Is being "Gender Confused" a mental, hormonal, genetic or legitiate problem?

What is "Gender Confused" ???


  • Total voters
    8
On the grounds that when people have problems that cause them mental anguish, their fellow citizens should help them out.

Coming from someone in Australia, whose military (last I heard) was paying for female members' breast augmentation surgery, this isn't surprising. Things are a tad different for us in the US though. :)
 
Transsexualism is caused by a developmental disorder during gestation. A male fetus develops testes and this begins the masculinization process away from the female template. Later in the development the testes release androgen and this courses through the fetus and imprints a male gender map onto the brain. For transsexuals the hormone flood is incomplete, they never become fully male, their brains don't get imprinted.

I have read it being something like the brain develops as one sex, while the body develops as another. Its not a choice, and its not an illness. Even if it was, these people need to change sex to match the brain to the body.

Men and women start as a female fetus. Masculinization then begins for males. That process has to complete in order for boys to have a male brain and male sexual identity.

What you heard about the brain developing as the opposite sex is wrong. A male transsexual has the body of a male but not the brain of a male. He is not male. This though doesn't mean he has the brain of a female. His brain has been partially masculinized. He knows enough to realize that he doesn't identify as male and so assumes that what he feels is from a female perspective. It is impossible for him to actually know the female perspective because he isn't female. We can determine that he's in between male and female by looking at brain scans.

So, what you're suggesting is a birth defect, a disability.
That makes sense.
Blindness is often a birth defect. We don't give blind people drivers licenses. Why should we give homos marriage licenses?
 
I can't see any damn sense in making thousands of woman uncomfortable in order to make one male transsexual comfortable, so I support the alternative of telling these guys to deal with it and use male restrooms and such, because the inconvenience is minimized (too bad that they're the one who is uncomfortable) and because while their brains are 50/50 their body isn't, so all told, they're closer to male than female.

I guess that is where I disagree. Let them use a unisex bathroom so they feel comfortable. I also think that if they wish to change sex, they should be allowed to, and such surgery should be taxpayer funded.

Bullshit. They can pay for it themselves.

No wonder your health care system is so shit. Each man for himself, eh?
 
On the grounds that when people have problems that cause them mental anguish, their fellow citizens should help them out.

Coming from someone in Australia, whose military (last I heard) was paying for female members' breast augmentation surgery, this isn't surprising. Things are a tad different for us in the US though. :)

Yes, and I am so glad I don't have to live there. Get sick and you end up bankrupt.
 
Its not a mental illness. It can be 'cured' with surgery. It cannot be 'cured' with sitting down talking to a shrink.

With all due respect you need to google GRS/SRS "regret"

The ops don't fix whatever's wrong in someone's head. All it's actually doing is altering the physical body. And enough people then regret it, and try changing back that's it's becomming pretty obvious the motivation to get the surgeies in the first place is the result of a mental illness. Not objective reality that your brain is different.

Also, will put this reply here in 1 post. Transsexuals are not female-brained in men's bodies. If that's in fact possible then ancient arguements men and woman's brains are significantly different and as such men are better at x, females are better at y will have to be revisted. Maybe woman's brains really do make them worse drivers that now we need to make driver requirement's stricter for women since their brains are different.

Disregard most everything that you've internalized over your life regarding the nature versus nurture debate. The nature side didn't have the proper tools to advance it's debate and got steamrolled by the nurture side and all sorts of gobbledygook got pushed into mainstream culture as science. All that has changed in the last two decades.
 
I can't see any damn sense in making thousands of woman uncomfortable in order to make one male transsexual comfortable, so I support the alternative of telling these guys to deal with it and use male restrooms and such, because the inconvenience is minimized (too bad that they're the one who is uncomfortable) and because while their brains are 50/50 their body isn't, so all told, they're closer to male than female.

Like instead of the tail wagging the dog it would be one hair on the tail wagging the dog. Not very democratic, considering its proponents are mainly democrats.
 
Blindness is often a birth defect. We don't give blind people drivers licenses. Why should we give homos marriage licenses?

How will gay people marrying be dangerous and threatening to others?


Go read this thread. A variant of your question back in the day would be "how would adding women to the workforce affect a man's job?"

Back in the day, labor law and business customs were all tailored to male-only workplaces. Things worked fine. Then women came on board. Now a man at work has to contend with socialization rules, sexual harrassment workshops, he can't take clients to nudie bars for entertainment because this gives him a competitive advantage over women in his department who feel uncomfortable entertaining male clients with a lunch at a strip club.

Marriage laws are going to be changing as the unique circumstances of homosexuals play out and need to be accommodated. Marital fidelity in homosexual relationships usually involves about 6 partners per year. Heterosexual fidelity is defined by one husband sleeping with his one wife.
 
Medical care is a private good. When you get your hemorrhoids operated on you alone get the benefit, so it makes as much sense for me to pay for your operation as it does you paying to buy me a new car.

