No, we think homosexuals really are sick and twisted sons of bitches, and we are not pulling their disorder from the index." the Gay Liberation Movement would probably have developed along different lines.

I never cared for AIDS Pride, which is sort of like gay, bisexual, and transgender pride. Or Crip Pride, Deaf Pride, Blind Pride, Cancer Pride (especially breast cancer pride), Downs Pride, and the rest of it. Dead Pride, I suppose is around the corner. Most of the Gay Community, and many in the wider world, were guilt-tripped into buying the story about the virtues of living with AIDS, not being a victim, and learning so much about life from being intensely ill.

"No, no -- we're NOT victims. We're living with AIDS."

Sure you are. That's why so many of the people "living with AIDS" are dead already.

"AIDS has been so good for me, it has taught me how important kindness is."

Christ--couldn't you have figured that out without anal tumors, constant diarrhea, brain infections, and severe pain?

And living with AIDS... not when that slogan was cooked up. Sure, people were living longer than they would have if they had been run over by a train, but between 1981 and 1996, AIDS was hell on wheels.

This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read. — Heister Eggcart

You have read dumber things than Agustino's proposal.

I've sat across the desk from psychiatrists on many occasions, on my own behalf. Some of them were good at what they do, some were not. Psychiatrists mostly prescribe medicine for mood disorders and base their treatments on patient reports. Good psychiatrists can cross examine a patient's report and determine whether the patient is exaggerating or covering up their symptoms. Bad psychiatrists aren't so capable.

The actual daily circumstances of the patient are not of great importance to psychiatry, because the model of care by which they are paid doesn't allow for more than the briefest specific familiarity with the patient's life. Besides, all they hear is complaining: They know people are unhappy, and that their jobs and spouses are driving them crazy (literally).

They can't counsel the patient that "Therapy means change, not adjustment" because they really don't have the time to help the patient examine their lives and actually make changes. That kind of therapy requires maybe two or three hundred hours of very good talk therapy. Most psychiatrists will see the patient...8 to 12 times, for perhaps 15 minutes a shot (if you are lucky) or for a half hour per visit if you are severely ill (like manic depression).

Psychiatrists have been called "Paid friends" but that is way out of date. Psychotherapists or social workers can sometimes be paid friends. Psychiatrists are more like hired acquaintances, or hired passers-by.

Having an intelligent, insightful friend or two is very good for one's mental health. Ideally, depressed, anxious, paranoid, vindictive SOBs would have these two or three smart insightful friends to draw upon during the day. The trouble is, the screwed up unhappy people hugely outnumber the smart, insightful population of friendly people. And sometimes, smart, insightful friendly people have perplexing problems of their own. Like all the lunatics they know.

I agree, AIDS pride and similar movements are basically coping mechanisms.

they should be pitied and helped, just like other people suffering from mental conditions. — Agustino

No one with a mental condition should be pitied and helped unless either (a) they want help because they don't like the way they are, or (b) they're unable to function/take care of themselves re simple daily tasks--maintaining shelter, acquiring and ingesting food, etc. AND they (at least seem to) want to be able to achieve those daily tasks.

It is completely against our survival in evolutionary terms and looks like an aberrant disorder of the mind that serves no purpose and is completely backward to procreation as a species. For if everyone was a transgender and/or gay that would mean no one would have babies (assuming IVF does not exist). — intrapersona

This argument doesn't work because evolution has no teleology. It's not that organisms ought reproduce, it's just that those that do are more likely to have copies of their genes show up in subsequent generations. So it's not a competition between species, or even just a singular species trying to propagate itself into the future. Rather, evolution can be understood as a 'competition' between individual genes, although here is no teleology or 'want' to reproduce, it's just that those that do, are likely to have gene copies show up in the subsequent generations, and those that don't reproduce, aren't.

However, I think an argument can be made that there ought be a better treatment to Gender Identity Disorder than 'transgendering'. As in, changing genders as a medical treatment is a bad treatment. It strikes me as much like giving liposuction to an anorexic.

What I've noticed (I have no stats or proof for this it's just anecdotal) is that transgender people have these highly rigid notions of gender. As in, pink is for boys, blue is for girls. But not just for how one appears but also for how one ought act. A man ought be responsible and not effeminate, nor 'pretty', nor interested in make up, or other men sexually or romantically, dresses, and a man ought be dominant, confident, not sexually submissive, and a man ought be interested in mechanical things and science rather than art and poetry. And likewise for female to males. It's as if they can't see that you don't literally need to inject testosterone in order to wear suits, be sexually dominant towards other women (transgenders have a far higher rate or homosexuality (in terms of their birth sex) than cis), and not care about your appearance.

