Protesters for Transgender rights outside Dáil

MakeEmLaugh

Over 200 protesters were outside Leinster House today, where the Gender Recognition Bill is being discussed. The protesters are demanding changes to Bill, such as the requirement that a person wishing to change the gender on their birth certificate be assessed by a medical practitioner.

Transgender people are probably the most discriminated against in the world today. Their identity is an almost constant target of derision and outright hatred, more so than gay, lesbian or bisexual people.

I fully support the right of transgender people to have the gender they identify as recognised on any current legal documents, such as driving licences and passports.

I do not see why they should have their birth certificates changed, however. A birth certificate is an historic document of what you are declared at birth. If you are declared male at birth, then your birth cert should reflect that.

Ireland has only been independent since December 1922. If we tried to go back and alter any official documents from before then which said we were part of the United Kingdom, wouldn't it seem wrong?

Lyaiera

The original document isn't changed. It will still exist and the courts will have access to it should the need arise. It's also been said that in the future, when the documents get used for ancestry reasons and historical research the original birth cert will be available (so once the trans person is long dead.)

All this will mean is that there's a newer "birth cert" available as a form of legal gender recognition, and to allow access to things like passports, driving licenses and marriage. The original will still be available, just not to anyone.

suicide_circus

Coming from a place of ignorance here....why is it a bad thing that someone wishing to change their gender on state documents has to be medically assessed first?

Lyaiera

suicide_circus wrote: »

Coming from a place of ignorance here....why is it a bad thing that someone wishing to change their gender on state documents has to be medically assessed first?

All the doctor will be saying is the person is living in their acquired gender. Why can't the person testify to that themselves?

conorh91

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

A birth certificate is an historic document of what you are declared at birth. If you are declared male at birth, then your birth cert should reflect that.

This is exactly the approach the Supreme Court takes in relation to surrogacy. The mother is defined as the person who gives birth. In justifying this approach, the courts have said that birth certificates are no more than a demographic instrument, whereby changes in circumstances can be reflected in subsequent official documents.

The birth certificate is therefore a 'snapshot' of a moment in time.

This argument has quite a bit of support.

Retrospectively doctoring population-surveys to avoid hurt feelings is bewildering.

The State will recognize a 'change' in gender. The apparent need to erase all historical trace of a previous gender is overwrought and over the top.

pickarooney

I didn't think birth certs mentioned gender at all, just sex.

suicide_circus

Lyaiera wrote: »

All the doctor will be saying is the person is living in their acquired gender. Why can't the person testify to that themselves?

I dont know. Im not qualified to answer that question.

Lyaiera

conorh91 wrote: »

This is exactly the approach the Supreme Court takes in relation to surrogacy. The mother is defined as the person who gives birth. In justifying this approach, the courts have said that birth certificates are no more than a demographic instrument, whereby changes in circumstances can be reflected in subsequent official documents.

The birth certificate is therefore a 'snapshot' of a moment in time.

This argument has quite a bit of support.

Retrospectively doctoring population-surveys to avoid hurt feelings is bewildering.

The State will recognize a 'change' in gender. The apparent need to erase all historical trace of a previous gender is overwrought and over the top.

As I've already said, which you may have missed is that the original document isn't changed. It still exists, however it's only accessible under limited circumstances. A new document is issued for day-to-day life.

mikemac1

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Over 200 protesters were outside Leinster House today, where the Gender Recognition Bill is being discussed.

Is the Dail even open on a Saturday? Are they protesting outside an empty building and all the politicians have gone home?

Stinicker

They were right to remove it, Northern Ireland exists because of Religion Sectarianism, Racism and Bigotry. It is a failed pariah entity. The 6 Counties of Northern Ireland belong rightfully to the people of Ireland, this Irish people. London should have no say in any affair on this entire island and the Irish people should be united and free.

Annasopra

conorh91 wrote: »

This is exactly the approach the Supreme Court takes in relation to surrogacy. The mother is defined as the person who gives birth. In justifying this approach, the courts have said that birth certificates are no more than a demographic instrument, whereby changes in circumstances can be reflected in subsequent official documents.

The birth certificate is therefore a 'snapshot' of a moment in time.

This argument has quite a bit of support.

