Sexuality and Gender

Selkies

I used to be a Christian, the first time I felt that the Bible was wrong was when I lived with a gay couple. I didn't want them to split up, I didn't see how that would help anything.

My orientation is asexual, which means I don't want to have sex with anyone before or after marriage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html

I have had romantic relationships with guys/girls and everything in between, it happens rarely but it happens. I become romanticly attracted based very similar qualities I look for in friends.
I sleep with people but it's just sleeping. May sound boring but that's likely due to the fact that you are interested in different things.

I wish I was female, I was born male. I cross dress very occasionally.

If I were to become a christian, what would I have to do?

While I'm on the subject, if I someday decide damn the increased chances of oesteoperosis and societal intollerance it I'm going to have a sex change. I get laser hair removal, my penis surgically removed, hormones, breasts the works.

Am I a female now in the eyes of God?

How about if I'm an intersex, XXY or perhaps I was born immune to testosterone, so I'm very female appart from no womb, and genetics.

And if the rules are different for those who are born with physical differences that we as humans use to determine gender, how about the psychological ones?

I mean we can't see them but surely God can?

I tried to pray on such issues years ago but God isn't returning my calls.

Fanny Cradock

That's a tough one, Selkies. I don't think there is an easy answer. I certainly don't have them. However, you might find the following links of interest.

Firstly, this article by Wesley Hill. If only I had the courage of his convictions.

Secondly, you might find this discussion interesting. The blurb runs:

"Both guests on today's show are Christians, both are gay, and both run ministries supporting Christians of homosexual orientation.

However a very different ethos underpins each. The True Freedom Trust, run by Jonathan Berry believes that Christians with homosexual orientation should abstain from sexual practise. Courage, run by Jeremy Marks accepts committed same-sex relationships between Christians."

Thirdly, and this is a big undertaking, it might be wise to actually get an understanding of what it is you have rejected. That is why I would recommend this excellent 14-part series by Don Carson on what Christianity is about.

Finally, there was a thread on this forum about Christianity and transsexuality not too long ago.

Links234

Hi Selkies,

I think there's a number of Christian denominations that accept LGBT people, even those who are transgender. I don't know the name of it, but I know there's a church in Dublin that's accepting, and the Transgender Day of Remembrance was held there last year. I'll try and find out which church that was.

Selkies wrote: »

While I'm on the subject, if I someday decide damn the increased chances of oesteoperosis and societal intollerance it I'm going to have a sex change. I get laser hair removal, my penis surgically removed, hormones, breasts the works.

Am I a female now in the eyes of God?

That's a very hard question if you're struggling with your faith, but I don't believe that faith has to be at odds with the reality of transsexuality. In recent years, medical science's understanding of transsexuality has made gigantic leaps, discovering many things, from genes, to physical traits in the brain that correspond to the other sex. So for trans people, this is just the way we are, and this is the reality we have to deal with.

So, lets assume that, if it's what you want, you transition some day. Are you female in the eyes of god? Seeing as this is just the way some people are, it's in their nature, we can ask here, does the soul have a gender?

If yes, then we can say that you have a female soul, that this is who you are, and that being born physically male is your "test". This can be a wonderful thought, because I can think of nothing that is a more positive affirmation of the soul, than the idea that a female soul can be born with a male body, or male soul with a female body. Nothing else could show that we are so much more than our physical bodies than the phenomenon of transsexuality. So faith doesn't have to be at odds with this, and perhaps you can interpret how you feel as a spiritual experience beyond what most people will have. It's all down to perspective really.

If no, and the soul doesn't have a gender, then it doesn't really matter anyway does it? By christian doctrine, our bodies are just transitory, so if in whatever afterlife you believe in, all the people in heaven are genderless, then god doesn't see you or anyone else as male or female, and it doesn't matter whether your body is male, female, intersex or whatever else in this life.

Anyway, I hope that you work things out, and that you don't have to compromise anything because or your faith, or have to compromise your faith either if that's important too. If you need someone to talk to, then please feel free to send me a message. It can be extraordinarily difficult to come to terms with our gender identity. Julia Serano said:

Trying to translate these subconscious experiences into conscious thought is a messy business. All of the words available in the English language completely fail to accurately capture or convey my personal understanding of these events. For example, if I were to say that I ‘saw’ myself as female, or ‘knew’ myself to be a girl, I would be denying the fact that I was consciously aware of my physical maleness at all times. And saying that I ‘wished’ or ‘wanted’ to be a girl erases how much being female made sense to me, how it felt right on the deepest, most profound level of my being. I could say that I ‘felt’ like a girl, but that would give the false impression that I knew how other girls (and other boys) felt. And if I were to say that I was ‘supposed to be’ a girl, or that I ‘should have been born’ female, it would imply that I had some sort of cosmic insight into the grand scheme of the universe, which I most certainly did not.

Best of luck.

deirdre_dub

Selkies,

First of all, a quick note about myself. I am male-to-female transgender - I've been on hormones for about 20 months. I'm living full-time as female, I've changed my name legally, and I have "Gender: F" on my passport.

Selkies wrote: »

While I'm on the subject, if I someday decide damn the increased chances of oesteoperosis and societal intollerance it I'm going to have a sex change. I get laser hair removal, my penis surgically removed, hormones, breasts the works.

Am I a female now in the eyes of God?

I'm not a theologian, so I can only give a lay answer to that question.

It seems to me that that depends on which monotheistic religion you believe in. There are some aboriginal monotheistic religions in which "God" most certainly accepts (and, in some cases, even honours) transgender people.

However, if you are specifically talking about being a Christian in the Catholic tradition, then you should be made aware that the Pope seems to consider transgender people to be as serious a threat to the continued existence of mankind as the burning of the rainforests. :mad:

The Church that Links234 is talking about above is the Unitarian Church on St. Stephen's Green. They are a Christian church, and they accept people of all genders and orientations.

My approach to these questions are based on the observation that, as a human, I am programmed to avoid suffering, and to respond to suffering by looking for ways to alleviate it. I've spent my life suffering in a particular way. I tried very very very hard to be a man, and I just couldn't. Eventually, after much soul-searching, I decided that I must be transgender. I sought, and received, medical treatment for my medical condition, and I've never been happier and I've never been as productive or as social a person as I am now.

I believe I can look God in the eye and say "I did my best with what you gave me". And if that isn't good enough for God, then I'm screwed anyway.

Asry

There's an LGBT church as well which is either called Branching Out or is affiliated with some movement by that name.

Being LGBT myself, just wondering, on what basis would an LGBT church be founded? Wouldn't that mean ignoring parts of the bible in favour of the other?

And maybe, wouldn't God have always seen you as female, regardless of what body you were born in?

C14N

Asry wrote: »

There's an LGBT church as well which is either called Branching Out or is affiliated with some movement by that name.

Being LGBT myself, just wondering, on what basis would an LGBT church be founded? Wouldn't that mean ignoring parts of the bible in favour of the other?

And maybe, wouldn't God have always seen you as female, regardless of what body you were born in?

You would have to ignore certain parts of the Bible I think but with the number of different sects of Christianity that exist or have existed, this must happen reasonable frequently right? As far as I know, even the Vatican have accepted evolution, thereby disregarding part of the Bible.

