What happened to getting to know Lenny Kravitz and Bob Dylan being awesome all of a sudden? You were a belieber a little while ago! What did I do!

Blanchard also holds a priori that there are no natal women analogs to autogynephilia because women can't be perverts. Hell of a lot more girl fags than the inverse in reality though... there has to be, as there's overwhelmingly more content aimed at them.

I'm neither a transsexual nor an autogynephile (or crossdreamer) as my good buddy jack calls it. If I have a fetish it's for lesbians and I don't have particularly stereotypical female interests or anything, and came to the conclusion around twelve with puberty.

I'm a bit intimidated by all you experts though... go easy on me.

Normal is fiction. Nobody lives there full time.

Just 20 years ago, I'd say just about all the lesbians and bisexuals I knew were crazy in some way or another. If somebody had done some statistical analysis, the conclusion would probably have been some psychobabble. Of course they were crazy. They led crazy lives.

Now it's different. It's more normalized. Because it's easier to live a normal life, there are more homosexuals who aren't nuts. I don't see why the same wouldn't be true of trans people. Is there some stuff that still needs to be worked through? Sure. Why would anybody expect otherwise?

That's my expert opinion. :-}

So, let's sum this up... it's a fact that psychiatrists are greedy, immoral and corrupt to the bone, not to mention at the same time hilariously stupid, and of course also a bunch of faggot cuckoos consulting lying books who want people to be sick and suffer and will stop at nothing to destroy all signs of greatness and mostly just want to enslave you to society? — zookeeper

Learn to write shorter sentences.

And that psychiatrists (probably pretty regularly) sending Alexander the Great, Jesus, Mohammed, Napoleon and Julius Caesar to the asylum is actually a really bad thing? — zookeeper

Well yeah, that's actually terrible. These people have written history, not the others. They have driven the progress of the human race, almost single-handedly. Sending them to the asylum is sending the best of the human race away. These people, and others like them, they are great, and should be respected for it. However, the human race does have a tendency to kill the best of its members or otherwise destroy them. It's called jealousy and ressentiment and I think you might just be suffering from it - you and Heister Feister actually, both of you.

And you realized all this, plus the fact that progressives are actually Nazis trying to control your thoughts, after you quit seeing psychiatrists and taking your medication? — zookeeper

And here he goes again. Here he goes again kids. The same strategy. Discredit your opponent, not by countering his arguments, but by personal attacks and insinuation. "No, he can't be right, he realised it only after stopping his medicine and after he quit seeing psychiatrists, and therefore what he says is wrong because he's mentally ill". That's what you're saying, nothing more, nothing less. So, because someone stops going to the psychiatrist, according to your picayune brain, they are mentally ill. And don't give me some horse manure that this isn't what you're saying, because we both know what your question aims to insinuate. Whereas it is quite clear to anyone with an ounce of human intelligence that the mentally ill are those who DO go to the psychiatrist, and to leave the psychiatrist is actually the first sign of mental well-being, when one no longer needs or requires a crutch, and has willingly and out of his own initiative dropped it. That is in fact a sign of great mental strength, not of weakness. Weakness exists so long as you require a crutch. My life achievements ever since I left the psychiatrist, professionally especially, but also immediately after leaving the psychiatrist, while in University, are proof that I am not, and I was not a mentally ill man. Mental illness - according to my definition, not the crooked psychiatrist definition - is any psychological trouble which stops you from achieving goals. Someone who achieves their goals - that person cannot be mentally ill. They may be evil - like Hitler - or good - like Socrates - but definitely NOT mentally ill.

Kids, take heed. Take your meds and don't skip sessions. — zookeeper

I suggest you go back to caring for your zoo, it seems that your intelligence is only sufficient to deal with the animals.

Your sentiments on mental health are revolting to me, so I'm not going to tickle your fancy and indulge in fruitless conversation. — Heister Eggcart

Heister Feister the man who put my name as his favorite philosopher and has had it there for quite some time! The man who always posts in the threads I post, with some snarky comment and an unwillingness to engage in discussion. Does this guy have a crush on me? >:O There's other people in the forums Heister ;)

Maybe you're a lesbian. Have you thought of that? I mean with all this fluidity, it would seem terribly discriminatory to prohibit lesbianism from anyone.