Retrospectively doctoring population-surveys to avoid hurt feelings is bewildering.

The State will recognize a 'change' in gender. The apparent need to erase all historical trace of a previous gender is overwrought and over the top.

No. All historical trace of the non preferred gender is not erased at all

Section 18: Parenthood
Section 18 is an avoidance of doubt provision. It provides that a change in a person’s recognised gender under the Act will not affect the responsibilities of that person as a parent of a child born prior to the issue of a gender recognition certificate.

Section 19: Disposal or devolution of property
Section 19 provides that where a person has had his/her preferred gender recognised, it does not affect the distribution of property under a will or other instrument made before the day on which the Act comes into force. For wills or other instruments made after that day, the general principle of the Bill will apply e.g. if a will refers to the ‘eldest daughter’, and a person who was previously a son becomes the ‘eldest daughter’ following recognition in the preferred gender, that person will inherit as the ‘eldest daughter’.

Section 20: Personal representatives and trustees
A trustee or personal representative is responsible for conveying and distributing property from a trust or estate. Section 20 relieves a trustee or personal representative from any fiduciary duty to inquire whether a gender recognition certificate has been issued to any person or revoked, even if that fact could affect entitlement to property which he or she is responsible for distributing. The beneficiary will nevertheless retain his or her claim to the property and may enforce this claim, e.g. by following the property into the
hands of another person who has received it instead.

Section 21: Orders where expectations defeated
Section 21 makes provision for any situation where the disposition or devolution of property under a will or other instrument is different from what it would be but for the fact that a person is regarded as being of the preferred gender. If, for example, an instrument governs succession by reference to the ‘eldest daughter’ of the settlor, and there is an older brother whose gender becomes female under the Act, then the person who was previously the ‘eldest daughter’ may cease to enjoy that position. Sub-Section (2) allows a person who is adversely affected by the different disposition or devolution of the property to make an application to the High Court. The Court, if it is satisfied that it is just to do so, may make such order as it considers appropriate in relation to the person benefiting from the different disposition of the property.

Section 22: Gender-specific offences
A number of sexual offences in this jurisdiction are gender specific. For example, the common law offence of rape can only be committed by a man. The offence is committed by a man against a woman who does not consent to it. Other offences can only be committed against or in relation to a person of a particular gender.
Section 22 provides that where criminal liability would arise, but for the fact that a person, either the victim or perpetrator, has been issued with a gender recognition certificate, such liability will exist notwithstanding the gender change. A person whose preferred gender has been recognised may still be physically capable of committing a sexual offence, or being the victim of a sexual offence, associated with the opposite gender.

MakeEmLaugh

Stinicker wrote: »

They were right to remove it, Northern Ireland exists because of Religion Sectarianism, Racism and Bigotry. It is a failed pariah entity. The 6 Counties of Northern Ireland belong rightfully to the people of Ireland, this Irish people. London should have no say in any affair on this entire island and the Irish people should be united and free.

I think you've got the wrong thread.

conorh91

Lyaiera wrote: »

It still exists, however it's only accessible under limited circumstances.

Sigh. Right so. Not erasing the document but simply hiding it, then, and replacing the public document with a doctored, retrospective version.

Lyaiera

conorh91 wrote: »

Sigh. Right so. Not erasing the document but simply hiding it, then, and replacing the public document with a doctored, retrospective version.

I would phrase it as respecting someone's right to live in their gender for day-to-day purposes and ensuring that the information is only available to people who need to access it. And as has been pointed out, it's not doctored it's reflective of the reality of the person's day to day life (where it will be used) and it's not retrospective as the legislation ensures.

conorh91

Lyaiera wrote: »

I would phrase it as respecting someone's right to live in their gender for day-to-day purposes

There is no question of refusing the right of someone to live as a woman or as a man in their daily life.

The point that was made, including by our Supreme Court, is that birth certificates are nothing more than population documents conveying the best-available data for one moment in time. Why is it so important to hide this data? It's totally bonkers.

Transexuals have the right to acquire (official) identity documents reflecting their new status. Just like a bride who changes her surname after marriage.

But if that bride started to demand her birth surname be retrospectively changed, I'd frankly be bewildered as to her demand.