PDN

C14N wrote: »

You would have to ignore certain parts of the Bible I think but with the number of different sects of Christianity that exist or have existed, this must happen reasonable frequently right? As far as I know, even the Vatican have accepted evolution, thereby disregarding part of the Bible.

Accepting evolution does not disregard any part of the Bible.

JimiTime

This is a great series on the subject matter that I've posted before and probably will post again. Its long, but Dr Michael Brown is on the button throughout.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCTTq8DMQ8E

Personally, I can't pretend to know what it must be like to have the feelings you do OP, but what I DO know, is what God reveals to us in scripture through his servants, the prophets and the law. When I was younger, I desired many sexual partners, and I ignored God. However, I always retained a sense that I was sinning. I would have been done a great disservice if the message had been altered to justify my sin. Similarly, I think it an AWFUL idea, to seek out churches on the basis that they approve of a behaviour you may desire. Seek out the truth, ALWAYS. Make your decisions based on that. If you wish to follow God, then seek his will, put it before your own and pray that your will and His become one in the same. If you simply want religion, then there is something out there for everyone. If you want God, then you must seek truth and take up your cross. Don't just go seeking approval.

PatricaMcKay

PDN wrote: »

Accepting evolution does not disregard any part of the Bible.

It says in the Bible that God created the world very good, how can that be reconciled with evolution?

How can the idea found in St Paul that our cosmos fell along with the fall of man being made subject to vanity so that it groans for redemption be reconciled with evolution?

Asry

PatricaMcKay wrote: »

It says in the Bible that God created the world very good, how can that be reconciled with evolution?

How can the idea found in St Paul that our cosmos fell along with the fall of man being made subject to vanity so that it groans for redemption be reconciled with evolution?

Isn't there a school of thought where even if one does not take the stories of the Bible literally, this does not make their messages and overarching meanings invalid?

So what about Intelligent Design? God created everything, yes, including our ascent from the waters to the skies.

Can you quote from where St Paul articulates that thought?

PDN

PatricaMcKay wrote: »

It says in the Bible that God created the world very good, how can that be reconciled with evolution?

How can the idea found in St Paul that our cosmos fell along with the fall of man being made subject to vanity so that it groans for redemption be reconciled with evolution?

Very easily.

God created the world very good, just as a baby is very good. 'Very good' does not mean something cannot grow or develop.

Evolution is not all upward - the created order is distorted through sin and does indeed need to be restored. This will happen, according to the Bible, when God creates a new heaven and a new earth.

Asry

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.

I think this is very beautiful.

Rev. 21:1

wolfsbane

PDN wrote: »

Very easily.

God created the world very good, just as a baby is very good. 'Very good' does not mean something cannot grow or develop.

Evolution is not all upward - the created order is distorted through sin and does indeed need to be restored. This will happen, according to the Bible, when God creates a new heaven and a new earth.

The flaw in that argument is that God did not initiate the Big Bang and then say His creation was 'very good'. He said it was very good after all life had begun, including the first man and woman.

IF evolution were true, billions of years of suffering and death had already occurred by than - so suffering and death must be 'very good' too.

As to sexuality & gender, Christianity holds out heterosexuality as the only valid orientation, and heterosexual marriage as the only valid expression of it, on the basis of the Genesis creation account of Adam & Eve being historical figures. Christianity's understanding of sexual perversion - and all sin - flows from a similar understanding of the Genesis account of the Fall.

***************************************************************************
Romans 5:18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

wolfsbane

Selkies said:

I wish I was female, I was born male. I cross dress very occasionally.

If I were to become a christian, what would I have to do?

That will depend on what your sexual state actually is. You will have to be willing to live according to it. Same as for all other aspects of your life - a Christian will be willing to do whatever God says.

While I'm on the subject, if I someday decide damn the increased chances of oesteoperosis and societal intollerance it I'm going to have a sex change. I get laser hair removal, my penis surgically removed, hormones, breasts the works.

Am I a female now in the eyes of God?

Only if you were one to begin with - that is, behind the obvious ambiguities.

How about if I'm an intersex, XXY or perhaps I was born immune to testosterone, so I'm very female appart from no womb, and genetics.

If you are really a female/male/neutral but have physical problems, you live as you really are, not as per the physical problems.

And if the rules are different for those who are born with physical differences that we as humans use to determine gender, how about the psychological ones?

You mean like having no physical problems but 'feeling' like the opposite sex? I have no reason to think other than that those are just psychological problems - not your real self.

I mean we can't see them but surely God can?

Our 'feelings' are not the reality. Psychological is not a synonym for spiritual.

I tried to pray on such issues years ago but God isn't returning my calls.

He will, if you are willing to do His will, whatever it might be.

*************************************************************************
Jeremiah 29:13 And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.

deirdre_dub

wolfsbane wrote: »

You mean like having no physical problems but 'feeling' like the opposite sex? I have no reason to think other than that those are just psychological problems - not your real self.

There is a ton of scientific and other evidence which says that the so-called "feeling" is actually based on a physical problem.

The physical "problem" in question is that a male-to-female transgender person's brain has the same characteristics as a female brain - in other words, a male-to-female transgender person has a female brain in a male body. Hence, since the brain is the seat of the identity, a male-to-female transgender person cannot successfully identify herself as anything other than female.

There is a ton of mythology out there about transgender people - that we do it for sexual reasons, or that we are incapable of discerning reality, are two of them. Neither are true. There is extensive psychological and psychiatric screening of transgender people to ensure that there are no underlying psychiatric/psychological problems. Speaking for myself, my diagnosis has been confirmed by a clinical psychiatrist, a clinical psychologist and a counsellor in consultation with a gender specialist.

Our 'feelings' are not the reality.

Our feelings are part of reality, and to ignore them is to store up huge problems for ourselves and for those around us.

zoomtard

wolfsbane wrote: »

The flaw in that argument is that God did not initiate the Big Bang and then say His creation was 'very good'. He said it was very good after all life had begun, including the first man and woman.

Any coherent Christian conception of God holds that he is outside/not subject-to time.

santing

zoomtard wrote: »

Any coherent Christian conception of God holds that he is outside/not subject-to time.

Very good. But when God created time and reveals Himself in time He normally makes statements that do not confuse us.
But even if we assume that God would have spoken before sin introduced itself in the world (and how did that happen?) at what stage could He say that it was "very Good," when life was based on millions of years of death? Or was everything "very good" when it was still "empty and void"?

santing

deirdre_dub wrote: »

There is a ton of scientific and other evidence which says that the so-called "feeling" is actually based on a physical problem.

The physical "problem" in question is that a male-to-female transgender person's brain has the same characteristics as a female brain - in other words, a male-to-female transgender person has a female brain in a male body. Hence, since the brain is the seat of the identity, a male-to-female transgender person cannot successfully identify herself as anything other than female.

Biblical the brain is not the seat of your personality, but "your heart" - not the big pump, but spirit. The aspects of sexuality are more related to your soul... But that's another discussion.
Your problem is valid and difficult. But in my opinion the only Christian answer must consist of an embracing of all aspects of our person, body, soul and spirit. No aspect is "less" us, we are not "trapped" in a body, that is Aristotele teaching, not Biblical. We must realise that as broken as we may be (or seem) God still has a plan with us and actually made us uniquely to fit the circumstances we are in... To quote the Apostle Paul: "Glorify God in your body."

deirdre_dub wrote: »

... Our feelings are part of reality, and to ignore them is to store up huge problems for ourselves and for those around us.

