Question for those who actually believe 'transgenderism' is a real thing?

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Party poopers!

On second thought, yours is a much more interesting conversation than the OP's silly premise, so feel free to carry on.

No, please take your banter elsewhere. If you purposely are trying to derail my thread, I'm gonna have to bring in a mod. I don't want to do that.

Now back to the topic:
"
What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay
BY BRANDON AMBROSINO
February 6, 2014


I recently wrote in an essay for The New Republic that gayness is, at least for me, a choice. My critics’ response was immediate and unanimous: That's impossible, they replied, because science has proven that gays are born that way. I was also accused of conflating identity and desire, and I even read that my position could get LGBT people killed. I'll take these arguments one at a time.

Neighbors 2: Equal Opportunity Idiocy

• Why Animal GIFs Make Us Feel Better

• It’s Not Bernie Sanders’s Job to Unify the Democratic Party

• All The Way: Proof That You Can’t Escape the Past

• Welcome to Maria Bamford’s Neighborhood

Writing at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern insists that sexual “orientation can never be altered,” citing "a number of scientists” he interviewed for anearlier article on the subject. Stern's certainty is all the more surprising, given his admission science has “never settled on an answer” for the origins of gayness and that the scientific studies he links to are couched with all kinds of qualifications. The National Center for Biotechnical Information study he cites, for instance, reads (italics mine): “Available evidence suggests that male homosexuality is … somewhat heritable … However, most studies have recruited subjects in a relatively unsystematic manner … and hence suffer from the potentialmethodological flaw of ascertainmentbias …."

The science on orientation remains murky. On this subject, the American Psychological Association says, “Many [scientists] think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” You might overlook the word “sense” in that quote, but that would be a serious distortion of the psychological consensus. Having no sense of choice refers to an unawareness of choosing, not the inability to choose. Further, while the APA affirms the possibility of homosexuality’s innateness (nature), it leaves open the possibility that, for at least some of us, gay orientation could be the result of “complex” environmental processes (nurture).

On the matter of identity versus desire. Gabriel Arana writes in The New Republic, "It is true that I have chosen to identify as gay, that I express myself in a way that makes it clear I am gay, and that I have gay sex. All of these are a matter of choice. But my sexual orientation—my underlying attraction for men—is beyond my control." Noah Michelson offers a similar sentiment in a Huffington Post article: “ … very few people would claim that they chose their attractions or that they could or can simply change them at will. However, what we do with our attractions and how we perform them is a choice.”

More at the link:

What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Search on, dude!

So are you trying to tease me about searching this stuff because I actually do my research and don't just make up my own reasoning and claim everyone who doesn't agree with me is a bigot like you did in your initial response to Gracie? I don't mind being teased for knowing what I am talking about. That just makes the person talking smack look like they have no real argument against my points.

 

[ChrisL]

I was actually just about to say that.

Party poopers!

On second thought, yours is a much more interesting conversation than the OP's silly premise, so feel free to carry on.

No, please take your banter elsewhere. If you purposely are trying to derail my thread, I'm gonna have to bring in a mod. I don't want to do that.

Now back to the topic:
"
What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay
BY BRANDON AMBROSINO
February 6, 2014


I recently wrote in an essay for The New Republic that gayness is, at least for me, a choice. My critics’ response was immediate and unanimous: That's impossible, they replied, because science has proven that gays are born that way. I was also accused of conflating identity and desire, and I even read that my position could get LGBT people killed. I'll take these arguments one at a time.

Neighbors 2: Equal Opportunity Idiocy

• Why Animal GIFs Make Us Feel Better

• It’s Not Bernie Sanders’s Job to Unify the Democratic Party

• All The Way: Proof That You Can’t Escape the Past

• Welcome to Maria Bamford’s Neighborhood

Writing at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern insists that sexual “orientation can never be altered,” citing "a number of scientists” he interviewed for anearlier article on the subject. Stern's certainty is all the more surprising, given his admission science has “never settled on an answer” for the origins of gayness and that the scientific studies he links to are couched with all kinds of qualifications. The National Center for Biotechnical Information study he cites, for instance, reads (italics mine): “Available evidence suggests that male homosexuality is … somewhat heritable … However, most studies have recruited subjects in a relatively unsystematic manner … and hence suffer from the potentialmethodological flaw of ascertainmentbias …."

