Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2017 23:45:31 GMT
yep no questions asked. perfectly sane to cut off your dick. It's actually inverted not cut off
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Mar 30, 2017 0:23:04 GMT
I do care about science. You just haven't presented your case in any coherent way that differentiates it from encouraging people to not accept who they are. You just ramble on and conflate ideas while saying I'm the one making assumptions. Sure. Actually no, you don't care about science at all. You are not capable of reading 500 words-- and here is where I have to stop you. NO ONE ON THIS SITE IS CAPABLE OF READING 500 WORDS IN ONE GO! AND NOT THE DRIVEL YOU SPEW OUT! GOOD GOD! Do you have any idea what TL:DR means??? too long didn't read! every freaking time you write you write these doctoral dissertations meant for Ivy Leaguers! fk you.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 30, 2017 1:19:10 GMT
People should be allowed to hurt themselves, or to do what you consider hurting themselves, if that's what they choose to do. I'll just let this response stand on it's own merit.
I on the other hand would prefer to help people. You know, being a humanist and all.
Forcing them to do what you prefer/not allowing them to do what they prefer isn't helping them. It's self-serving on your part instead.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 30, 2017 1:25:31 GMT
I'll just let this response stand on it's own merit.
I on the other hand would prefer to help people. You know, being a humanist and all.
Forcing them to do what you prefer/not allowing them to do what they prefer isn't helping them. It's self-serving on your part instead. Yeah, leave those heroine addicts to it
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 30, 2017 1:32:07 GMT
Forcing them to do what you prefer/not allowing them to do what they prefer isn't helping them. It's self-serving on your part instead. Yeah, leave those heroine addicts to it You want to prohibit them from doing heroin, and perhaps incarcerate them, etc., based on your preferences. There's nothing benevolent about that.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 30, 2017 1:34:13 GMT
Yeah, leave those heroine addicts to it You want to prohibit them from doing heroin, and perhaps incarcerate them, etc., based on your preferences. There's nothing benevolent about that. YEAH!!! Heroin rights now!!!! And save the anorexics too!!!!! I'm tired of people trying to force people to eat! WHO ARE WE TO DECIDE!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 30, 2017 1:51:15 GMT
You want to prohibit them from doing heroin, and perhaps incarcerate them, etc., based on your preferences. There's nothing benevolent about that. YEAH!!! Heroin rights now!!!! And save the anorexics too!!!!! I'm tired of people trying to force people to eat! WHO ARE WE TO DECIDE!!!! It's sad that you feel it goes without saying that you should be allowed to dictate that people be prohibited from making some consensual choices.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 30, 2017 2:07:19 GMT
YEAH!!! Heroin rights now!!!! And save the anorexics too!!!!! I'm tired of people trying to force people to eat! WHO ARE WE TO DECIDE!!!! It's sad that you feel it goes without saying that you should be allowed to dictate that people be prohibited from making some consensual choices. Who said prohibited?
I'm just talking about discussing the idea.
You're the one acting like it's wrong to even bring it up, and that we should all just go along everything.
What's sad is you pretending I'm talking about passing laws. Why don't you listen instead of making up what you wanted to hear?
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 30, 2017 2:09:24 GMT
YEAH!!! Heroin rights now!!!! And save the anorexics too!!!!! I'm tired of people trying to force people to eat! WHO ARE WE TO DECIDE!!!!Haha! Ignores facts and keeps repeating the same nonsensical appeals. We actually don't force them, however. If they happen to pass out and are brought into medical care, we offer them intravenous nutrition, but that's another story. The core of the treatment is psychiatric and psychological. Also, do remember that WE (the medical community) are the ones doing the surgeries, not the patients themselves. We don't see it any differently than we see the care we offer to addicts and anorexic patients. They feel an uneasiness (which is not their TG identity) that they want to manage, and we have options we can offer to try doing so. Not that you actually care about helping anyone, though, nor about the facts involved, as you have admitted yourself when you told us you were not reading the information you asked for. Finally, since that's not your specialty, nor are you particularly involved (that is, you are not them), you are certainly not anyone whose input matters here.
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 30, 2017 2:14:23 GMT
Who said prohibited?