In other news, I've got to take prednisone for a couple of weeks for a condition that is none of your God damned business (so stop fucking prying). It's like making me sweat and get a little hyped up, sort of like after drinking a bunch of coffee but without the runs. Having no real vices, having this weird buzz is kind of cool, and I can now see why people get hooked on meth. Yep, just a little anti-inflammatory meds and I'm talking about meth.

The point of this is that I now get how people might want to change their reality, either through meds or through the knife. And by "through the knife," I'm talking about having one's gonads lopped off, just so there's no confusion.

I think I'm going to take this energy surge to the gym to get huuuuuuuge.

Learn to write shorter sentences. — Agustino

:-}

Learn to write shorter rants.

Heister Feister the man who put my name as his favorite philosopher and has had it there for quite some time! The man who always posts in the threads I post, with some snarky comment and an unwillingness to engage in discussion. Does this guy have a crush on me? >:O There's other people in the forums Heister ;) — Agustino

You're a character, Agustino. After I realized you're not trolling, now you're just befuddling. I have no idea how you've not said the wrong thing to the wrong person and gotten shot, yet.

You're a character, Agustino. After I realized you're not trolling, now you're just befuddling. I have no idea how you've not said the wrong thing to the wrong person and gotten shot, yet. — Heister Eggcart

Oh yeeees, I'm very scared, especially of you Feister >:O - you're the Cowboy! Find something better to do than making threatening remarks over the internet kiddie. Any loser can do that ;)

You better be, I can be rather liberal at times...

>:O

You better be, I can be rather liberal at times... — Heister Eggcart

At times? You mean all the time, apart from sex. In that you're not liberal >:O In fact, you're more conservative than me, who would've thought...

I can be liberal, and I can be conservative. Reason does not belong merely to one interpretation.

Maybe you're a lesbian. Have you thought of that? I mean with all this fluidity, it would seem terribly discriminatory to prohibit lesbianism from anyone.. — Hanover

Duh! Nah, Utena showed me that I could be, not only the best at this, but be the very definition of it. It doesn't matter what or who I am, it matters what I do.

In other news, I've got to take prednisone for a couple of weeks for a condition that is none of your God damned business (so stop fucking prying). It's like making me sweat and get a little hyped up, sort of like after drinking a bunch of coffee but without the runs. Having no real vices, having this weird buzz is kind of cool, and I can now see why people get hooked on meth. Yep, just a little anti-inflammatory meds and I'm talking about meth..

It's lupus isn't it? it's probably lupus. I like weed a lot, more than I should (if you still do at my age, it means you're a fuck up). Heard on the radio on the way home that they're building an 800 square meter grow op factory in Leduc, biggest and most advanced in the world!

Sorry about your inflammation.

The point of this is that I now get how people might want to change their reality, either through meds or through the knife. And by "through the knife," I'm talking about having one's gonads lopped off, just so there's no confusion..

All people talk about is genitals and how grossed out they are about all that when they talk about transgenderism... it's fucking weird, and dehumanizing, you know. It's one of those things that indicates that everything you know about it comes from television and rumor.

I think I'm going to take this energy surge to the gym to get huuuuuuuge.

No you won't.

No, I don't have lupus. That's a chick disease. I suffer from cockus gigantus and I need the meds to fit into my fabulous sleak spandex unitard bitch.

Yeah, when a normal (what I call myself) hears about transstuff I think of a hacked up goober. That's not weird, that's normal. That's what transfolks do. I seen the movie.

If you smoke the weed, you are the fuckus upus. I live under the bright sober light of reality 24/7. Know why? Cuz I can deal with whatever shit the good Lord throws at me without needing to sedate. It's red blooded bad assery, something your Canadian ass don't undercomprehend.

Eat that bitch.

No you're right. I want it because I can't deal. You know, the guy sitting at the gates of hell in the depiction of Dante's inferno is incontinent in the Aristotelian sense, of being an addict.

I wouldn't be posting... or talking to anyone at all if I were high though. Forgetting is the most merciful thing in the world. No matter what's been bothering me, what worries or problems I have, I get to just be distracted by idiocy for awhile.

It's difficult being the only sane one in the asylum... I hope you have a good travel agent for the guilt trip you're sending me on!

14" bicep, neck, and calves. They're all supposed to be the same, and the biggest anyone ever had with my wrist size is 16" without PEDs.