Completely true... But your body is also part of reality and to ignore it is to store up huge problems for ourselves and for those around us.

Links234

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Galatians 3:28

deirdre_dub

santing wrote: »

Biblical the brain is not the seat of your personality, but "your heart" - not the big pump, but spirit.

I've always been quite feminine in my spirit.

The aspects of sexuality are more related to your soul... But that's another discussion.

Indeed. Gender identity and transgenderism have nothing whatsoever to do with sexuality.

Your problem is valid and difficult. But in my opinion the only Christian answer must consist of an embracing of all aspects of our person, body, soul and spirit.

And those aspects have never been in as much harmony as they are now.

No aspect is "less" us, we are not "trapped" in a body

Oh no - not that ridiculous "trapped" meme again! :rolleyes:

Completely true... But your body is also part of reality and to ignore it is to store up huge problems for ourselves and for those around us.

Indeed - I tried for many decades to ignore my body - no more!!!

JimiTime

deirdre_dub wrote: »

I've always been quite feminine in my spirit.
Indeed. Gender identity and transgenderism have nothing whatsoever to do with sexuality.

I don't think the fact that trangenderism is lumped in with gay/lesbian/bi, as in LGBT, helps that view. Such association makes it SEEM sexual. Then you have cases of women who identify as men, but then hook up with other women who identify as men. So we enter a strange world, where medical disorder and sexuality go hand in hand. Its certainly doesn't seem as cut and dry as 'Its got nothing to do with sexuality'.

Oh no - not that ridiculous "trapped" meme again! :rolleyes:
Indeed - I tried for many decades to ignore my body - no more!!!

I think the question as far as Gender identity disorder is concerned, is if it is a physical disorder, a neurological disorder, a psychological disorder or a combination of them. Due to the emotive nature of the issue, it seems that the patients opinion is being accepted too easily. Apotemnophilia is a disorder which makes people feel like they should not have certain limbs for instance. It is believed that this is both psychological and neurological, though research is thin on the ground. However, you wont find people suggesting that cutting off the limb in question really solves the issue. It seems that this is what is happening in relation to transgenderism though. No doubt its a sensitive subject, and sufferers of GID are convinced that they are a different gender to the gender they physically are. However, I think a huge disservice is being done to sufferers of GID if we simply pander to their desire. Much like a great disservice would be done to those suffering with Apotemnophilia if we accept their desire that they want a limb removed.

JimiTime

Links234 wrote: »

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Galatians 3:28

Is there a point to this quoted scripture?

deirdre_dub

Some good points, JimiTime. Not sure how it came about that we ended up discussing them on a Christianity forum, but here goes.

JimiTime wrote: »

I don't think the fact that trangenderism is lumped in with gay/lesbian/bi, as in LGBT, helps that view. Such association makes it SEEM sexual.

Yes lumping in the T with LGB does kinda associate it with sexuality. However, the social issues trans people face are very very similar to the social issues faced by LGB people. Both sets of people are breaking gender norms / expectations, and so it makes sense that we should recognise those places where our interests and challenges align, and team up!

Then you have cases of women who identify as men, but then hook up with other women who identify as men. So we enter a strange world, where medical disorder and sexuality go hand in hand.

As far as I can see, what you are talking about there is labels - you aren't actually talking about inner experiences. In the example you are quoting (a trans man hooking up with another trans man), the experience of the two people indentifying themselves as "trans men" is different to the experience of their sexual attraction. What I think you are trying to point to is - how would the two people identify themselves? Would they identify themselves as lesbians, or as gay men? Given that they both more than likely identify themselves as men, I think the answer is clear...

I think the question as far as Gender identity disorder is concerned, is if it is a physical disorder, a neurological disorder, a psychological disorder or a combination of them. Due to the emotive nature of the issue, it seems that the patients opinion is being accepted too easily.

Some would say that the patients opinion isn't being taken seriously enough!

In any case, there is physical evidence that what we say about ourselves is actually true.

Apotemnophilia is a disorder which makes people feel like they should not have certain limbs for instance. It is believed that this is both psychological and neurological, though research is thin on the ground. However, you wont find people suggesting that cutting off the limb in question really solves the issue.

The current treatment regieme of transgender patients has proven itself time and time again to be extremely effective. I do not know if the same can be said of the amputation of the limb(s) of apotemnophilic patients.

However, I think a huge disservice is being done to sufferers of GID if we simply pander to their desire.

Not as much disservice as would be made if you were to withhold what is extremely effective treatment (something like 99% - which is extremely high for a treatment regieme of it's severity) and hence force me continue to suffer greatly. Would you not agree?

Why do you need me to not get this treatment?! The only reason I can think of as to why someone should not get a specific treatment is if they are mentally impared enough to not be able to make a sound decision. As I believe I said above, there is significant psychological / psychiatric evaluation of transgender patients. I have, to date, received three such evaluations, and there is a (slim) possibility of a fourth in my future.

Much like a great disservice would be done to those suffering with Apotemnophilia if we accept their desire that they want a limb removed.

And your reference for that is ... ?

There are some doctors who will, indeed, perform amputations on apotemnophilic patients. I have no idea as to how effective that treatment is. Do you?

Links234

JimiTime wrote: »

I don't think the fact that trangenderism is lumped in with gay/lesbian/bi, as in LGBT, helps that view. Such association makes it SEEM sexual. Then you have cases of women who identify as men, but then hook up with other women who identify as men. So we enter a strange world, where medical disorder and sexuality go hand in hand. Its certainly doesn't seem as cut and dry as 'Its got nothing to do with sexuality'.

it's independent of sexual orientation, that doesn't mean trans people don't have a sexual orientation.

JimiTime wrote: »

I think the question as far as Gender identity disorder is concerned, is if it is a physical disorder, a neurological disorder, a psychological disorder or a combination of them. Due to the emotive nature of the issue, it seems that the patients opinion is being accepted too easily. Apotemnophilia is a disorder which makes people feel like they should not have certain limbs for instance. It is believed that this is both psychological and neurological, though research is thin on the ground. However, you wont find people suggesting that cutting off the limb in question really solves the issue. It seems that this is what is happening in relation to transgenderism though. No doubt its a sensitive subject, and sufferers of GID are convinced that they are a different gender to the gender they physically are. However, I think a huge disservice is being done to sufferers of GID if we simply pander to their desire. Much like a great disservice would be done to those suffering with Apotemnophilia if we accept their desire that they want a limb removed.

Do you actually give a damn about what's in the best interests of trans people, or are you just being a concern troll?

Asry

JimiTime wrote: »

However, I think a huge disservice is being done to sufferers of GID if we simply pander to their desire.

But like not everyone with GID undergoes the full surgical procedure, you know? And what if it's the right treatment to do? What would work for one disorder might not work for another.

I get your point though, as regards diagnosis of disorders in general and the treatment of them. The study of mental health (aside from the neurological and other aspects of a GID diagnosis) is still very shaky and in early days. I don't agree with Links that I think you're being a concern troll. Just an objective observer of a medical system of treatment. For example, I don't necessarily agree that anxiety sufferers should be pandered to with relaxants, if this can be described as pandering, which in my case it would be. Of course, I don't believe that this is the case with GID and surgical procedures at all, just some aspects of treatment of other mental ill-health issues.