The science on orientation remains murky. On this subject, the American Psychological Association says, “Many [scientists] think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” You might overlook the word “sense” in that quote, but that would be a serious distortion of the psychological consensus. Having no sense of choice refers to an unawareness of choosing, not the inability to choose. Further, while the APA affirms the possibility of homosexuality’s innateness (nature), it leaves open the possibility that, for at least some of us, gay orientation could be the result of “complex” environmental processes (nurture).

On the matter of identity versus desire. Gabriel Arana writes in The New Republic, "It is true that I have chosen to identify as gay, that I express myself in a way that makes it clear I am gay, and that I have gay sex. All of these are a matter of choice. But my sexual orientation—my underlying attraction for men—is beyond my control." Noah Michelson offers a similar sentiment in a Huffington Post article: “ … very few people would claim that they chose their attractions or that they could or can simply change them at will. However, what we do with our attractions and how we perform them is a choice.”

More at the link:

What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

 

[ChrisL]

I highly doubt that many heterosexual men would . . . well you know . . . if not really a homosexual, just to aggravate someone else. Lol.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Party poopers!

On second thought, yours is a much more interesting conversation than the OP's silly premise, so feel free to carry on.

No, please take your banter elsewhere. If you purposely are trying to derail my thread, I'm gonna have to bring in a mod. I don't want to do that.

Now back to the topic:
"
What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay
BY BRANDON AMBROSINO
February 6, 2014


I recently wrote in an essay for The New Republic that gayness is, at least for me, a choice. My critics’ response was immediate and unanimous: That's impossible, they replied, because science has proven that gays are born that way. I was also accused of conflating identity and desire, and I even read that my position could get LGBT people killed. I'll take these arguments one at a time.

Neighbors 2: Equal Opportunity Idiocy

• Why Animal GIFs Make Us Feel Better

• It’s Not Bernie Sanders’s Job to Unify the Democratic Party

• All The Way: Proof That You Can’t Escape the Past

• Welcome to Maria Bamford’s Neighborhood

Writing at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern insists that sexual “orientation can never be altered,” citing "a number of scientists” he interviewed for anearlier article on the subject. Stern's certainty is all the more surprising, given his admission science has “never settled on an answer” for the origins of gayness and that the scientific studies he links to are couched with all kinds of qualifications. The National Center for Biotechnical Information study he cites, for instance, reads (italics mine): “Available evidence suggests that male homosexuality is … somewhat heritable … However, most studies have recruited subjects in a relatively unsystematic manner … and hence suffer from the potentialmethodological flaw of ascertainmentbias …."

The science on orientation remains murky. On this subject, the American Psychological Association says, “Many [scientists] think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” You might overlook the word “sense” in that quote, but that would be a serious distortion of the psychological consensus. Having no sense of choice refers to an unawareness of choosing, not the inability to choose. Further, while the APA affirms the possibility of homosexuality’s innateness (nature), it leaves open the possibility that, for at least some of us, gay orientation could be the result of “complex” environmental processes (nurture).

On the matter of identity versus desire. Gabriel Arana writes in The New Republic, "It is true that I have chosen to identify as gay, that I express myself in a way that makes it clear I am gay, and that I have gay sex. All of these are a matter of choice. But my sexual orientation—my underlying attraction for men—is beyond my control." Noah Michelson offers a similar sentiment in a Huffington Post article: “ … very few people would claim that they chose their attractions or that they could or can simply change them at will. However, what we do with our attractions and how we perform them is a choice.”

More at the link:

What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

Is it extremist to choose to be gay?

 

[ChrisL]

On second thought, yours is a much more interesting conversation than the OP's silly premise, so feel free to carry on.