I am comparing different mental disorders, and pointing out the fact that because transgenders suffer from some kind of mental disorder, they should be treated as such. — Emptyheady

How do we treat someone as if they have a mental disorder?

What perscriptions do you offer?

If you catch a man dressing up as a woman, do you have them committed?

We are dealing with a mental disorder, like anorexia. Not Yolanda from yoga lessons. — Emptyheady

Anorexia has objectively unhealthy ramifications on physical health, and that's the only reason really you can say that we ought to necessarily intervene in the life of an anorexic individual. But because transgender individuals are not necessarily inflicting any bodily harm upon themselves whatsoever, what necessary right do you have to intervene?

Anorexia is defined as a disorder where people perceive that they are not skinny enough and continue losing weight to the point of risking their nutritional and bodily health. The disorder is only recognizable when people begin to compromise their own health by not eating enough, and we only intervene because they're harming themselves.

At what point does transitioning into the opposite gender become objectively harmful?

When do we get the right to intervene and what exactly gives it to us?

The fact that transgenderism is listed as a mental disorder?

If it was not listed as a disorder in the DSM would we not have the right to intervene?

Let me explain what I mean with the word indulge. Their mental capacity is defective regarding judgements relevant to their own mental disorder. Therefore, another person with good judgement has the right to (and I would even say "ought to") intervene and override some important decisions that the person with mental disorder wishes to make -- a paternalistic approach. Suicide, starvation and surgery that permanently affect your life are what I consider important decisions. Decisions that someone with a mental disorder cannot make and no one should co-operate (i.e. indulge) as if that person has good judgement. — Emptyheady

In the 50's our society used this line of reasoning to castrate homosexuals. We thought that since homosexuality was as bad as chopping off limbs and death by starvation, we went to heinous lengths to try and end it.

So when an individual tells their psychiatrist that they want to transition, the psychiatrist should be issuing a hard "no" in every case, right?

Or are you just saying that since transitioning genders is an impactful decision, we should not let anyone make that decision alone?

None of this is controversial, since there are already laws in place that override your autonomy. For example, you cannot just go to the surgeon and ask him/her to cut off your legs without any medical reasons. That surgeon has to refuse it by law, if he/she does not that surgeon will risk some serious lawsuits. You can consider those laws as paternalistic, but they are there to protect vulnerable people who are either temporarily or permanently incapable of making good judgements. Interestingly enough, those laws are there even for people who do not suffer from a mental disorder. People who do suffer from a mental disorder have to live an even more restrictive life. It is simply evil to indulge them in their mental disorder. — Emptyheady

So when doctors perform sex change operations on individuals who have, with outside assistance, decided to transition, they are comitting an evil act?

Clarify what it is you're saying...

Normal is fiction. Nobody lives there full time. — Mongrel

Hanover is Mayor of normal town.

I most certainly have my aches and pains, but they remind me of what matters and of the sacred, as opposed to you godless ones who only gripe of the bitterness and then forsake the holy dark night by numbing yourself to it.

Don't feel any guilt though. Watching your failing is one of those divine pains I'm blessed to feel, rising me up to an even more lofted comprehension of the sacred.

How do we treat someone as if they have a mental disorder? — VagabondSpectre

By not indulging them in their mental disorder.

In the 50's our society used this line of reasoning to castrate homosexuals. We thought that since homosexuality was as bad as chopping off limbs and death by starvation, we went to heinous lengths to try and end it. — VagabondSpectre

ok

Or are you just saying that since transitioning genders is an impactful decision, we should not let anyone make that decision alone? — VagabondSpectre

Depends on the mental condition of that person, but given this context: yes.

Severity plays a role. Putting on different clothes is not an important decision. Surgery is.

Another analogy is how we treat children. A child can not request on his/her own a surgery. The doctor (legally) needs the signature of the parent (or official superior -- the legalities can get immensely complex but you get the point). Why? Because the child is simply mentally incapable to make such important decisions.

So when doctors perform sex change operations on individuals who have, with outside assistance, decided to transition, they are comitting an evil act? — VagabondSpectre

Depends on what basis the doctor performs the operation. He has to do so by a decision of a person with good judgement. In this case, not the patient, but a superior (e.g. psychiatrist?).