I hope I wasn't too garbled in my reply It's hard sometimes to say what I mean.

deirdre_dub

JimiTime wrote: »

sufferers of GID are convinced that they are a different gender to the gender they physically are.

Actually, no - I believe the gender I physically am isn't as obvious in me as it is in most.

A However, I think a huge disservice is being done to sufferers of GID if we simply pander to their desire.

The only thing I desire is to stop suffering. How is the medical profession doing me a disservice by "pandering" to my desire to stop suffering?

I do not want to be a woman. I do not want to change gender. I want to stop suffering. That is all.

wolfsbane

zoomtard wrote: »

Any coherent Christian conception of God holds that he is outside/not subject-to time.

Santing points out the crucial element. It was not a comment outside of time, but in time, in response to a specific circumstance.

*******************************************************************************
Jeremiah 29:13 And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.

wolfsbane

deirdre_dub said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
You mean like having no physical problems but 'feeling' like the opposite sex? I have no reason to think other than that those are just psychological problems - not your real self.
There is a ton of scientific and other evidence which says that the so-called "feeling" is actually based on a physical problem.

The physical "problem" in question is that a male-to-female transgender person's brain has the same characteristics as a female brain - in other words, a male-to-female transgender person has a female brain in a male body. Hence, since the brain is the seat of the identity, a male-to-female transgender person cannot successfully identify herself as anything other than female.

If it could be shown that the brain is female but the other parts are male, then I agree one should go with the brain identity. The brain is the determiner of the body's behaviour, and is the interface with the soul.

There is a ton of mythology out there about transgender people - that we do it for sexual reasons, or that we are incapable of discerning reality, are two of them. Neither are true. There is extensive psychological and psychiatric screening of transgender people to ensure that there are no underlying psychiatric/psychological problems. Speaking for myself, my diagnosis has been confirmed by a clinical psychiatrist, a clinical psychologist and a counsellor in consultation with a gender specialist.

If this is as clear-cut as you say, fine. Can you assure me that none who have changed their body's gender have later said they were mistaken about their real gender and wished they had not changed?

Quote:
Our 'feelings' are not the reality.
Our feelings are part of reality, and to ignore them is to store up huge problems for ourselves and for those around us.

Yes, our feelings can tell us reality. But they can also misinform us. Our spirits interact with our emotions, and can have negative as well as positive effects one one another. One may be joyous in adultery; or downcast after doing some good but difficult thing.

*****************************************************************************
Jeremiah 29:13 And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.

JimiTime

deirdre_dub wrote: »

Some good points, JimiTime. Not sure how it came about that we ended up discussing them on a Christianity forum, but here goes.

Well its a hot topic in the world right now, so its bound to cross paths.

Yes lumping in the T with LGB does kinda associate it with sexuality. However, the social issues trans people face are very very similar to the social issues faced by LGB people. Both sets of people are breaking gender norms / expectations, and so it makes sense that we should recognise those places where our interests and challenges align, and team up!

Thats what I thought alright, but I'm sure you can understand why people can associate it with sexuality when its tagged onto a sexuality related group. Do you mind me asking, when you had the desire to be a woman, can you describe in non-sexual terms, what that means?

In any case, there is physical evidence that what we say about ourselves is actually true.
The current treatment regieme of transgender patients has proven itself time and time again to be extremely effective.

I don't doubt that it is effective in making a transgender person identify themselves more as the gender they wish to be. Removing a lot of the cosmetic identifications of the gender of their birth. Many prepubescent kids are given puberty blockers if they want to be a different gender, and then given hormone treatment to bring on the puberty of the opposite sex. (look up Dr. Norman Spack for references). I don't doubt that this is effective in making a person feel more feminine or masculine respectively. However, if we explore GID on a psychological and neurological level, a breakthrough would surely be so much better. mending the neurological problem has the benefit of allowing the person live in the body they were born with naturally. They can be fully functional men and women. The concern I would have, is that the current treatment regime stunting the growth of the research into the neurological/psychological issues. This, combined with LGBT pejorative campaigns to vilify those who differ, would make me worry that people will just leave it be as it were.

I do not know if the same can be said of the amputation of the limb(s) of apotemnophilic patients.

An apotemnophile can identify as a paraplegic allegedly, and wish for their spine to be broken. Its considered a NEED rather than a WANT. You can't deny the similarities are startling, and I must say, convince me of the ignorance we have to the multitude of neriological/pycholgical dysfunction.

If a person testifies as to how happy they are after being made a paraplegic, from a healthy person, do you think that this is successful treatment?

Not as much disservice as would be made if you were to withhold what is extremely effective treatment (something like 99% - which is extremely high for a treatment regieme of it's severity) and hence force me continue to suffer greatly. Would you not agree?

I can't pretend to know such suffering, but I certainly don't believe the treatment you refer to is the real answer. It surely can't be? Just like chopping off healthy limbs, even if it makes the person happier is the answer for Body integrity Identity Disorder sufferers.

Why do you need me to not get this treatment?!

I don't see YOU having this treatment having any effect on ME, just the same as a person who chops off their fingers has no effect on me. The issue is what I think is best, and what I think is wrong in terms of medical care. Though, I do not want an LGBT agenda, driving gender neutral terms in schools etc like they have in parts of the USA.

The only reason I can think of as to why someone should not get a specific treatment is if they are mentally impared enough to not be able to make a sound decision.

I don't agree with this. For instance, I think plastic surgeons can act irresponsibly in carrying out certain procedures, and hide behind the 'Well they asked for it' line. Michael Jackson for instance. I think he could have done with some serious mental/psychological help in relation to his desire to change his features.

As I believe I said above, there is significant psychological / psychiatric evaluation of transgender patients. I have, to date, received three such evaluations, and there is a (slim) possibility of a fourth in my future.

Well, thats a can of worms in itself.

There are some doctors who will, indeed, perform amputations on apotemnophilic patients. I have no idea as to how effective that treatment is. Do you?

As I said, it could be effective in making a patient feel better, but that does not mean success IMO. Such a disorder, being of a mental nature, ultimately needs a treatment which helps the person come to a feeling of belonging in their healthy bodies. Some people genuinely want to die, but I'd never suggest that we kill these people, even if they are constantly unhappy on account of their being alive.

Links234

wolfsbane wrote: »

Can you assure me that none who have changed their body's gender have later said they were mistaken about their real gender and wished they had not changed?

there are plenty of examples of people misdiagnosed with cancer, should people stop being diagnosed with cancer because of the possibility of misdiagnosis?

deirdre_dub

wolfsbane wrote: »

If it could be shown that the brain is female but the other parts are male, then I agree one should go with the brain identity. The brain is the determiner of the body's behaviour, and is the interface with the soul.

Well, that is what science seems to be discovering. (Though maybe not the bit about the soul! )

Can you assure me that none who have changed their body's gender have later said they were mistaken about their real gender and wished they had not changed?

Of course not! :rolleyes: There is a famous case where a person of considerable means used his means to by-pass the psychiatric evaluations, went through transition, and regretted it. There is another case I'm aware of where a survivor of sexual abuse ended up regretting it. This is why there is extensive psychiatric / psychological screening of transgender people. And, like all screenings, it isn't perfect. However, I believe the success rate is something like 99% or more, which is extremely high indeed for a medical intervention of its severity.

Yes, our feelings can tell us reality. But they can also misinform us.