No, please take your banter elsewhere. If you purposely are trying to derail my thread, I'm gonna have to bring in a mod. I don't want to do that.

Now back to the topic:
"
What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay
BY BRANDON AMBROSINO
February 6, 2014


I recently wrote in an essay for The New Republic that gayness is, at least for me, a choice. My critics’ response was immediate and unanimous: That's impossible, they replied, because science has proven that gays are born that way. I was also accused of conflating identity and desire, and I even read that my position could get LGBT people killed. I'll take these arguments one at a time.

Neighbors 2: Equal Opportunity Idiocy

• Why Animal GIFs Make Us Feel Better

• It’s Not Bernie Sanders’s Job to Unify the Democratic Party

• All The Way: Proof That You Can’t Escape the Past

• Welcome to Maria Bamford’s Neighborhood

Writing at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern insists that sexual “orientation can never be altered,” citing "a number of scientists” he interviewed for anearlier article on the subject. Stern's certainty is all the more surprising, given his admission science has “never settled on an answer” for the origins of gayness and that the scientific studies he links to are couched with all kinds of qualifications. The National Center for Biotechnical Information study he cites, for instance, reads (italics mine): “Available evidence suggests that male homosexuality is … somewhat heritable … However, most studies have recruited subjects in a relatively unsystematic manner … and hence suffer from the potentialmethodological flaw of ascertainmentbias …."

The science on orientation remains murky. On this subject, the American Psychological Association says, “Many [scientists] think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” You might overlook the word “sense” in that quote, but that would be a serious distortion of the psychological consensus. Having no sense of choice refers to an unawareness of choosing, not the inability to choose. Further, while the APA affirms the possibility of homosexuality’s innateness (nature), it leaves open the possibility that, for at least some of us, gay orientation could be the result of “complex” environmental processes (nurture).

On the matter of identity versus desire. Gabriel Arana writes in The New Republic, "It is true that I have chosen to identify as gay, that I express myself in a way that makes it clear I am gay, and that I have gay sex. All of these are a matter of choice. But my sexual orientation—my underlying attraction for men—is beyond my control." Noah Michelson offers a similar sentiment in a Huffington Post article: “ … very few people would claim that they chose their attractions or that they could or can simply change them at will. However, what we do with our attractions and how we perform them is a choice.”

More at the link:

What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

Is it extremist to choose to be gay?

See my post #163. Not many heterosexual men are going to "choose" to be gay just to annoy you . . . because they like WOMEN. That's my opinion on that.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I highly doubt that many heterosexual men would . . . well you know . . . if not really a homosexual, just to aggravate someone else. Lol.

That doesn't mean it cannot be a choice. People choose to deal and do drugs even though it ruins their lives and could get them thrown in prison eventually....and society doesn't think highly of them. Yet...they choose to deal and do drugs, do they not?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

I agree...as someone said...why on earth would someone choose such pain.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

No, please take your banter elsewhere. If you purposely are trying to derail my thread, I'm gonna have to bring in a mod. I don't want to do that.

Now back to the topic:
"
What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay
BY BRANDON AMBROSINO
February 6, 2014


I recently wrote in an essay for The New Republic that gayness is, at least for me, a choice. My critics’ response was immediate and unanimous: That's impossible, they replied, because science has proven that gays are born that way. I was also accused of conflating identity and desire, and I even read that my position could get LGBT people killed. I'll take these arguments one at a time.

Neighbors 2: Equal Opportunity Idiocy

• Why Animal GIFs Make Us Feel Better

• It’s Not Bernie Sanders’s Job to Unify the Democratic Party

• All The Way: Proof That You Can’t Escape the Past

• Welcome to Maria Bamford’s Neighborhood

Writing at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern insists that sexual “orientation can never be altered,” citing "a number of scientists” he interviewed for anearlier article on the subject. Stern's certainty is all the more surprising, given his admission science has “never settled on an answer” for the origins of gayness and that the scientific studies he links to are couched with all kinds of qualifications. The National Center for Biotechnical Information study he cites, for instance, reads (italics mine): “Available evidence suggests that male homosexuality is … somewhat heritable … However, most studies have recruited subjects in a relatively unsystematic manner … and hence suffer from the potentialmethodological flaw of ascertainmentbias …."

The science on orientation remains murky. On this subject, the American Psychological Association says, “Many [scientists] think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” You might overlook the word “sense” in that quote, but that would be a serious distortion of the psychological consensus. Having no sense of choice refers to an unawareness of choosing, not the inability to choose. Further, while the APA affirms the possibility of homosexuality’s innateness (nature), it leaves open the possibility that, for at least some of us, gay orientation could be the result of “complex” environmental processes (nurture).

On the matter of identity versus desire. Gabriel Arana writes in The New Republic, "It is true that I have chosen to identify as gay, that I express myself in a way that makes it clear I am gay, and that I have gay sex. All of these are a matter of choice. But my sexual orientation—my underlying attraction for men—is beyond my control." Noah Michelson offers a similar sentiment in a Huffington Post article: “ … very few people would claim that they chose their attractions or that they could or can simply change them at will. However, what we do with our attractions and how we perform them is a choice.”

More at the link:

What My Angry Critics Get Wrong About My Choice to Be Gay

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

Is it extremist to choose to be gay?

See my post #163. Not many heterosexual men are going to "choose" to be gay just to annoy you . . . because they like WOMEN. That's my opinion on that.

I don't think they would choose to be homosexual just to annoy me.

 

[ChrisL]

I highly doubt that many heterosexual men would . . . well you know . . . if not really a homosexual, just to aggravate someone else. Lol.

That doesn't mean it cannot be a choice. People choose to deal and do drugs even though it ruins their lives and could get them thrown in prison eventually....and society doesn't think highly of them. Yet...they choose to deal and do drugs, do they not?

That's a little bit different (or actually a LOT different) than "choosing" who you are sexually attracted to. Lol.

Could you just be gay suddenly? What would it take for you to "choose" to be gay?

 

[ChrisL]

So you have searched this particular angle extensively. Interesting.

I've searched all the different explanations, yes. But I am not an expert. I just know that not all gays go along with the political talking points.

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

Is it extremist to choose to be gay?

See my post #163. Not many heterosexual men are going to "choose" to be gay just to annoy you . . . because they like WOMEN. That's my opinion on that.

I don't think they would choose to be homosexual just to annoy me.

Well, you basically said to "piss of society." I just used you as an example.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

My own personal opinion it is not a conscious choice, that it is environmental, socialized, learned over time...sexual molestation is definitely a factor for some , but I am sure there are plenty of gays out there that were not molested. I don't think there is any one cause that's the same for all of them. I believe that is a very narrow minded way to approach the topic.

 

[ChrisL]

Well, I don't think most of them choose. Of course there are extremists in every group.

I agree...as someone said...why on earth would someone choose such pain.

I don't really think sexual attractions are choices. They are what they are.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I highly doubt that many heterosexual men would . . . well you know . . . if not really a homosexual, just to aggravate someone else. Lol.

That doesn't mean it cannot be a choice. People choose to deal and do drugs even though it ruins their lives and could get them thrown in prison eventually....and society doesn't think highly of them. Yet...they choose to deal and do drugs, do they not?

That's a little bit different (or actually a LOT different) than "choosing" who you are sexually attracted to. Lol.

Could you just be gay suddenly? What would it take for you to "choose" to be gay?

How so? They both carry a social stigma.

 

[ChrisL]

My own personal opinion it is not a conscious choice, that it is environmental, socialized, learned over time...sexual molestation is definitely a factor for some , but I am sure there are plenty of gays out there that were not molested. I don't think there is any one cause that's the same for all of them. I believe that is a very narrow minded way to approach the topic.

Of course there could be all different reasons. That still doesn't classify it as "choice" though. Do you choose to be attracted to women?

 

[ChrisL]

I highly doubt that many heterosexual men would . . . well you know . . . if not really a homosexual, just to aggravate someone else. Lol.

That doesn't mean it cannot be a choice. People choose to deal and do drugs even though it ruins their lives and could get them thrown in prison eventually....and society doesn't think highly of them. Yet...they choose to deal and do drugs, do they not?

That's a little bit different (or actually a LOT different) than "choosing" who you are sexually attracted to. Lol.

Could you just be gay suddenly? What would it take for you to "choose" to be gay?

How so? They both carry a social stigma.

Because I don't believe sexual attraction is a choice that people make. It just is. Some people can be sexually attracted to a person that they don't like very much. There was an episode on Seinfeld about it. Lol.

 

[MaryL]

On the issue of transgenderism, leftists seem to deny some aspects of the science and enshrine others: the existence of sex chromosome abnormalities and other disorders of sexual development (DSDs) are seen as "proof" of multiple genders....despite the fact that most people who carry these abnormalities do not suffer from gender dysphoria (the DSM 5 diagnosis assigned to transgenderism).

Why do the leftists here completely ignore the fact that the vast majority of the people who have these abnormalities do not suffer from gender dysphoria and try to pretend as if the science is settled?

Also why do you guys lie and say Transgenderism a.k.a Gender Dysphoria is not in the DSM?

What benefit do you get from lying and denying scientific facts and statistics?

The late great Oliver Sacks wrote many books about how diseases and malformations of the brain cause people to reject half of their own body as if it was real, so many more sad yet humorous cases. The man that mistook his wife for a hat. And so on and so forth. It isn't much of a stretch to realize Homosexuality is just another symptom of mental disjunction. I know that goes against popular physiatric opinion. Something rather fishy about that. like a mathematician saying 2+2=whatever dogma we want to stick in there.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Perhaps these folks get their info from less than honest sources or something? Maybe they don't know they're being lied to?

The Leftwing Loons believe manipulated models that fake Global Warming, but can't tell Men with Penii from Women without Penii.

Hey, get with the programme, just because a man has a penis doesn't mean he's not a woman....listen if a man with a penis now says he's a woman, well he's a woman, if you don't agree then you're just a bigot or something

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

My own personal opinion it is not a conscious choice, that it is environmental, socialized, learned over time...sexual molestation is definitely a factor for some , but I am sure there are plenty of gays out there that were not molested. I don't think there is any one cause that's the same for all of them. I believe that is a very narrow minded way to approach the topic.

Of course there could be all different reasons. That still doesn't classify it as "choice" though. Do you choose to be attracted to women?

No. And just because I didn't choose to be heterosexual does not automatically mean that someone else cannot choose to be homosexual.

Males and females are physiologically designed to compliment each other through evolution, through God, through nature...however you want to view it...fact is our sex drive is the product of biological imperatives. I simply follow what I was designed to do, find a woman and pass on my genes. Yes, yes, I am leaving out love and all of that...but that's because I am getting down to the evolutionary biological science of the matter.

There is no biological imperative reason for homosexuality to exist, therefore there is no reason why anyone should believe there is an evolutionary reason to be homosexual.
Human sexuality can be manipulated by environmental causes both for heterosexuals and homosexuals...none of us are immune to it. Human sexuality is some pretty complex shit....

 

[boedicca]

Perhaps these folks get their info from less than honest sources or something? Maybe they don't know they're being lied to?

The Leftwing Loons believe manipulated models that fake Global Warming, but can't tell Men with Penii from Women without Penii.

Hey, get with the programme, just because a man has a penis doesn't mean he's not a woman....listen if a man with a penis now says he's a woman, well he's a woman, if you don't agree then you're just a bigot or something

Meh.

Men have outies.

Women have innies.

Just sayin'.

 

[Vigilante]

Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.

Dr. McHugh, the author of six books and at least 125 peer-reviewed medical articles, made his remarks in a recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal, where he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically.

He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”

While the Obama administration, Hollywood, and major media such as Time magazine promote transgenderism as normal, said Dr. McHugh, these “policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention.”.....MORE.....

Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’