I'm glad that my influence betters you. That's all that really matters.

By not indulging them in their mental disorder. — Emptyheady

Full circle eh?

So for example, not permitting someone to dress as the opposite gender, right? To do so would be indulging them in their mental disorder after all, and we shouldn't do that... Right?

Another analogy is how we treat children. A child can not request on his/her own a surgery. The doctor (legally) needs the signature of the parent (or official superior -- the legalities can get immensely complex but you get the point). Why? Because the child is simply mentally incapable to make such important decisions. — Emptyheady

If by "indulging the delusion" you mean installing sex-change booths on every corner and handing out pez-hormone dispensers to children, then I really don't know why you bothered to post in this thread in the first place; nobody here is disagreeing with that.

But given that you opened by describing transgendered people as deluded victim trophies of the left, cited raw statistics (a common tactic of the regressive left you seem to know so well) indicating that sexual reassignment surgery is associated with risks such as increased suicidal behavior, and proceeded to equate transsexualism itself with anorexia (beause they're both in the DSM!), mental retardation and suicide, perhaps why you can see why I'm confused as to your actual position.

Depends on what basis the doctor performs the operation. He has to do so by a decision of a person with good judgement. In this case, not the patient, but a superior (e.g. psychiatrist?). — Emptyheady

So essentially what you're saying is that sometimes transgenderism, a mental disorder, should be indulged?

It's called jealousy and ressentiment and I think you might just be suffering from it - you and Heister Feister actually, both of you. — Agustino

Add me to the list

I most certainly have my aches and pains, but they remind me of what matters and of the sacred, as opposed to you godless ones who only gripe of the bitterness and then forsake the holy dark night by numbing yourself to it.

Don't feel any guilt though. Watching your failing is one of those divine pains I'm blessed to feel, rising me up to an even more lofted comprehension of the sacred. — Hanover

Umm Hanover, are you still taking that Prednisone? 8-)

Umm Hanover, are you still taking that Prednisone? 8-) — ArguingWAristotleTiff

I am, but it only has immune system suppressant properties and not the hallucinogenic properties needed to motivate my post.

So for example, not permitting someone to dress as the opposite gender, right? To do so would be indulging them in their mental disorder after all, and we shouldn't do that... Right? — VagabondSpectre

I literally said regarding important decisions and exampled clothing as a not important decision...

Can you read?

If by "indulging the delusion" you mean installing sex-change booths on every corner and handing out pez-hormone dispensers to children, then I really don't know why you bothered to post in this thread in the first place; nobody here is disagreeing with that. — VagabondSpectre

By treating a particular mental disorder like we treat all other mental disorders...

And by the way you misquoted me. I never said "the delusion" but that is fine, just don't moan if I accuse you of straw manning.

But given that you opened by describing transgendered people as deluded victim trophies of the left, cited raw statistics (a common tactic of the regressive left you seem to know so well) indicating that sexual reassignment surgery is associated with risks such as increased suicidal behavior, and proceeded to equate transsexualism itself with anorexia (beause they're both in the DSM!), mental retardation and suicide, perhaps why you can see why I'm confused as to your actual position. — VagabondSpectre

You are referring to this post. Again, I never used the words "deluded" or "regressive left." I do not mind this straw man, but it strongly indicates that you read things between the lines that are not there and it shows how sloppy you are in this conversation. This explains why I have to milk out an obvious uncontroversial point.

Sexual reassignment surgery is not associated with increased suicidal behaviour (or at best there is some weak correlation) -- none of my links show that. It just shows that surgery does next to nothing regarding the attempts of suicides, which further backs my point to not indulge transgenders. Again, it reveals your shoddy reading.

Transgenders are deeply insecure confused. More reasons not to indulge them, because no healthy and good judgement can be based on deep confusion and insecurity. Sometimes it turns out that they were just gay and regret the surgical transition.

Transgederism is more severe than anorexia regarding fatal consequences. So everything I said regarding anorexia is even more true regarding transgenderism.

So essentially what you're saying is that sometimes transgenderism, a mental disorder, should be indulged? — VagabondSpectre

Mental disorders should never be indulged. I have been clear and consistent in that regard. If you disagree, it is just because you are "confused."

I had two two-week prednisone bursts recently. It's magic. Unfortunately it won't do anything for Jackass Syndrome... obviously.