Indeed - hence the need for some sort of screening.

JimiTime

Asry wrote: »

But like not everyone with GID undergoes the full surgical procedure, you know?

I do.

And what if it's the right treatment to do?

I personally don't think it could ever truly be the right treatment. If it could actually turn a mans body into a womans body or vice-versa, then I would say that if its a case that it was known that the brain can be one gender and the body another its the right treatment. As its simply a poor facimile of, or cosmetic change, I can't really see it ever being 'right' as such.

I get your point though, as regards diagnosis of disorders in general and the treatment of them. The study of mental health (aside from the neurological and other aspects of a GID diagnosis) is still very shaky and in early days.

Indeed it is.

I don't agree with Links that I think you're being a concern troll.

I don't really know what that is anyway, but its an emotive topic, so such reactions happen.

deirdre_dub

JimiTime wrote: »

Do you mind me asking, when you had the desire to be a woman, can you describe in non-sexual terms, what that means?

I do not desire to be a woman.

I did not make a decision to be a woman - I discovered that I am a woman.

Anyway, on to the question about sexuality. Like any woman, I also have an experience of my sexuality. But my sexuality has no more to do with me being a woman than it has for any woman. I do not get any sexual kick whatsoever out of dressing like I do, out of taking hormones, or any of the other things I do. Things like re-learning how to dress myself, taking hormones etc - are in and of themselves a burden on me - just as it is a burden on anyone who has to take medication on a long-term basis.

I don't doubt that it is effective in making a transgender person identify themselves more as the gender they wish to be.

Again, you are mis-understanding what transgenderism is. I do not wish to be a woman. I wish to be pain-free.

Before you ask - if science were to discover a way that removed my pain without requiring me to transition, would I take it? Probably not. Why? Well, if that way was harder than transition, then I would obviously prefer transition. But even if that way was of comparable difficulty and success rate (> 99%), I still wouldn't take it, as I like living in a world of such diversity as ours, and I wouldn't like to see transgenderism eradicated just for the sake of it. If that way were much easier than transition and just as effective, then I might just consider it.

Many prepubescent kids are given puberty blockers if they want to be a different gender,

Again, please get rid out of your mind that this is something that transgender people "want". Being trans is a very difficult thing to describe, and often times the only way someone can describe it is by saying "I want this", but that isn't actually quite true. I don't want transition - I need transition.

However, if we explore GID on a psychological and neurological level, a breakthrough would surely be so much better. mending the neurological problem has the benefit of allowing the person live in the body they were born with naturally.

It would only be of potential benefit if the cost to the trans person of that "breakthrough" were noticably less than the cost of transition, and at least as effective.

They can be fully functional men and women.

I am actually a fully functional woman, thank you. Unless, of course, your definition of a fully functional woman requires her to be able to give birth.

The concern I would have, is that the current treatment regime stunting the growth of the research into the neurological/psychological issues.

It is surely immoral to require people to suffer in the name of research.

This, combined with LGBT pejorative campaigns to vilify those who differ, would make me worry that people will just leave it be as it were.

Trust me - the vilification of LGBT people is far far greater than the vilification that some (understandably) angry LGBT people dish out to cisgender and straight people.

If a person testifies as to how happy they are after being made a paraplegic, from a healthy person, do you think that this is successful treatment?

That is one test. Another would be how effective they are in society. And speaking for myself, I am far more effective than I was before transition.

I can't pretend to know such suffering, but I certainly don't believe the treatment you refer to is the real answer. It surely can't be? Just like chopping off healthy limbs

If, through a neurological or whatever issue, a person has to disown a part of their body, then surely that part of their body cannot be considered to be truly healthy. Let me put it to you this way - if someone is desperate enough at a part of their body that they consider taking a meat cleaver to it, then do you think that they take proper care of that part and keep it healthy?

I don't see YOU having this treatment having any effect on ME, just the same as a person who chops off their fingers has no effect on me. The issue is what I think is best, and what I think is wrong in terms of medical care. Though, I do not want an LGBT agenda, driving gender neutral terms in schools etc like they have in parts of the USA.

So the "problem" here is social.

It is certainly true that the existence of people who are on some level outside the gender binary creates social challenges for a society that is married to the gender binary. So what is to be done? Should those people be marginalised? Or should a way be found to incorporate us as valuable human beings into society?

I don't agree with this. For instance, I think plastic surgeons can act irresponsibly in carrying out certain procedures, and hide behind the 'Well they asked for it' line. Michael Jackson for instance. I think he could have done with some serious mental/psychological help in relation to his desire to change his features.

Eh - you are responding to my quote of "The only reason I can think of as to why someone should not get a specific treatment is if they are mentally impared enough to not be able to make a sound decision.". So what is it that you are not agreeing with? It seems to me that we are on the same page(-ish).

As I believe I said above, there is significant psychological / psychiatric evaluation of transgender patients. I have, to date, received three such evaluations, and there is a (slim) possibility of a fourth in my future.

Well, thats a can of worms in itself.

Eh?

As I said, it could be effective in making a patient feel better, but that does not mean success IMO. Such a disorder, being of a mental nature, ultimately needs a treatment which helps the person come to a feeling of belonging in their healthy bodies.

That is precisely what the treatment achieves!!!

Some people genuinely want to die, but I'd never suggest that we kill these people, even if they are constantly unhappy on account of their being alive.

Currently, there is only one effective set of treatments for transgender people, and that is transition. If another one comes along, I'll consider it, but it is going to have an uphill battle against something that is 99% or more effective!!!

deirdre_dub

JimiTime wrote: »

If it could actually turn a mans body into a womans body or vice-versa

The point of transition isn't to change a man's body into a woman's or vice-versa - the point of transition is to ease the suffering of the transgender person.

One of the more interesting aspects that I found to my transition is the effects estrogen has on my brain. My brain feels much better on estrogen. As someone else described it - "putting testosterone into my brain is like putting diesel into a petrol car!". My brain just doesn't run on testosterone.

A few months ago, I was talking to a transgender friend of mine about how I was feeling utter crap. She suggested that I have a look at my blood test results and see what my estrogen levels were. I did, and I discovered that my estrogen levels had dropped a lot! I immediately went to my GP, who doubled my dose of estrogen, and I now feel a lot better.

In other words, I was suffering the transgender equivalent of PMT! I don't take estrogen because I want to grow breasts - I take estrogen because I need it to function! Female-to-male transgender people report a similar phenomenon when they take testosterone.

And that is the point of transition. It's not to create a woman or a man - it is to fix something that went a bit awry when we were being created in the womb.

wolfsbane

Links234 wrote: »

there are plenty of examples of people misdiagnosed with cancer, should people stop being diagnosed with cancer because of the possibility of misdiagnosis?

No, but we are talking about the person's understanding of themselves. If that is the basis for action, then we would want to be sure it was based on reality, not on mixed-up 'feelings'.

Yes, a misdiagnosis can happen anywhere and doesn't invalidate the system - but a significant % of such would lead one to think the whole idea is mistaken. deirdre_dub assures us that sufficient investigations are in place to prevent most misdiagnoses, and I have no reason to question her figures. I hope she's right.

***************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

No, but we are talking about the person's understanding of themselves. If that is the basis for action, then we would want to be sure it was based on reality, not on mixed-up 'feelings'.

We aren't talking about that, any more than someone gets a breast removed because they "feel" like they have breast cancer.