I'm just talking about discussing the idea.
You're the one acting like it's wrong to even bring it up, and that we should all just go along everything.
What's sad is you pretending I'm talking about passing laws. Why don't you listen instead of making up what you wanted to hear?
Haha Still pretends he is not criticizing the establishment without scientific backing, and still pretends this has no legal implications. How cute! And, apparently, he still thinks anyone will take his appeals to "listening/reading" seriously after admitting he was not reading himself. Let's see how that plays out!
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 30, 2017 3:01:52 GMT
It's sad that you feel it goes without saying that you should be allowed to dictate that people be prohibited from making some consensual choices. Who said prohibited?
I'm just talking about discussing the idea.
You're the one acting like it's wrong to even bring it up, and that we should all just go along everything.
What's sad is you pretending I'm talking about passing laws. Why don't you listen instead of making up what you wanted to hear?
And what are you saying about discussing the idea?
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 30, 2017 3:48:07 GMT
Who said prohibited?
I'm just talking about discussing the idea.
You're the one acting like it's wrong to even bring it up, and that we should all just go along everything.
What's sad is you pretending I'm talking about passing laws. Why don't you listen instead of making up what you wanted to hear?
And what are you saying about discussing the idea? I'm saying that stating out of hand that should not be a questionable action, is absurd. It is simply a demonstration of human compassion that if a person is going to engage in a dangerous activity, or risky career move, or unstable marriage partner, that you seek to understand the decision so that you can either support it, or if a legitimate concern is found, so that you can discuss that openly with the person in question.
Your assertion that every decision a person makes should just be accepted no matter what as though you do not care about the results to that individual, is the exact opposite of what it means to hold compassion for an individual. The idea that somehow transgender will ever be accepted as a decision beyond question, is flat out unrealistic. Of course it won't, and it shouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 30, 2017 10:17:56 GMT
And what are you saying about discussing the idea? I'm saying that stating out of hand that should not be a questionable action, is absurd. It is simply a demonstration of human compassion that if a person is going to engage in a dangerous activity, or risky career move, or unstable marriage partner, that you seek to understand the decision so that you can either support it, or if a legitimate concern is found, so that you can discuss that openly with the person in question.
Your assertion that every decision a person makes should just be accepted no matter what as though you do not care about the results to that individual, is the exact opposite of what it means to hold compassion for an individual. The idea that somehow transgender will ever be accepted as a decision beyond question, is flat out unrealistic. Of course it won't, and it shouldn't.
I don't know why you took me to be saying that you shouldn't discuss anything with anyone. Discussing doesn't imply not accepting, by the way (and not accepting certainly doesn't imply merely discussing). You're not under the impression that if you discuss something with someone, they'll necessarily change their mind about wanting to do heroin, or wanting a sex change operation, or wanting to try to talk people out of doing heroin or having sex change operations, are you? So then after you discuss wanting to do heroin, wanting to get a sex change operation, or wanting to talk people out of doing heroin or getting a sex change operation, and the person afterwards still wants to do heroin, get a sex change operation, or try to talk people out of the same, what should you do in your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 30, 2017 14:09:59 GMT
I'm saying that stating out of hand that should not be a questionable action, is absurd. It is simply a demonstration of human compassion that if a person is going to engage in a dangerous activity, or risky career move, or unstable marriage partner, that you seek to understand the decision so that you can either support it, or if a legitimate concern is found, so that you can discuss that openly with the person in question.
Your assertion that every decision a person makes should just be accepted no matter what as though you do not care about the results to that individual, is the exact opposite of what it means to hold compassion for an individual. The idea that somehow transgender will ever be accepted as a decision beyond question, is flat out unrealistic. Of course it won't, and it shouldn't.