I suspect a lot of transgender people had parents with really rigid notions of gender. "No! You can't cut your hair, short hair is for boys, and you are A GIRL, and girls have long hair!" If you imagine a parent with this sort of attitude towards all notions of gender, this could confuse the hell out of a child or teen. A young or teen girl doesn't care about clothes, pink, being submissive, liking arty things, wanting children, boys sexually or romantically, or any other stereotypical notion of the female gender. And yet has it drilled into her, all through her childhood and teens that only boys DON'T want these things. You can see the logic from here: "I don't like X, I like Y. Only boys like Y. Therefore, I am a boy." That's my pet theory anyway..

I suspect that, rather than people with GID starting off with a primary desire being to alter their body to appear like the opposite sex biologically, (and therefore they're really a girl because they have this desire). It's more like, their primary desire is to act and appear like girls do (and therefore they're really a girl because they want to act/appear this way, (and girls don't have penises)).

To answer the question: nothing. — Benkei

Clearly not. GID/gender dysphoria is a terrible disorder to have, with an awful prognosis. Apparently 41 percent attempt suicide at some point. Being transgender is just the medical treatment for the disease (gender dyshporia, or Gender Identity Disorder). It's a shame this medical illness has been tacked onto LGB issues and causes/politicized.

To give a bit of clarification on that 41% number, while the methodology of the study I'm guessing you've cited (linked by EmptyHeady?) was not so robust in the it was an almost wholly uncontrolled method of sampling with a smallish sample size to begin with (they had a small budget and it's probably hard to gather statistical data on a socially rare phenomenon), but casting that aside for the moment, the study itself concluded that the link between GID and suicide has much to do with the social and economic ramifications of transitioning rather than the disorder itself.

A staggering 41% of respondents reported attempting suicide compared to 1.6% of the general population, with unemployment, low income, and sexual and physical assault raising the risk factors significantly...

The National Institute for Mental Health (NIMH) reports that most suicide attempts are signs of extreme distress, with risk factors including precipitating events such as job loss, economic crises, and loss of functioning. Given that respondents in this study reported loss in nearly every major life area, from employment to housing to family life, the suicide statistics reported here cry out for further research on the connection between the consequences of bias in the lives of transgender and gender non-conforming people and suicide attempts.

To give a bit of clarification on that 41% number, while the methodology of the study I'm guessing you've cited (linked by EmptyHeady?) was not so robust in the it was an almost wholly uncontrolled method of sampling with a smallish sample size to begin with (they had a small budget and it's probably hard to gather statistical data on a socially rare phenomenon) — VagabondSpectre

Did you read it?

"Over 7,000 people responded to the 70 question survey, providing data on virtually every significant aspect of transgender discrimination—including housing, employment, health and health care, education, public accommodation, family life, criminal justice, and identity documents."

And here a more recent study completely confirming the 41%: "Suicide attempts among trans men (46%) and trans women (42%) were slightly higher than the full sample (41%). "

To answer the question: nothing — Benkei

lol

Well certainly if you can see souls, then I'd expect you to have much greater insights than I would with regards to God no? — Agustino

No, not as of yet and best I can tell, if there is a soul of God, he has plenty of sources to convey any message he wishes. ;)

I suppose that you can converse, and ask the souls you meet about God no? Hence if you asked this question, it would seem strange to me. It's like a man who can see, while looking out the window, asks me if there's a tree in front of him. — Agustino

Souls have their own message to convey and as I said are persistent about it, until it has been heard by the right person.

So - you can't ask souls questions?

The only time I have been able to ask a soul questions, is when the person the soul is trying to contact is present and open.

Hmm okay, I see. And weren't you curious to ask them about God, the spirit realm etc. when you did have the chance?

I think professional psychiatrists are a bunch of cuckoos pretty much. I think the way in which they work, having multiple and different patients, and spending relatively little with the patient in actual real life circumstances makes them completely unaware of what a patient actually goes through or how to help them — Agustino

Do you know what a DSM 5 code is? Maybe you are more familiar with an ICD 9 code is?
Exactly how many Psychiatrists have you seen as a patient in your life?

Hmm okay, I see. And weren't you curious to ask them about God, the spirit realm etc. when you did have the chance? — Agustino

I am not really curious about God, as I am not really a believer in God, so much as I am a mixer of religions if that makes sense.