SEPT 23 1989

AC/DC

Little CuChulainn

Bit of a conundrum. The Bill can't be passed with the desired changes because we haven't had the same sex marriage referendum and it can't be put off until then because of the legal pressure that has been placed on the government.

Lyaiera

conorh91 wrote: »

There is no question of refusing the right of someone to live as a woman or as a man in their daily life.

The point that was made, including by our Supreme Court, is that birth certificates are nothing more than population documents conveying the best-available data for one moment in time. Why is it so important to hide this data? It's totally bonkers.

Transexuals have the right to acquire (official) identity documents reflecting their new status. Just like a bride who changes her surname after marriage.

But if that bride started to demand her birth surname be retrospectively changed, I'd frankly be bewildered as to her demand.

And a new birth cert is the practical (and necessary) solution to this. It ensures that the day to day life and reality of the trans person is being respected and that they are not exposed to discrimination by being forced to reveal their trans status, while ensuring that in circumstances where it is necessary to have that information (inheritance, crime, etc.) the original document is available. It's a practical solution for a small section of society that doesn't compare to the scenarios you're putting forth for name changes, etc. This will have a real practical benefit for trans people and it is a solution to a very specific issue, while ensuring that when all information is necessary that it is available.

mikemac1

Lyaiera wrote: »

And a new birth cert is the practical (and necessary) solution to this. It ensures that the day to day life and reality of the trans person is being respected and that they are not exposed to discrimination by being forced to reveal their trans status, while ensuring that in circumstances where it is necessary to have that information (inheritance, crime, etc.) the original document is available. It's a practical solution for a small section of society that doesn't compare to the scenarios you're putting forth for name changes, etc. This will have a real practical benefit for trans people and it is a solution to a very specific issue, while ensuring that when all information is necessary that it is available.

That sounds like a simple solution that will work well

Lyaiera for Taoiseach!

Lyaiera

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Bit of a conundrum. The Bill can't be passed with the desired changes because we haven't had the same sex marriage referendum and it can't be put off until then because of the legal pressure that has been placed on the government.

That's hugely debatable. Legal experts are of the opinion that because the marriage was legal at the time the marriage was created, when it was a man and woman marrying, that nothing can make that marriage illegal retrospectively. This would be one of the cases where the original birth cert would be important, because it would show that the marriage was perfectly fine at the time it came into effect. A subsequent change does not change prior legal contracts. The proposed Gender Recognition Legislation even states this explicitly, you can't get out of a contract purely on the basis of legally changing your gender. Everything you've done in the past you are still responsible for.

Little CuChulainn

Lyaiera wrote: »

That's hugely debatable. Legal experts are of the opinion that because the marriage was legal at the time the marriage was created, when it was a man and woman marrying, that nothing can make that marriage illegal retrospectively. This would be one of the cases where the original birth cert would be important, because it would show that the marriage was perfectly fine at the time it came into effect. A subsequent change does not change prior legal contracts. The proposed Gender Recognition Legislation even states this explicitly, you can't get out of a contract purely on the basis of legally changing your gender. Everything you've done in the past you are still responsible for.

Everything is debatable. But the simple fact is the current interpretation of the constitution prohibits same sex marriage. The altered bill would allow for same sex marriage to exist. Therefore it would be repugnant to the constitution. And you can be sure it wouldn't be out a week before it was challenged. Even if it was eventually successful, the challenge would likely result in the freezing applications involving married persons until the outcome of the case.

The best approach would be to allow the bill pass as is and amend it if and when the same sex marriage referendum passes.

Birneybau

Great bunch of lads.

Lyaiera

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Everything is debatable. But the simple fact is the current interpretation of the constitution prohibits same sex marriage. The altered bill would allow for same sex marriage to exist. Therefore it would be repugnant to the constitution. And you can be sure it wouldn't be out a week before it was challenged. Even if it was eventually successful, the challenge would likely result in the freezing applications involving married persons until the outcome of the case.

The best approach would be to allow the bill pass as is and amend it if and when the same sex marriage referendum passes.