I don't know why you took me to be saying that you shouldn't discuss anything with anyone. Discussing doesn't imply not accepting, by the way (and not accepting certainly doesn't imply merely discussing). You're not under the impression that if you discuss something with someone, they'll necessarily change their mind about wanting to do heroin, or wanting a sex change operation, or wanting to try to talk people out of doing heroin or having sex change operations, are you? So then after you discuss wanting to do heroin, wanting to get a sex change operation, or wanting to talk people out of doing heroin or getting a sex change operation, and the person afterwards still wants to do heroin, get a sex change operation, or try to talk people out of the same, what should you do in your opinion? You're not under the impression that anybody is obligated to accept it are you? And you realize they can be perfectly justified in not accepting it? You seem to have this idea that whatever a person wants to do to themselves shouldn't concern anybody else for any reason.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 30, 2017 15:45:28 GMT
Right, so major reconstructive surgery to look like a different person even though the parts won't work is perfectly sane as long as it makes you happy.
No reason to even ask questions. That's casual family dinner conversation.
What should be done? Lock them up and refuse them surgery? That's not going to happen. When I was working in retail I encountered transgenders and/or cross dressers. I thought they were a lot nicer then some of the other rude jerks I would see. Now that I'm not working I don't see anyone "different". If they're not bothering you then don't worry about how they live their lives, it's their business What should be done about people who have Body Integrity Identity Disorder? Should we allow them to cut off limbs the way trans people do breasts and genitalia? I mean, they're not really hurting anyone, right? So why not let them cut off their limbs as they see fit?
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 30, 2017 15:57:53 GMT
Yeah, leave those heroine addicts to it You want to prohibit them from doing heroin, and perhaps incarcerate them, etc., based on your preferences. There's nothing benevolent about that. No, he wants to prevent people from doing heroin because it destroys lives and communities, you asshole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 18:14:27 GMT
What should be done? Lock them up and refuse them surgery? That's not going to happen. When I was working in retail I encountered transgenders and/or cross dressers. I thought they were a lot nicer then some of the other rude jerks I would see. Now that I'm not working I don't see anyone "different". If they're not bothering you then don't worry about how they live their lives, it's their business What should be done about people who have Body Integrity Identity Disorder? Should we allow them to cut off limbs the way trans people do breasts and genitalia? I mean, they're not really hurting anyone, right? So why not let them cut off their limbs as they see fit? No one is cutting off limbs and they're not the same thing. TGs are changing their bodies to the gender they're supposed to be. What would cutting off limbs achieve??
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 30, 2017 18:37:26 GMT
What should be done about people who have Body Integrity Identity Disorder? Should we allow them to cut off limbs the way trans people do breasts and genitalia? I mean, they're not really hurting anyone, right? So why not let them cut off their limbs as they see fit? It seems Trump-on-a-belly didn't actually check the criteria for diagnosis! And after everyone expected so much from Trump-on-a-belly! So does that mean that, despite his bold clinical claims, Trump-on-a-belly is neither a credible Psychiatrist, nor has he internalized any relevant textbook on the subject himself, much less updated himself on the last available meta-analyses? I’m sure the board is devastated! About everything else: haha So cute! Since the "opposition" does not even pretend anymore, I'm just going to copy paste. "It’s also both cute and telling how the people who really, really want to paint the TG spectrum as a disorder don’t have even a toddler’s grasp of actual psychiatry." "You are still wrongly assuming surgery is either “self-harm” or maltreatment. We do surgery all the time for all kinds of problems and feel no guilt about it. Plastic surgery, neurosurgery, heart surgery, endocrinological surgery, gynecological surgery, dental surgery, urological surgery, craniofacial surgery. Do you seriously believe only lethal conditions are treated surgically (although, for the record, distress and dysphoria do have the potential to be lethal)? And if your assumption is that we should deny medical care, what’s your alternative? If you don’t have any, and if you don’t even acknowledge nor care about the problem – the distress and dysphoria suffered by part of the TG community –, which I’m already long tending to suspect, then what’s the point of criticizing the establishment? Scientists make criticism (“questioning”) within their specialty because they know how to identify operational definitions, they know how to identify problems and they know how to propose solutions. Your statements and questions, however, are nonsensical, because they don’t get the definitions right, have no base on actual psychiatric, endocrinological, psychological, social or surgical data and have no counterargument whatsoever. What’s more, they are based on your personal belief system of body purity, which, in the eyes of science, has no meaning (which means they are