Kinda. A healthy working public is a healthy tax-paying public. Let people fall ill they can't work any more instead of paying taxes benefitting everyone, they're leeching taxes impacting everyone. That said, paying to reinforce a delusion isn't correct either. Some things should be paid for by the state as with life-saving, health-sustaining so you can work things, but stuff like this is more akin to, in fact it is, cosmetic surgery.
 
Go read this thread. A variant of your question back in the day would be "how would adding women to the workforce affect a man's job?"

Back in the day, labor law and business customs were all tailored to male-only workplaces. Things worked fine. Then women came on board. Now a man at work has to contend with socialization rules, sexual harrassment workshops, he can't take clients to nudie bars for entertainment because this gives him a competitive advantage over women in his department who feel uncomfortable entertaining male clients with a lunch at a strip club.

Marriage laws are going to be changing as the unique circumstances of homosexuals play out and need to be accommodated. Marital fidelity in homosexual relationships usually involves about 6 partners per year. Heterosexual fidelity is defined by one husband sleeping with his one wife.

I could refute most of that but why bother. You're clinigng to nonsense in some as delusional perception of reality as the transsexuals are.
 
Bullshit. They can pay for it themselves.

Nothing like an educated exchange of ideas. :)

Medical care is a private good. When you get your hemorrhoids operated on you alone get the benefit, so it makes as much sense for me to pay for your operation as it does you paying to buy me a new car.

Do you feel that way abut someone's cancer treatment?

Hey, I need a new car, will you please send me some money?

That cancer treatment that you want others to pay for involves sacrifices. There are children dying in Africa as we speak, so why aren't you selling your television set or your car and sending the money to these strangers? When you shove the cost of paying for cancer treatment for strangers onto me, then that means my wife and kids, and me too, have less money to spend on ourselves.
 
Hey, I need a new car, will you please send me some money?

That cancer treatment that you want others to pay for involves sacrifices. There are children dying in Africa as we speak, so why aren't you selling your television set or your car and sending the money to these strangers? When you shove the cost of paying for cancer treatment for strangers onto me, then that means my wife and kids, and me too, have less money to spend on ourselves.

Not a term I use much, but nice strawman there.
 
Hey, I need a new car, will you please send me some money?

That cancer treatment that you want others to pay for involves sacrifices. There are children dying in Africa as we speak, so why aren't you selling your television set or your car and sending the money to these strangers? When you shove the cost of paying for cancer treatment for strangers onto me, then that means my wife and kids, and me too, have less money to spend on ourselves.

Not a term I use much, but nice strawman there.

You can make your points more forceful by telling WHY you believe what I wrote is a strawman rather than merely stating that it is, which leaves me in the dark.

Why aren't you paying for saving lives in Africa? Because those people are strangers to you. They die and it doesn't affect your life at all. The same process is at work when someone in your state dies. What duty do you have to pay for that person's medical care that doesn't apply to the person in Africa?
 
You can make your points more forceful by telling WHY you believe what I wrote is a strawman rather than merely stating that it is, which leaves me in the dark.

Why aren't you paying for saving lives in Africa? Because those people are strangers to you. They die and it doesn't affect your life at all. The same process is at work when someone in your state dies. What duty do you have to pay for that person's medical care that doesn't apply to the person in Africa?

Loss of our fellows effects us all no matter how far away they are. I live by a metaphorical view of the world and life: We're not individuals. We're merely autonomous discrete parts of a greater whole. Like blood cells in a single living organism. Loose too many blood cells, and the organism suffers. So when people around the world die it negatively impacts the whole.
 
You can make your points more forceful by telling WHY you believe what I wrote is a strawman rather than merely stating that it is, which leaves me in the dark.

Why aren't you paying for saving lives in Africa? Because those people are strangers to you. They die and it doesn't affect your life at all. The same process is at work when someone in your state dies. What duty do you have to pay for that person's medical care that doesn't apply to the person in Africa?

Loss of our fellows effects us all no matter how far away they are. I live by a metaphorical view of the world and life: We're not individuals. We're merely autonomous discrete parts of a greater whole. Like blood cells in a single living organism. Loose too many blood cells, and the organism suffers. So when people around the world die it negatively impacts the whole.

OK, so why do you believe that your beliefs should be binding on me? I never stated any objection to you paying for the healthcare of strangers. If that floats your boat, don't let me stop you in any way.
 
OK, so why do you believe that your beliefs should be binding on me? I never stated any objection to you paying for the healthcare of strangers. If that floats your boat, don't let me stop you in any way.

Because sometimes the government or majority's views are simply better than the minority's or individual's. If we could pick and choose what taxes to pay or what laws to follow we wouldn't have a government or social order, we'd have anarchy. Paying for the sustainment of working people is in the government's own best interest. I wouldn't wanna pay for other people either, but I recognize that the overall impact benefits me as well.

Sopt talking, submit, and do as you're told you puny prole. :)
 

If someone wants to perform surgery on their body to make them resemble a different gender... I say let them. Allow them to decorate their Temple the way they so choose.

 

Forum List

Back
Top