I think that's the practical solution and what will happen. And as I've been saying this legislation is all about practicality. And mostly the practicality of recognising the actual life someone is living.

suicide_circus

Birneybau wrote: »

Great bunch of lads.

oh no you di'n't!

bb1234567

Awful situation for trans people, all over the world, even in the most tolerant liberal countries life looks very difficult. They even suffer huge discrimination from other cisgendered members of the lgbt community

suicide_circus

bb1234567 wrote: »

Awful situation for trans people, all over the world, even in the most tolerant liberal countries life looks very difficult. They even suffer huge discrimination from other cisgendered members of the lgbt community

If you don't know what cisgender is, you are one.

Pardon me for being glib, but I often think to myself when reading arguments about this and gay marriage is, "What's it to you? How could this possibly intrude on your life?"

bb1234567

suicide_circus wrote: »

If you don't know what cisgender is, you are one.

What? I do know what it is and I am cisgender

Lyaiera

bb1234567 wrote: »

Awful situation for trans people, all over the world, even in the most tolerant liberal countries life looks very difficult. They even suffer huge discrimination from other cisgendered members of the lgbt community

It's not great for us, every trans person I know has stories of being mistreated, finding it difficult to find work, transitioning while working and ending up with crappy bosses making things difficult, getting looks on the street (at best) or outright abuse, quite a few people I know have been assaulted (including me.) But... The vast majority of people have been nothing but lovely and supporting. The people in my local have seen me at every step of my transition and are fully supportive of me, my friends are amazing, most people on the street don't even notice you, I've never had hassle by any people in shops whether I'm buying booze or bras. But the few assholes really do make things difficult, because you have the constant threat of someone making a scene, or coming at you. Most people really do have a live and let live attitude, and even if they realise I'm trans they're respectful because they know this is a personal thing I'm doing because it's important for my life, it's who I am. It's just the minority of bad apples who spoil things.

I even know trans people who have moved from other countries to Ireland who say they could never imagine receiving as much acceptance from their peers in their home country as they do in Ireland. Ireland can be pretty good when it wants to be, but there's always a few idiots.

Annasopra

bb1234567 wrote: »

Awful situation for trans people, all over the world, even in the most tolerant liberal countries life looks very difficult. They even suffer huge discrimination from other cisgendered members of the lgbt community

Cisgendered and transgendered are not really correct terminology. Its the equivalent of saying homosexualised. Cisgnender and transgender are better terms to use.

Wibbs

suicide_circus wrote: »

If you don't know what cisgender is, you are one.

TBH when I see or hear the word cisgender in any discussion it's at that point my eyes glaze over and I back away to talk with other people. Ditto for "gender normative" and such newspeak. Because experience has told me that much of what will follow is nearly always an ever increasing circle jerk of nonsense and precious snowflakism, with a healthy side order of offence seeking at any questioning of the position, even if meant in good faith.

As for transexual folks, I say good luck to them and whatever get's one through life as a more content human being and I think Lyaiera's take is the right one. Day to day life the person's record reflect their wishes and gender alignment, but with the original record available should it be required down the line.

emmetlego

To quote Anton Savage….

Yis are all QWAAAARRREEESSS!

Relax, trying to inject humor...

bb1234567

Lyaiera wrote: »

It's not great for us, every trans person I know has stories of being mistreated, finding it difficult to find work, transitioning while working and ending up with crappy bosses making things difficult, getting looks on the street (at best) or outright abuse, quite a few people I know have been assaulted (including me.) But... The vast majority of people have been nothing but lovely and supporting. The people in my local have seen me at every step of my transition and are fully supportive of me, my friends are amazing, most people on the street don't even notice you, I've never had hassle by any people in shops whether I'm buying booze or bras. But the few assholes really do make things difficult, because you have the constant threat of someone making a scene, or coming at you. Most people really do have a live and let live attitude, and even if they realise I'm trans they're respectful because they know this is a personal thing I'm doing because it's important for my life, it's who I am. It's just the minority of bad apples who spoil things.

I even know trans people who have moved from other countries to Ireland who say they could never imagine receiving as much acceptance from their peers in their home country as they do in Ireland. Ireland can be pretty good when it wants to be, but there's always a few idiots.

This made me really happy to hear! Im actually delighted haha I thought even in Ireland life was really really awful for trans people. I don't know any trans people personally so thank you for sharing. And I wish you the best of luck with your transitioning.