irrational beliefs). And no, the TG spectrum, although not a disorder, is not derived from irrational beliefs. Nor are the disorders you mention, anorexia , MPD (controversial in its status, but I’m leaving it here anyway) and addiction. If you don’t have any idea of what you are talking about, why do you even post? Science is not built on “opinions”. The psychological evaluations made before HRT and sometimes even identification itself already do get the definitions right, are aware of the problems and know which are the best ways we know of managing them. They don’t skip steps in the scientific method. And, needless to say, they don’t throw all the steps out of the window, which is what criticism with no scientific grounding does." "We should accept others when they are not harming others. The rest doesn't matter. Contrary to OP's assumption, we do accept anorexic patients and addicts in society. Now, whether we should provide them with care is another matter entirely. Healthcare professionals should provide health service when the patient (or legal sponsor) wants it and when there is something we can change that could help the patients more than the evidence suggests it harms them. Gender (1) is a definition that exists in a dimension completely alien to secondary sexual characteristics (2), reproductive organs (3) and sexual chromossomes (4). It is a psychosocial definition of identity, much like being Chinese, being a cinephile, etc, and it's mostly dependent on brain type, its cognitive byproducts and identity development during human growth. It's more fundamental than being a cinephile, probably more fundamental in most senses than being of your given nationality, but just as impossible to change as it is. As for the other numbers, they are all definitions operationalized on biological morphology, except for number 2, that contains cognitive and behavioral dimensions as well. Number 3 is defined by number 4 and certain conditions of embryonic development. Number 2 is defined by certain conditions of development and complex physiological changes started by "cues" sent by different parts of the body under certain conditions, among them 3. However, a lot of variation does occur already at this level of analysis for a variety of different reasons, and these characteristics may not be expressed at all, due to both artificial and natural factors. Either way, gender is completely different, and that's why TG people's minds do match reality. They don't wrongly believe they are chromossomal Xy or XX, nor do they believe they have male or female reproductive organs, nor do they believe they have or don't have male or female secondary characteristics. They don't necessarily believe anything at all. They just have a male or female type mind they cannot change and an identity that reflects that mind. As for choosing your own gender identity, evidence suggests it's not much of a choice, and that it's not changeable eiher, even if the patient wants it to change, by any service we can provide him/her that would not incur in irreversible, unjustifiable harm and, all evidence suggests, not even work at all. People already tried doing this in the past, sometimes with consent and previous patient demand, just as people already tried doing other things we now know we can't do. It's not just guesswork. Now, let's suppose that you could change your gender identity by choice. That would be a great power in your hands, and, according to the criteria above, there's no reason whatsoever we should not accept you and your choice. Now, should we provide you with some kind of healthcare? It totally depends on what changing your gender would mean to you. Would it provoke body dysphoria (this, yes, a negative symptom, unlike being TG, and which does not have any fundamental relationship at all to the patients' beliefs)? That happens for some, but not all trans people. If yes, then we should present you with the option of undergoing HRT, SRS and counseling. All of this process is only began after a careful psychological evaluation that tries to determine that you really do present the neccessary requirements and that doing so has, according to the data we have, a higher probability of helping you more than harming you. That is, briefly explained, how healthcare works." Do keep on, though! Every word you post further endorses the fragility, misinformation and the antiethical, ungrounded belief systems behind the anti-TG faction
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 30, 2017 18:44:50 GMT
What should be done about people who have Body Integrity Identity Disorder? Should we allow them to cut off limbs the way trans people do breasts and genitalia? I mean, they're not really hurting anyone, right? So why not let them cut off their limbs as they see fit? No one is cutting off limbs and they're not the same thing. TGs are changing their bodies to the gender they're supposed to be. What would cutting off limbs achieve?? Well, there's a fact-filled scientific response. Explain the difference to me between cutting off a limb, a penis, or breasts. It would satisfy the feelings of inadequacy. These people "feel" they are meant to be disabled.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 18:48:55 GMT
No one is cutting off limbs and they're not the same thing. TGs are changing their bodies to the gender they're supposed to be. What would cutting off limbs achieve?? Well, there's a fact-filled scientific response. Explain the difference to me between cutting off a limb, a penis, or breasts. It would satisfy the feelings of inadequacy. These people "feel" they are meant to be disabled. Don't respond to me anymore, I'm not interested in talking to rude assholes
|
|