Do you know what a DSM 5 code is? Maybe you are more familiar with an ICD 9 code is?
Exactly how many Psychiatrists have you seen as a patient in your life? — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Yes I do know what the DSM codes are. I've seen 3 psychiatrist (and a few psychologists), and I have to say they were the most boring and hilariously stupid people. You told them what they wanted to hear, they congratulated you, bye bye! >:O (not to mention that what they understand by normality is being like your average Joe in the street - if Alexander the Great goes in there they'd tell him he's NUTS!) I haven't heard a single useful thing from psychiatrist, quite the contrary, everything they said was so general, and so inapplicable, that trying to apply it actually made your condition worse not better. It's not until I quit listening to their nonsense that I started to overcome my anxiety and become like I am today, when I rarely, if ever feel very anxious.

That's strange, if I was in the position to speak to souls, I would have many questions to ask them I would imagine.

Not true, you've been railing against the "progressives' all over the place. You scoff at the notion of a world which is run on their principles. You no less argue people ought to follow your identity than trans people or anyone supporting them. You've said people ought to live and think like you countless times on this board-- witness your exclamation of glory that people in the West were finally waking up to the scourge of "progressivism," which would end our culture obsession with permissiveness. You give bucketloads of shit to what people think. You aren't sitting back and saying: "Ehh, it's fine. People can value and think whatever suits them." — TheWillowOfDarkness

Yes, because these Nazis want to control what I think. I can't even think a certain way, I'm not allowed. I personally don't care that others think differently, but these progressives do care, so then the rest of us have to do something about them so that they start learning to mind their own affairs without disturbing others - like they do in the video I showed you.

I said I will fight the progressives with exactly the same weapons the progressives use - because those weapons work, the progressives have been proving it for decades! The progressives fight by attacking certain identities - thus I will fight back in the same way. Why? It works! I've analysed the progressive mind, and the reason why progressive movements have been winning is simply because they use moral blackmail of good people like me. The way the progressive mind works, is that what others think and say about you is very important - in fact it's the only thing that matters. Truth doesn't matter. Truth is simply what others think for progressives. So if I call a loose progressive woman a slut, it's a disaster for her, because all that matters for her isn't whether she is a slut or not, it's whether people think of her that way. That's why the progressives are trying to re-define what a loose woman is - she's not a slut, she's liberated, I'm supposed to admire and congratulate her now. She improved from the condition of how women had to be in the past (oppressed!), and that's laudable.

So the progressive mind mistakes other minds to be the same. They think if they call me a sexist, a xenophobe, a misogynist, and morally deformed, then I will lick up to them and start playing their game - like you have forced poor @darthbarracuda to do. He has to watch what he says, he has to beg you not to consider him a bigot, he has to bow his head and be a slave to you. He has to fight back, and show how pro-feminazi he is by struggling with convoluted explanations as to why he admires modern progressive women, so that you don't label him all those things. It's fucking outrageous! You should be ashamed of yourself Willow. The progressives have fooled us into believing we have to defend ourselves from their charges, their slander, and their labelling. They have morally blackmailed us, because they tell us - you are good people, you can't do this - so that they can then continue playing their game. But we don't have to obey. And I don't defend at all. I wear the labels with pride. Because I can wear them with pride. I know I'm not a sexist, nor a xenophobe or a misogynist or morally deformed. I know that. Doesn't matter what the progressives say. They can label me however they want, I don't care. But this doesn't hold the other way. If I tell a loose woman she's a slut, then there's no way she can think otherwise, because it's the truth. That's what actually angers progressives - the truth. They are Nietzsche's weak - they are playing a losing game, and they know it.

So remember friends - two methods the progressives use to control you. Number 1: they morally blackmail you so that you start playing their game and defending yourself "uh I'm not a bigot I'm not a bigot, look how pro-feminazi I am!". Number 2: They prevent you from striking back by appealing to your compassion and benevolence. You're a good person, you can't strike back, can you? Don't let yourselves be fooled. And many many are waking up Willow. People aren't stupid anymore. For quite some time it used to be just me and a few who dared question our progressive masters. But now just look at this thread - so many great people standing up.

Well, it's is a factor. But Emptyheaded's argument is a pretty good reflection of the problem of seeing it in terms of a "mental illness." It fools us into thinking trans identity is something we give a magic pill to cure. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Yes - there the appeal to compassion and benevolence continues. "You're a bad person Emptyheaded! You don't have any bit of human love for these suffering people!" People are seeing through this Willow. People aren't stupid.