There is an identifiable underlying physical cause for tran-gender people. I tend not to go in for the notion of identifying gender based on brain chemistry, I wouldn't identify a male with female brain chemistry as a woman with a male body (I would identify them as a male with female brain chemistry).

But at the same time research into this area has moved far beyond simply taking people as saying they feel like a different gender.

Links234

sorry if I'm using terms people aren't familiar with, "concern troll" is a type of argument tactic

wolfsbane wrote: »

Yes, a misdiagnosis can happen anywhere and doesn't invalidate the system - but a significant % of such would lead one to think the whole idea is mistaken. deirdre_dub assures us that sufficient investigations are in place to prevent most misdiagnoses, and I have no reason to question her figures. I hope she's right.

Deirdre's figures are a bit off, but it's a little more complicated than that.

This is one study that's been referred to in the UK, I'll just quote the relevant bits, look under the chapter "The Efficacy of surgical techniques":

A comprehensive review of post-surgical follow-up studies on transsexuals, spanning a period of thirty years, concluded, “In over 80 qualitatively different case studies and reviews from 12 countries, it has been demonstrated during the last 30 years that the treatment that includes the whole process of gender reassignment is effective.” 31

Later studies have provided further evidence in support of this conclusion. Rates of regret are consistently low: one study32 calculated a regret rate of 3.8%, and found that regrets were commonly associated with poor surgical results rather than with any desire to de-transition. Another study33 found that 98% of patients expressed no regrets post-operatively. In addition, 91.6% were satisfied with their overall appearance; the other 8.4% were neutral. In a group that had previously suffered from extreme gender dysphoria, it might be considered quite remarkable that, following surgery, not one patient’s physical appearance had given cause for personal dissatisfaction.

Similar results were obtained in a study34 that observed a satisfaction rate of over 90%: “Male-to-female surgery can achieve excellent cosmetic and functional results... None of the present patients claimed to regret their
decision to undergo gender-transforming surgery.” Here again, as in other studies35, any dissatisfaction was generally associated with poor surgical results, many of which could easily be corrected through secondary surgery. Furthermore, as the quality of surgical procedures improves, it can be expected that rates of dissatisfaction should decrease over time – certainly, the most recently published study36 showed an especially high rate of satisfaction at 98%.

This is the treatment for transgender individuals because it is very effective.

Asry

Some people genuinely want to die, but I'd never suggest that we kill these people, even if they are constantly unhappy on account of their being alive.

Slightly off topic, I vehemently disagree with this.

...That's all I wanted to say in my interjection anyway, apologies, carry on

Links234

Wicknight wrote: »

We aren't talking about that, any more than someone gets a breast removed because they "feel" like they have breast cancer.

There is an identifiable underlying physical cause for tran-gender people. I tend not to go in for the notion of identifying gender based on brain chemistry, I wouldn't identify a male with female brain chemistry as a woman with a male body (I would identify them as a male with female brain chemistry).

But at the same time research into this area has moved far beyond simply taking people as saying they feel like a different gender.

Well, it's more than just brain chemistry, it's brain anatomy and even genes associated with it.

There's a great list of different studies of transsexuality and intersexuality compiled here for anyone interested in taking a look at it.

JimiTime

deirdre_dub wrote: »

I do not desire to be a woman.

I did not make a decision to be a woman - I discovered that I am a woman.

Ok, when you discovered that you are a woman, in non sexual terms, what does that mean? What does it mean to be a woman?

Again, you are mis-understanding what transgenderism is. I do not wish to be a woman. I wish to be pain-free.

And I appreciate you sharing your experience. It is enlightening.

Before you ask - if science were to discover a way that removed my pain without requiring me to transition, would I take it? Probably not. Why? Well, if that way was harder than transition, then I would obviously prefer transition. But even if that way was of comparable difficulty and success rate (> 99%), I still wouldn't take it, as I like living in a world of such diversity as ours, and I wouldn't like to see transgenderism eradicated just for the sake of it.

Forgive my bluntness, but that concerns me. It seems to be saying that you consider GID and the resultant transgenderism as a good thing. Simply part of our diversity. Now maybe this is born out of your possible ignorance of what it is to feel and be wholly a man or wholly a woman, in body and mind. But under no circumstance should such disorders be lauded as anything but a problem surely? At the end of the day, you are undergoing constant treatment for your condition. Surely you can't laud this as part of our diversity? I realise my language may sound very insensitive, but I'll do us both the favour of not trying to beat around the bush. I hope you appreciate I am giving my honest reaction.

Again, please get rid out of your mind that this is something that transgender people "want". Being trans is a very difficult thing to describe, and often times the only way someone can describe it is by saying "I want this", but that isn't actually quite true. I don't want transition - I need transition.

In spite of terms that may have been used, I do realise that this is the feeling of those suffering from GID.

I am actually a fully functional woman, thank you.

Again, I'm going to get brutal with terminology. But how can you honestly say this? You have the body of a man, with all its functions, or if post-op missing some functions. You have never had, nor will have mammary glands. You have never have, nor ever will have a womb, ovaries, a natural supply of oestrogen, a vagina etc.

Can we honestly say that this is a 'fully functional' woman. The above is very much part of a womans make-up. This is what I mean in relation to the neurological issue. If rather than transition, the mind could be treated, the outcome is so much better. You would be a fully functional man or woman. Surely you can see the point? Again, I understand that its hard to detach the feelings from it, but surely the above is the cold hard facts about living with such a disorder?

It is surely immoral to require people to suffer in the name of research.

The issue though, is that you are not being cured, you are being treated. The treatment is extreme, and in some cases irreversible. In the case of prepubescent treatment, they will never have fully functional sex organs, i.e. they will be rendered infertile.

Trust me - the vilification of LGBT people is far far greater than the vilification that some (understandably) angry LGBT people dish out to cisgender and straight people.

Maybe this was the case at one time, I would certainly not believe it is now, but thats OT I suppose.

That is one test. Another would be how effective they are in society. And speaking for myself, I am far more effective than I was before transition.

I don't deny that, and I find your reference to the effects of the hormone quite interesting. However, I could not ever think that making someone a paraplegic is the answer to their problem, and upfront, I find it hard to see transgenderism as an answer to GID. Though I'd like to look into that whole hormone scenario a bit more. Can I ask, did getting oestrogen have a shot in the arm effect, or was it only after being on it for a while that you suffered the effects of withdrawal due to not having enough of it? If what you say is true, then the effect of giving me oestrogen, will make me feel like crap. And the effect of giving my wife testosterone would do the same. But a man who identifies as a woman will have the opposite effect. Thats what you're saying right?

If, through a neurological or whatever issue, a person has to disown a part of their body, then surely that part of their body cannot be considered to be truly healthy.

Of course it can. The disorder is not in the limb, but in the mind. From my reading, it can be Psychological and neurological.

So the "problem" here is social.

If such a thing were to happen, I don't believe that we should redefine gender on the basis of a disorder. So in THAT regard, if such an agenda was to arise, then it would indeed be social.

It is certainly true that the existence of people who are on some level outside the gender binary creates social challenges for a society that is married to the gender binary.

You say it like its malleable. That somehow the issue is with society and its view of gender.

So what is to be done? Should those people be marginalised? Or should a way be found to incorporate us as valuable human beings into society?