Lyaiera

bb1234567 wrote: »

This made me really happy to hear! Im actually delighted haha I thought even in Ireland life was really really awful for trans people. I don't know any trans people personally so thank you for sharing. And I wish you the best of luck with your transitioning.

It can be awful at times, but it's not as awful as not living your life the way you want.

My story isn't universal though. There's a lot of trans people who don't have it as easy as me. There's a lot of people who really fear what reaction society will have. There's a lot of people who have lost all their family, all their friends, and their job. When I talk about the minority of people making comments, being abusive and attacking you it's because it's happened to me. I've been lucky enough that I can pick myself up, with the help of some of my family, my friends and quite a few trips to the pub for a sympathetic ear and a beer. But there's a lot of people who fear they couldn't conquer those issues, and stay in the closet (for want of a better word.) There's a lot of people who transition who can't deal with those people and end up isolated and alone.

Resilience is a big buzzword in mental health, the ability to deal with the things that will inevitably try to drag you down. A lot of people fear they don't have that resilience, and a lot of people find that the setbacks knock them hugely. I try my best to stay positive, but the times like when my father has hung up on me saying he doesn't know me have of course had an effect. This is the reality, but to trans people I'd say this reality where you get to live your life is better than the one where you don't.

And often the reality for trans people is that you have to do things that put you at risk, that make you feel vulnerable and that are a challenge. I saw a dress I liked on sale in Debenhams two weeks ago, I went back this week and bought it, and I wore it out the other night (my first time wearing a dress as I'm normally a jeans and top girl.) That was a challenge, but I needed the strength to say "fcuk you" to any who would give me crap (although say it silently, saying it out loud can get you punched in the head.) The ability to psyche yourself up to know you are just as entitled to wear nice clothes out on a night out as anyone else, and anyone who gives you hassle for that isn't worth your time. But the threat of those people, or of family giving you hassle can be really hard to deal with. And hopefully legislation like this, the trans people on boards speaking out, the support groups around the country, TENI, Senators and TDs speaking up, and newspapers writing articles does give the many frightened trans people the strength to live their life as is best for them.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

As for transexual folks, I say good luck to them and whatever get's one through life as a more content human being

Or helps you get over a genuine ailment. We have learned little - but enough - about transgenderment that we know they do not just get through life. They get through their day.

Holsten

I would fully support whatever they want, for the simple reason it doesn't affect me in any way, and giving them what they want should not cause any harm to anyone, and give them some form of happiness.

If they are born male and feel they are female, why should their birth cert not reflect this?

If I am born Steven and live 15 years as a male, yet then choose to live the rest of my live as Stephanie, should my birth cert not reflect my actual life?

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Cisgendered and transgendered are not really correct terminology. Its the equivalent of saying homosexualised. Cisgnender and transgender are better terms to use.

... and here we go... Make sure folks that you're using the "correct" terminology. Do you ever get tried of being so right on, being so "correct"(tries hard to avoid using the P word), being so primed for spotting offence?

Deleted User wrote:

Or helps you get over a genuine ailment. We have learned little - but enough - about transgenderment that we know they do not just get through life. They get through their day.

No doubt T, but that way of thinking all too common these days on a myriad of topics is arguably just another way of bringing more and more people into the circle of perpetual victims of life and of themselves.

Links234

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH when I see or hear the word cisgender in any discussion it's at that point my eyes glaze over and I back away to talk with other people. Ditto for "gender normative" and such newspeak. Because experience has told me that much of what will follow is nearly always an ever increasing circle jerk of nonsense and precious snowflakism, with a healthy side order of offence seeking at any questioning of the position, even if meant in good faith.

Eh Wibbs, cisgender is a clinical term, it means the opposite of transgender and you'd find it in a lot of medical or scientific papers. It's derived from the latin, where trans means across or on the other side, cis means on the same side of. You see the same thing elsewhere, such as cis and trans isomers in chemistry and so forth.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

victims of life

And the alternative does not beat thinking about

What we have learned about things like TGism at the level of the brain though is remarkable. To think that a mere "wrong" flip of a gene could cause someone to live a life of pain and confusion is something we are only learning now as a species. The tongue in cheek Ahours joke would be to explore situational comedy of cave men wanting to be cave women.

but the reality we have learned is remarkable.

bjork

Deleted User wrote: »

And the alternative does not beat thinking about

What we have learned about things like TGism at the level of the brain though is remarkable. To think that a mere "wrong" flip of a gene could cause someone to live a life of pain and confusion is something we are only learning now as a species. The tongue in cheek Ahours joke would be to explore situational comedy of cave men wanting to be cave women.

but the reality we have learned is remarkable.

How much of it is real and how much of it is perceived? The discrimination, I mean

bjork

bjork wrote: »

How much of it is real and how much of it is perceived? The discrimination, I mean

More than you would think I guess. What we have learned from disambiguation for example would condition you to second guess any preconception you might have of someone who comes before you with a feeling that they are not what they feel they should be. Imagine people who hold up their arm to you and declare to you with totally cogent clarity that they can not be happy unless you cut their limb off them.

ngcxt6

Like most discussions about transgender issues online and in real life, I expect this to devolve into nothing but subtle abuse, insults and discrimination.

Mostly it's from cisgender people who outright refuse to accept trans peoples identity and who are totally insecure with the term cisgender, the abuse I see on a daily basis is awful.

Could somebody link the TENI video titled "Gender Recognition Matters 2015". It's a fantastic video and everybody should watch it if you want to have an ounce of understanding about what these people are fighting for.

I've seen even gay people outright discriminate and abuse transgender people, it's really sickening to see such behaviour and ignorance.

Wibbs

bjork wrote: »

How much of it is real and how much of it is perceived? The discrimination, I mean

Oh the discrimination is very real, the diagnosis I'd be a little less sure of.

taxAHcruel wrote:

More than you would think I guess. What we have learned from disambiguation for example would condition you to second guess any preconception you might have of someone who comes before you with a feeling that they are not what they feel they should be. Imagine people who hold up their arm to you and declare to you with totally cogent clarity that they can not be happy unless you cut their limb off them.

And in that case T it would be seen as a mental illness, a clear pathology and no way in hell would a doctor agree to amputate their limb on such a declaration and subsequent diagnosis. Even if the person was suicidal.

Wibbs

ngcxt6 wrote: »

Mostly it's from cisgender people who outright refuse to accept trans peoples identity and who are totally insecure with the term cisgender

What nonsense is this? It's got feck all to do with "insecurity", that go to defence/offence of the Oprah generation. Indeed one could easily argue it's far more to to with transgender people's "insecurities' and feeling not "normal". Which is well understandable.

Lyaiera

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh the discrimination is very real, the diagnosis I'd be a little less sure of.

Why would you be less sure of the diagnosis? Trans people have existed throughout history. If someone presents as transgender, receives treatment (psychological, social, medical and legal transition) and their life improves what more do you need? There's an issue, the issue is addressed, the issue goes away. This has been recognised by the vast majority of medical practitioners and researchers, and has been proven to work. If you're looking for proof like an x-ray then you must have a lot of issues with psychology and psychiatry in general.

Wibbs

Links234 wrote: »

Eh Wibbs, cisgender is a clinical term, it means the opposite of transgender and you'd find it in a lot of medical or scientific papers. It's derived from the latin, where trans means across or on the other side, cis means on the same side of. You see the same thing elsewhere, such as cis and trans isomers in chemistry and so forth.

You're kinda proving my point here. Newspeak for "normal" and "not so normal". Both say exactly the same thing, but the "cis/trans" is looking to normalise both. Which again is understandable, neither should be a value judgement, especially in the face of abuse, but it does start to get a bit wearing and over sensitive after a while.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

And in that case T it would be seen as a mental illness, a clear pathology

We are learning otherwise. There is a genuine reason for people feeling this way. Alien Limb syndrome is an extreme case but a poignant one. We are learning that the way the brain views the world is through many inputs - and for most of us those inputs match with our internal wiring - but what we learn from phantom limbs - alien limbs - transgenders - synesthesia - and much more - is that we have many words for one condition - a simple mis-match between neurons and reality.

It is hard to classify this as an illness or a pathogen or a delusion or anything else. It is a fundamental discord between reality and your brains representation of reality. It must be horrific to live with. But - and I say this with regret not glee - it is a fascination and a joy to work with. The human brain is a pandoras box of surprise. And working with it will genuinely undermine any preconception you might have - even preconceptions about your preconceptions

Wibbs

Lyaiera wrote: »

Why would you be less sure of the diagnosis? Trans people have existed throughout history. If someone presents as transgender, receives treatment (psychological, social, medical and legal transition) and their life improves what more do you need? There's an issue, the issue is addressed, the issue goes away. This has been recognised by the vast majority of medical practitioners and researchers, and has been proven to work. If you're looking for proof like an x-ray then you must have a lot of issues with psychology and psychiatry in general.

Again let's take taxAHcruel's example: "What we have learned from disambiguation for example would condition you to second guess any preconception you might have of someone who comes before you with a feeling that they are not what they feel they should be. Imagine people who hold up their arm to you and declare to you with totally cogent clarity that they can not be happy unless you cut their limb off them". Chances are high they'd be diagnosed as mentally ill with body dysmorphic disorder and no way would they be encouraged to have an amputation.

I am not saying all cases of transgender is a body dysmorphic disorder, but I would argue that some are. Transgender folks have one of the highest rates of suicide ideation of any group, pre and post transition.

As for issues with psychology and psychiatry? I have much with the former and less with the latter. Those areas of medicine have one of the highest "WTF were we thinking" in hindsight of any medical area of study and treatment. And that ain't some hippie scientology nonsense, that's looking at the clinical stuff over time.

Lyaiera

Wibbs wrote: »

You're kinda proving my point here. Newspeak for "normal" and "not so normal". Both say exactly the same thing, but the "cis/trans" is looking to normalise both. Which again is understandable, neither should be a value judgement, especially in the face of abuse, but it does start to get a bit wearing and over sensitive after a while.

You're comparing scientific and medical language with Orwellian dystopian oppression.

Deleted User wrote: »

We are learning otherwise. There is a genuine reason for people feeling this way. Alien Limb syndrome is an extreme case but a poignant one. We are learning that the way the brain views the world is through many inputs - and for most of us those inputs match with our internal wiring - but what we learn from phantom limbs - alien limbs - transgenders - synesthesia - and much more - is that we have many words for one condition - a simple mis-match between neurons and reality.

It is hard to classify this as an illness or a pathogen or a delusion or anything else. It is a fundamental discord between reality and your brains representation of reality. It must be horrific to live with. But - and I say this with regret not glee - it is a fascination and a joy to work with. The human brain is a pandoras box of surprise. And working with it will genuinely undermine any preconception you might have - even preconceptions about your preconceptions

That would be the research done on the cortical homunculus. Which is very interesting, but with phantom limbs, anorexia, etc. the cortical homunculus is where it ends. Trans people (both pre and post hormone treatment) have been shown to have other neurological structures similar to cis people of the same gender in other areas of the brain. This has been shown with "live" scans but most of the knowledge comes from autopsies. Similarly, implicit association tests have shown that trans children have the same results as cis children of the same gender.

Lyaiera

Wibbs wrote: »

Again let's take taxAHcruel's example: "What we have learned from disambiguation for example would condition you to second guess any preconception you might have of someone who comes before you with a feeling that they are not what they feel they should be. Imagine people who hold up their arm to you and declare to you with totally cogent clarity that they can not be happy unless you cut their limb off them". Chances are high they'd be diagnosed as mentally ill with body dysmorphic disorder and no way would they be encouraged to have an amputation.

I am not saying all cases of transgender is a body dysmorphic disorder, but I would argue that some are. Transgender folks have one of the highest rates of suicide ideation of any group, pre and post transition.

As for issues with psychology and psychiatry? I have much with the former and less with the latter. Those areas of medicine have one of the highest "WTF were we thinking" in hindsight of any medical area of study and treatment. And that ain't some hippie scientology nonsense, that's looking at the clinical stuff over time.

I don't see the point of all this? What are you proposing? Most trans people seek medical treatment, and are treated by the medical establishment. Quality of life improves dramatically for people once they've received treatment (even more so if their social setting is supportive.) Both psychology and psychiatry supports the idea that trans people need medical treatment. I really don't know why you're trying to get at.

Wibbs

Lyaiera wrote: »

You're comparing scientific and medical language with Orwellian dystopian oppression.

Yep. That was my intention.