Mental disorders should never be indulged. I have been clear and consistent in that regard. If you disagree, it is just because you are "confused." — Emptyheady

What is your idea of indulging?

I've looked up some data for the Netherlands where there's an increase of deaths compared to the regular population, mostly due to coronary diseases (slightly more suicides and AIDS). Suspected cause is increased stress due to non-acceptance of being openly transgender by their surroundings. So maybe sex change operations aren't working that well because everybody else is being a dick about it. Under that scenario, suicides should drop too if everybody was a bit more tolerant.

What is your idea of indulging? — Benkei

http://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/36301

Mental disorders should never be indulged. I have been clear and consistent in that regard. If you disagree, it is just because you are "confused." — Emptyheady

As your definition of 'mental disorder' is simply deviation from supposed norms, ie. behaviour that you personally find odd or repugnant, in which you support yourself by cherry picking medical diagnoses that can be twisted to that interpretation, I would suggest that you are the last person on Earth from whom anybody should be taking advice on this matter. You are, frankly, for those of us who suffer from genuine mental illnesses our worst nightmare, a dark spectre that reaches out from the horrors of Bedlam and exorcisms. How dare you pretend that this is somehow a contest of morals with you on the side of the angels, spitting out your 'shoulds' and 'should nots'? I could find a hundred references in your beloved diagnostic works declaring your behaviour and argument in this thread to be mental disorder of the worst kind if I so chose. Why, in your barbarous opinion, should we indulge your disorder?

And by the way you misquoted me. I never said "the delusion" but that is fine, just don't moan if I accuse you of straw manning.

You are referring to this post. Again, I never used the words "deluded" or "regressive left." I do not mind this straw man, but it strongly indicates that you read things between the lines that are not there and it shows how sloppy you are in this conversation. This explains why I have to milk out an obvious uncontroversial point. — Emptyheady

Harry Hindu asked "Why do we find it okay to tell the religious that they believe in a delusion, but not okay to tell this to a transgender?".

You responded "Because they are a treasure of victim points for the Left. So we must rationalise and intellectualise a case...". So I guess you did actually describe transgender people as deluded by telling Harry that the only reason we don't label them as such is because of rationalization among leftists.

The fact that you "don't mind this strawman" (read: I agree with this position but i didn't actually say that" strongly indicates that I have accurately interpreted and represented your position in this thread.

I literally said regarding important decisions and exampled clothing as a not important decision...

Can you read? — Emptyheady

It's just that when you morally approve of allowing someone to dress as the opposite gender you're indulging their mental disorder in the same way that someone who says to an anorexic person "you are right, you are fat, stop eating" is indulging anorexia. Anorexia is the desire to be unhealthily thin (or the belief that they are too fat) , transgenderism is the desire to be the opposite gender (or the belief that they are the wrong gender), and so by your own comparison you're indulging the mental disorder. (BTW, Every time i say "right?" (even when you may have already stated you disagree) is because I'm trotting out the internally contradictory sub-points of your overall position.

Just to be clear, transgenderism/transsexualism is the desire to be the opposite gender. It's not the same as "getting a sex change operation" or even "wanting a sex change operation". SRS is a form of treatment for gender dysphoria/treanssexualism/transgenderism, not the disorder itself. "Indulging" transgenderism includes more than just condoning SRS case by case or at all as a possibly beneficial treatment, which you already seem to have condoned.

By treating a particular mental disorder like we treat all other mental disorders... — Emptyheady

You realize that we don't treat people with different mental disorders the same way right?

As in, how we treat an anorexic person is different than how we treat say, an autistic person. You know that right? Even people with the same disorder often benefit most from different kinds of "treatment" and being "treated" differently...

Sexual reassignment surgery is not associated with increased suicidal behaviour (or at best there is some weak correlation) -- none of my links show that. It just shows that surgery does next to nothing regarding the attempts of suicides, which further backs my point to not indulge transgenders. Again, it reveals your shoddy reading. — Emptyheady

You're right, I guess you were arguing that since sexual reassignment surgery is not a statistically effective treatment for their disorder, we should not indulge transgenders. Got it. Your first serious post in this thread was to say that we should not indulge transgenders because SRS does not reduce the risk of suicide among transgenders. Isn't that your own shoddy reasoning?