Of course you should be valued in society, but not by redefining gender etc. Its a bit like having a 'Don't bully gays day'. Why not just a 'Don't bully! day'.

Eh?
That is precisely what the treatment achieves!!!
Currently, there is only one effective set of treatments for transgender people, and that is transition. If another one comes along, I'll consider it, but it is going to have an uphill battle against something that is 99% or more effective!!!

I'm rushing out the door now, but I think the word 'effective' and also, what part of transition is 'effective' is a topic in itself.

Again, I appreciate your testimony.

Zombrex

Links234 wrote: »

Well, it's more than just brain chemistry, it's brain anatomy and even genes associated with it.

Well yes, what I mean is that there is a physical, identifiable, difference centered around the brain.

I would tend to take Jimi's position that this in itself does not make the person a "woman", but equally I would not consider this just some sort of mental confusion that was traditionally the view with regard to trans-gender.

wolfsbane

Wicknight said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
No, but we are talking about the person's understanding of themselves. If that is the basis for action, then we would want to be sure it was based on reality, not on mixed-up 'feelings'.
We aren't talking about that, any more than someone gets a breast removed because they "feel" like they have breast cancer.

That's my point: the person's understanding of themselves must be real, rather than just a 'feeling'. Deirdre says comprehensive tests have been developed to avoid that risk.

There is an identifiable underlying physical cause for tran-gender people. I tend not to go in for the notion of identifying gender based on brain chemistry, I wouldn't identify a male with female brain chemistry as a woman with a male body (I would identify them as a male with female brain chemistry).

So you would be opposed to body-realignment? You favour re-aligning the brain chemistry? I imagine trans-gender folk disagree.

But at the same time research into this area has moved far beyond simply taking people as saying they feel like a different gender.

Indeed.

****************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.

deirdre_dub

JimiTime wrote: »

Ok, when you discovered that you are a woman, in non sexual terms, what does that mean? What does it mean to be a woman?

As I said in another post, part of it is that my brain runs on estrogen, not testosterone. When I don't have enough estrogen in my system, I suffer the symptoms of PMT!

I tried very very hard for a very very long time to identify myself as male. I just couldn't make it work. When I started to entertain the idea that I might actually be female, suddenly life started to "make sense". I started to understand gender, I started to understand relationships. But mostly I started to understand myself.

It's really really hard to pin down and explain.

Forgive my bluntness, but that concerns me. It seems to be saying that you consider GID and the resultant transgenderism as a good thing.

That's stretching what I said. Or, at least, what I meant!

This isn't something I'd wish on my worst enemy. Having said that, most of the difficulty is actually social. I think a society which has a place for people who aren't strictly male or strictly female is a better one, and I'd hate to see that baby thrown out with the bath water.

At the end of the day, you are undergoing constant treatment for your condition. Surely you can't laud this as part of our diversity? I realise my language may sound very insensitive, but I'll do us both the favour of not trying to beat around the bush. I hope you appreciate I am giving my honest reaction.

Compared to the social difficulties, the difficulties of having to undergo constant treatment is pretty much nothing. If it weren't for the social difficulties, I would say that transgenderism is "worth it" for what it brings to society and, indeed, for what it brings to the trans person themself. I mean, I've been privileged to see life from both sides of the fence, and there are times when I really really feel that privilege.

Again, I'm going to get brutal with terminology. But how can you honestly say this? You have the body of a man, with all its functions, or if post-op missing some functions. You have never had, nor will have mammary glands. You have never have, nor ever will have a womb, ovaries, a natural supply of oestrogen, a vagina etc.

First of all, a post-op transgender woman -

* has a vagina (OK - it's surgically reconstructed - but it's pretty indistinguishable from the vagina of a natal woman)

* has a natural source of estrogen (every man does - OK, it's a low dosage, but there are endocrinologists who stop writing prescriptions for estrogen for trans women over a certain age)

What we are actually asking here is - what makes a woman a woman? If I am not a woman because my vagina isn't "natural enough", then surely any natal woman who has had her vagina removed isn't a woman either! Do you really believe that? Is having a vagina, or any of the other things you mentioned above, absolutely necessary for a woman to be a woman? Is a natal woman who has a problem with her estrogen-production system not a woman? etc etc etc.

Can we honestly say that this is a 'fully functional' woman.

That is the question I'm going to throw back at you. Is someone who has had her vagina removed a "fully functional" woman?

The above is very much part of a womans make-up. This is what I mean in relation to the neurological issue. If rather than transition, the mind could be treated, the outcome is so much better.

So what you are seeking is technology in which someone with the neurological makeup of a man could be changed to have the neurological makeup of a woman. I truly hope such technology never comes into existence - the ways in which it would be abused just don't bear thinking about.

I don't deny that, and I find your reference to the effects of the hormone quite interesting. However, I could not ever think that making someone a paraplegic is the answer to their problem, and upfront, I find it hard to see transgenderism as an answer to GID.

Well, it is certainly extremely effective, and that makes it an answer. And, it is the only answer that is in existence.

Though I'd like to look into that whole hormone scenario a bit more. Can I ask, did getting oestrogen have a shot in the arm effect, or was it only after being on it for a while that you suffered the effects of withdrawal due to not having enough of it?

I get estrogen on an on-going basis - I don't get a "shot in the arm". So my estrogen levels rise and fall slowly (weeks or months). So it takes time for the effects to make themselves known.

If what you say is true, then the effect of giving me oestrogen, will make me feel like crap. And the effect of giving my wife testosterone would do the same. But a man who identifies as a woman will have the opposite effect. Thats what you're saying right?

That is my guess as to what would happen. You probably wouldn't feel that much different without something being done about your testosterone production - your testosterone would counter-act the introduced estrogen. However, I predict that your wife would feel the effects without anything being done about her estrogen production. It would take time, and there would have to be a significant difference generated in your and her levels.

Of course it can. The disorder is not in the limb, but in the mind. From my reading, it can be Psychological and neurological.

It's neurological (or some such), which consequently makes it psychological. It isn't psychological as such.

That somehow the issue is with society and its view of gender.

Correct.

It's not just transgender people who are saying that society's view of gender is incomplete - it is also intersexed people. Intersexed people are people whose gender incongruity is more visible than in transgender people, and even less deniable than the gender incongruity in transgender people.

It is simply a fact that society's view of gender is incomplete. There are people born every day with undeniably ambiguous gender. And I'm not just talking about ambiguous genitalia - there are also people with ambiguous genetic genders. There are even cases of fertility in women who are XY (ie people born with vaginas and all the other female biological features, yet who have a male genetic gender, and who naturally give birth to babies!). Now - given that such things happen, how can you defend society's view of gender as being completely accurate?

Of course you should be valued in society, but not by redefining gender

I'm not trying to redefine gender, I'm trying to clarify it. Mostly by trying to find space for myself (and intersexed people) in a society that, let's face it, doesn't really have a proper place for us.

wolfsbane

I think it significant that sex will not be a part of our eternal nature. We will be like the angels. This to me speaks of the essential unity of human nature - it is not essentially male and female, but human. It was formed male and female to facilitate communion of two individual humans, but it was formed from one human.

So the spirit of the individual is not male or female, just human. That's my musing - I'm open to correction.

******************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

So you would be opposed to body-realignment? You favour re-aligning the brain chemistry? I imagine trans-gender folk disagree.

No, more I would be opposed to the idea that a man with various female parts of the brain, who may or may not require body alterations, should be considered a "woman", or that such operations make them a woman.

I've ran into trouble expressing this notion before, but I take a some what materialistic view of these things.

I appreciate that it can make such a person feel happier about themselves to be identified as a woman by others, and I've little problem politely referring to "her" if the social circumstances arise. I also have little problem with surgery to alter the body to a situation that easies suffering in the person.

But equally I think it is more beneficial in the long term to view these biological phenomena in as accurate a manner as possible. The person is a man with some female brain structure. The person is a man who has had his testicles removed because of this, etc etc.

The notion that these things make someone a woman seem to be more a defensive response to intolerant social attitudes towards trans-gender people than based on any biological reality. It always reminds me of a mixed-race people being referred to a "black" despite the fact that they have as much "white" in them as black. Social constructs tend to rarely line up with the actual physical realities of the situation.

By the way that goes for religious notions of spirits or souls or other unidentifiable supposed external aspects of human personality and the body, I think you yourself are doing what you cautioned others about, supposing the existence of certain things based on little more than feelings and desires that they exist.

wolfsbane

Wicknight wrote: »

No, more I would be opposed to the idea that a man with various female parts of the brain, who may or may not require body alterations, should be considered a "woman", or that such operations make them a woman.

I've ran into trouble expressing this notion before, but I take a some what materialistic view of these things.

I appreciate that it can make such a person feel happier about themselves to be identified as a woman by others, and I've little problem politely referring to "her" if the social circumstances arise. I also have little problem with surgery to alter the body to a situation that easies suffering in the person.

But equally I think it is more beneficial in the long term to view these biological phenomena in as accurate a manner as possible. The person is a man with some female brain structure. The person is a man who has had his testicles removed because of this, etc etc.

The notion that these things make someone a woman seem to be more a defensive response to intolerant social attitudes towards trans-gender people than based on any biological reality. It always reminds me of a mixed-race people being referred to a "black" despite the fact that they have as much "white" in them as black. Social constructs tend to rarely line up with the actual physical realities of the situation.

By the way that goes for religious notions of spirits or souls or other unidentifiable supposed external aspects of human personality and the body, I think you yourself are doing what you cautioned others about, supposing the existence of certain things based on little more than feelings and desires that they exist.

I'm still puzzled why you believe the body apart from the brain is the correct identifier of the sex. Why not the brain apart from the body? The latter makes more sense, since the brain is the seat of the person/soul/spirit. I mean, get a body transplant and you are still you. Get a brain transplant and you're gone, the other person that inhabited the brain is now in possession of your body.

As to souls/spirits being imaginary, I reckon I have more evidence for the existence of the person than I have for my awareness/thinking being mere chemical reactions. If you admit to the existence of the person, but want to say it ends will the end of a certain kind of chemical reactions - that is a matter of faith. I think it at least as reasonable to think the person continues in another dimension. That's aside from the other witnesses to the existence of a spiritual dimension.

*****************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

I'm still puzzled why you believe the body apart from the brain is the correct identifier of the sex. Why not the brain apart from the body? The latter makes more sense, since the brain is the seat of the person/soul/spirit. I mean, get a body transplant and you are still you. Get a brain transplant and you're gone, the other person that inhabited the brain is now in possession of your body.

And they are in possession of a male body. I would see male/female as a description of biological gender. A male ant has no concept of mental gender, yet we call it a male ant.

wolfsbane wrote: »

As to souls/spirits being imaginary, I reckon I have more evidence for the existence of the person than I have for my awareness/thinking being mere chemical reactions. If you admit to the existence of the person, but want to say it ends will the end of a certain kind of chemical reactions - that is a matter of faith.

How exactly?

That is like saying if you want to say that a car moves just because of its engine rather than invisible fairies that push it, that is a matter of faith.

It isn't, it is a matter of the engine being the only thing that has ever been tested to do anything to the car.

wolfsbane

Wicknight said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
I'm still puzzled why you believe the body apart from the brain is the correct identifier of the sex. Why not the brain apart from the body? The latter makes more sense, since the brain is the seat of the person/soul/spirit. I mean, get a body transplant and you are still you. Get a brain transplant and you're gone, the other person that inhabited the brain is now in possession of your body.
And they are in possession of a male body. I would see male/female as a description of biological gender. A male ant has no concept of mental gender, yet we call it a male ant.

Ahh, I see. You say one is male because their body is, never mind the state of their brain. That is certainly one way of assigning sex.

But is it the correct one? The most accurate one? If the brain composition/structure is mostly female and the body mostly male, why is biological gender not better determined from the brain?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
As to souls/spirits being imaginary, I reckon I have more evidence for the existence of the person than I have for my awareness/thinking being mere chemical reactions. If you admit to the existence of the person, but want to say it ends will the end of a certain kind of chemical reactions - that is a matter of faith.
How exactly?

That is like saying if you want to say that a car moves just because of its engine rather than invisible fairies that push it, that is a matter of faith.

It isn't, it is a matter of the engine being the only thing that has ever been tested to do anything to the car.

Do we say the car turns, accelerates, slows, stops all due to its steering wheel, foot-pedals and engine? Neither have we reason to believe we do all we do due to the chemical reactions in our bodies.

************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.

Links234

Wicknight wrote: »

And they are in possession of a male body. I would see male/female as a description of biological gender.

I appreciate your argument Wicknight, and I kinda agree with you in some ways, but I think sex and gender are quite complex, and even ignoring gender, the human body is sexed in a vast amount of different ways beyond just the genitalia. what makes us phenotypically male or female is based on quite a lot of different sex characteristics, and I don't think people realise how much of that is based on hormones. I mean, it's hormones that make boys into men and girls into women, that's what puberty is, massive change in hormones. so when you introduce cross sex hormones to the bodies of transgender people, they do change considerably. I'm still very early in my transition, and the amount of physical changes that have happened with my body already are mindboggling.

I'll show an example, this is Ryan Sallans, who was born female:



His body is now quite male I think you'd agree.



And this is Janet Mock, she is transgender and she was born male:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0t-Ft-vRUE

and I mean, I don't think of my body as "male" exactly, and that's not to deny the physical characteristics I have, but just that I look at my body being "male" as just the state it's been in for a time. so, it's just my body, and it's becoming less and less male, and more female. and that's quite wonderful

Links234

wolfsbane wrote: »

But is it the correct one? The most accurate one? If the brain composition/structure is mostly female and the body mostly male, why is biological gender not better determined from the brain?

to be honest, it's kinda hard to define sex, and there's many different ways of defining it, like genitals, chromosomes, gonads, hormones, but there's always exceptions and that's why gender testing in sports has had a spotted history, because there's really no one way to test it and there's really no medical consensus either.

think about Caster Semenya and how her gender was the subject of huge debate.

wolfsbane

Links234 wrote: »

to be honest, it's kinda hard to define sex, and there's many different ways of defining it, like genitals, chromosomes, gonads, hormones, but there's always exceptions and that's why gender testing in sports has had a spotted history, because there's really no one way to test it and there's really no medical consensus either.

think about Caster Semenya and how her gender was the subject of huge debate.

OK. But that undermines the case deirdre_dub made. Does she need to consider she may be mistaken about her real gender?


***************************************************************************
Psalm 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Try me, and know my anxieties;
24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting.