LBGQT: Or how I learned to stop worrying and read the DSM

[TerraPrime]

You have an inherent to derail every conversation into a sociology critique....which is how this argument devolved to the point where it went from a political discussion to LGBT concerns.

Every conversation worthy of being critiqued on those grounds, yes. Oddly, the number of discussions where this is necessary appears in high frequency when you are an active participant in those discussions.

It's irrelevent to the issue about whether the public should be paying for an elective procedure, the fact that the procedure in question is hormone therapy or gender reassignment is incidental.

The reason why I moved the topic here is because my main interest is no longer in the tax paying part. I wanted to point out to you the problems in the way you describe and talk about transgender issues. This is what we do in this forum - we split off threads that have meandered off the main topic but still worthy of discussion.

You wouldn't expect the public to be on the hook for such operations, but suddenly that expectation is different...in your view....if you apply the criterion that the disorder in question is gender identity. I don't think that's a valid viewpoint.

In this case, my viewpoint concerning the importance of HRT to transgender people happens to align with that of psychologists and psychiatrists who treat people with these gender identity issues. So yeah, I do expect there to be a difference in how transgender people are treated on this issue when compared to someone who wants a face lift.

You can ride that politically correct high horse all day it doesn't change reality. I'm not going to alter the definitions inherent in the english language just because you decided that it should offend someone else's sensibilities. I'm done addressing this point, this has far more to do with you needing to portrary those that disagree with you as bigotted, close minded individuals than it does with correcting an actual preceived offense.

I was not the one who decide that refusing to use the preferred pronoun of a person is rude. It was the people to whom you are referring who made that decision. If someone's birth certificate says their name is Christian Malcome Morganson, but he would prefer you call him Lewis, would you balk? After all, his name is defined by the birth certificate, right?

The majority view? He is by any conceivable test a male human being. Not a female human being. When a person's "self-determination" doesn't align with reality, I think it's ok to disregard their opinion on the matter.

I know you think it's ok to disregard that request. I am, and so are others, pointing to you that it is rude to do so.

For the last time, it is not disrespectful or rude to refer to a man as a man.

It is, however, rude to assign a contrary name to someone despite their protest.

When you're done complaining about this imaginary point, feel free to detail how I've marginalized, minimized, or dismissed the lived experience of transgender people.

Just re-read your posts in this thread so far. Honestly, it's a textbook example.

Seeing as how gallstones, if left untreated can be fatal, this is a terrible example. But it is good you are finally figuring out that the meaning of elective and optional surgery.

What? I think you tried really hard to miss the point didn't you? Not all gall stones require the same treatment, just like not all transgender identity issues require the same treatment. In some cases, a gall stone problem can be solved by sonication. In other cases, it requires the removal of the gall bladder. In some cases, a transgender identity problem can be solved by hormone treatments alone. In other cases, it requires sex reassignment surgery.

Re: TheCryptile

The difference is that the transgender issue is about a self-identity that is entirely subjective, and it affects the people choosing that identity. In the case of the white privilege discussion, most of the effects can be, and have been, objectively documented, measured, and quantified, so denying the existence of white privileges is really not an option. But if you want to keep talking about white privilege, we can go revive the other thread. If you just want to call me a hypocrite, try my PM instead.

[Sci-2]

Why not? And why does it make "perfect sense"?

Are you better equipped to answer that than a trans person? Do you feel your view should prevail over that of trans people regarding what they should have the right to refer to themselves as? For what reason?

I'd also say that declaring it makes "perfect sense" is assuming the conclusion of the argument.

The larger question is when should we feel obligation to respect one's self-identification if we aren't obligated to do so w.r.t. trans*.

Can a person who is majority white but only partially Native American claim tribal identification?

Can someone claim to be of a religious faith if they deviate from scripture?

[Seli]

...

Seeing as how gallstones, if left untreated can be fatal, this is a terrible example. But it is good you are finally figuring out that the meaning of elective and optional surgery.

And one look at suicide rates for trans* people ought to tell you it is actually a great example.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Why is it skin off of anyone's nose whether any particular individual identifies as a man or a woman? I don't get it. Where's the harm to, you know, anything? What's strain on any particular individual to refer to another human being in the way he or she prefers? I have worked with several trans* folks over the years through an awesome pro bono program my firm participates in. We work with the Transgender Legal Defense Fund to help people get legal name changes to reflect who they are. Some of these men and women have transitioned fully. Others haven't. Does it matter? Shouldn't each of these human being individuals be permitted to claim their own identity? I'm so puzzled why anyone is bothering wasting memory even talking about this (and even more puzzled at some of the nastiness).

[Robin Of House Hill]

Sadly, it appears that those who have been saying that progress has been made in this area, are deluding themselves.

[TerraPrime]

Shouldn't each of these human being individuals be permitted to claim their own identity? I'm so puzzled why anyone is bothering wasting memory even talking about this (and even more puzzled at some of the nastiness).

It's about power. People who refuse to follow the requests of transgender people for the appropriate pronouns resent being made to alter their language use because the change will confirm that the transgender people have power to make them change their behaviors. That's pretty frightening to some, I'd imagine. It's the same core that underlies all the discussions on why minority groups get to pick their own labels and why the majority group needs/should/wants to follow that decision. It's the same wine, different bottle.

[TerraPrime]

Sadly, it appears that those who have been saying that progress has been made in this area, are deluding themselves.

I know it seems like it.

But I don't see it that way.

I think the number of people who have come out as trans* on this board, and those who shared that they have known close friends who are trans*, and those who are allies supporting trans* people have greatly exceeded my expectation. I wouldn't have expected this 10 or 15 years ago. So I do see some progress, albeit at a pace much slower than is desired. Cold comfort, I know, to those who still live with the reality of it all.

[Guy Kilmore]

GID is not only in the DSM, but it is also a recognized disorder in the ICD and has an ICD code. (The ICD is to medical doctors what the DSM is to psychiatrists. It just takes a lot more research and peer review to get something into the ICD is my understanding. I am not a medical doctor, so someone of that background might know the in and outs.) What alarms me is that some of the people in this thread would place people in a position where GID would go untreated and significantly increase the chances for death and suicide for that individual. I find that, frankly, scary. The AMA is lobbying to have Gender Reassignment Surgery to be considered basic coverage. Here is a little information on that: http://www.gires.org...sets/AMA122.pdf

[Robin Of House Hill]

I know it seems like it.

But I don't see it that way.

I think the number of people who have come out as trans* on this board, and those who shared that they have known close friends who are trans*, and those who are allies supporting trans* people have greatly exceeded my expectation. I wouldn't have expected this 10 or 15 years ago. So I do see some progress, albeit at a pace much slower than is desired. Cold comfort, I know, to those who still live with the reality of it all.

I hope you are right.

[TerraPrime]

I hope you are right.

No, I'm always left. ;)

[Mlle. Zabzie]

It's about power. People who refuse to follow the requests of transgender people for the appropriate pronouns resent being made to alter their language use because the change will confirm that the transgender people have power to make them change their behaviors. That's pretty frightening to some, I'd imagine. It's the same core that underlies all the discussions on why minority groups get to pick their own labels and why the majority group needs/should/wants to follow that decision. It's the same wine, different bottle.

I hear all that, and I know you are right in my heart of hearts. As much as I try to empathize though, that fear is not something I can understand though. I fear something happening to my children. I fear snakes. I'm f*cking terrified of the Zombie apocalypse. Calling someone by their preferred name and using preferred pronouns? Not scary. Easy. Comforting in fact. ETA, and I'm not really that left. :lol:

[Robin Of House Hill]

No, I'm always left. ;)

I needed a chuckle.. Harlan Ellison wrote a short story, I have No Mouth And I Must Scream. Years ago, I paraphrased that title. I Have No Tears And I Must Cry. I had tears today.

[Sci-2]

It's about power. People who refuse to follow the requests of transgender people for the appropriate pronouns resent being made to alter their language use because the change will confirm that the transgender people have power to make them change their behaviors. That's pretty frightening to some, I'd imagine. It's the same core that underlies all the discussions on why minority groups get to pick their own labels and why the majority group needs/should/wants to follow that decision. It's the same wine, different bottle.

Part of it likely has to do with societal shifts, which isn't exactly a defense but perhaps a more acceptable explanation? If society reorders itself to accept X, then what about Y, W, and Z?

We see this with people who are accepting of trans* but doubtful/disparaging of Otherkin. I also know the comparison between the two is considered offensive in certain circles, and I do understand why that would be so though it seems to me there are similarities worthy of consideration[.] just as

[similarly,] Otherkin metaphysics, to me, isn't more or less worthy of respect than the beliefs of Christianity.

[Deedles]

It's about power. People who refuse to follow the requests of transgender people for the appropriate pronouns resent being made to alter their language use because the change will confirm that the transgender people have power to make them change their behaviors. That's pretty frightening to some, I'd imagine. It's the same core that underlies all the discussions on why minority groups get to pick their own labels and why the majority group needs/should/wants to follow that decision. It's the same wine, different bottle.

Thanks Terra,

You've verbalised something I was having huge issues with. I just don't see where people would find this threatening but you've given a decent rationale that, in charity, I will try to adopt.

If Chelsea manning wants to identify as female, why would I as another female be threatened or upset by that. I'm not, and I can only wish her the best of luck on her journey.

[Rubies & Jade]

I honestly think it is getting better, just in tiny little steps. I've had questions about transgender and LGBT folks come up from people in rural areas that have little or no experience with anyone from these communities that were just sincerely curious but not full of the hostility I've seen here on this forum lately. I count things like that as progress, even if it doesn't exactly seem like it here atm.

tangent:

...Harlan Ellison wrote a short story, I have No Mouth And I Must Scream. ...

one of the, if not THE, best short stories every written.

[Guest Raidne]

We had a discussion at my office about a situation where partner benefits were denied to the wife of a man who had been enlisted as a woman and subsequently reassigned her gender and sex to male. And then talked about the outcome if the person had been intersexed and artificially assigned a gender in the first place.

Makes a good case for grouping all these issues together as eliminating a sex-based definition of marriage gets rid of a reason to pry into the "realness" of an individual's decision, which lends a false veneer of legitimacy to the exercise and unnecessarily violates privacy.

[karaddin]

Sadly, it appears that those who have been saying that progress has been made in this area, are deluding themselves.

I know it seems like it.

But I don't see it that way.

I think the number of people who have come out as trans* on this board, and those who shared that they have known close friends who are trans*, and those who are allies supporting trans* people have greatly exceeded my expectation. I wouldn't have expected this 10 or 15 years ago. So I do see some progress, albeit at a pace much slower than is desired. Cold comfort, I know, to those who still live with the reality of it all.

I'm actually going to agree with Terra here, even if we take this shit of the last 12 hours into consideration look at how many assholes there are vs how many people are on our side standing up for our right to self identify and seek treatment. I want to thank everyone who has been on here arguing decency, it let me catch up on the thread and only be stunned by the offensiveness instead of offended by it.

No, I'm always left. ;)

Probably seems awful random, but this just put Rammstein - Links 2 3 4 into my head >_<

Galactus asked a really good question in the last thread that deserves to be quoted and given an answer, but I shall only be giving it an answer.

Yes I agree that when you are not careful about how you say it, the push to declassify being trans as a mental condition (gender dysphoria) can be offensive to people with mental illness. To me, the argument should be to differentiate between different aspects of it, I view being trans as essentially a physical deformity - I have the wrong genitals, my body naturally produces the wrong hormone - and very frequently this deformity causes mental illness. Whether it's the social stigma, or inherent to being trans, that connection cannot currently be disputed...you just have to look at the suicide rates for trans people to see there is frequently mental illness there, but the deformity itself is not a mental illness and getting treatment for it shouldn't require confirmation from a psychiatrist that you are trans - no one can determine that but you. If there needs to be a gate keeping process I would much rather than the medical treatment require a psychiatrist to check you are of sound mind, rather than be making the diagnosis themselves. This splitting off being trans itself puts better focus on treating the actual issues - both HRT etc, and counselling for what mental illness the person does have.

Robin - on your point regarding medical professionals getting to define it, I completely understand where you are coming from given some of the horror stories I've read regarding how we were treated by the medical profession back when you were going through your transition. I think it's a reasonable concern and something we will need to remain vigilant against, but it is worth pointing out that there has been a major shift that happened 10-15 years ago, and there is much more sincerity about trying to understand us and help us in the profession today. The doctor and psychiatrist that I went to were both fantastic, knowledgeable and respectful, and my counsellor that only helps trans people is incredible.

Finally I've learnt from the Christian Left thread that when you want a certain thread designated for a certain type of discussion, you can contact the mods to ensure that is enforced. Seeing as there are a bunch of you that have been active in this thread, can I request that any further discussion that rejects transgender identity just be deleted from here, there is little value is further hashing that out and at least for the rest of this iteration of this thread I can't deal with any more of that bigotry.

[Adz of CCAA]

Finally I've learnt from the Christian Left thread that when you want a certain thread designated for a certain type of discussion, you can contact the mods to ensure that is enforced. Seeing as there are a bunch of you that have been active in this thread, can I request that any further discussion that rejects transgender identity just be deleted from here, there is little value is further hashing that out and at least for the rest of this iteration of this thread I can't deal with any more of that bigotry.

I'd like to second this request!

And I'd like to express my support for all the LBGQT people on here and elsewhere.

Sadly, I've never been in contact much with said people, which is mostly due to my self imposed isolation, which I'm trying to get out of and which isn't for this thread.

I live in a big city where it is no problem for people of any "persuasion" (sorry if that's offensive) to express themselves.

I'm always happy when, for example, I see two guys holding hands openly in the streets. Or two women.

There are quite a few trans* people here too and I can't begin to imagine what they have to go through to get their rights! Which are often enough basic human rights!

Also, in Germany the public pays for SRSs. Almost no-one complains about that, because it's a principle of solidarism with our "evil" health care system.

They don't pay random cosmetic surgery, though.

Last, but not least:

I'm always impressed with our mods! I couldn't keep this calm and point out the things you do if I were in your shoes!

[Galactus]

Yes I agree that when you are not careful about how you say it, the push to declassify being trans as a mental condition (gender dysphoria) can be offensive to people with mental illness. To me, the argument should be to differentiate between different aspects of it, I view being trans as essentially a physical deformity - I have the wrong genitals, my body naturally produces the wrong hormone - and very frequently this deformity causes mental illness. Whether it's the social stigma, or inherent to being trans, that connection cannot currently be disputed...you just have to look at the suicide rates for trans people to see there is frequently mental illness there, but the deformity itself is not a mental illness and getting treatment for it shouldn't require confirmation from a psychiatrist that you are trans - no one can determine that but you. If there needs to be a gate keeping process I would much rather than the medical treatment require a psychiatrist to check you are of sound mind, rather than be making the diagnosis themselves. This splitting off being trans itself puts better focus on treating the actual issues - both HRT etc, and counselling for what mental illness the person does have.

Thanks for the response, and yes, that makes sense.

[emberling]

Yes I agree that when you are not careful about how you say it, the push to declassify being trans as a mental condition (gender dysphoria) can be offensive to people with mental illness. To me, the argument should be to differentiate between different aspects of it, I view being trans as essentially a physical deformity - I have the wrong genitals, my body naturally produces the wrong hormone - and very frequently this deformity causes mental illness. Whether it's the social stigma, or inherent to being trans, that connection cannot currently be disputed...you just have to look at the suicide rates for trans people to see there is frequently mental illness there, but the deformity itself is not a mental illness and getting treatment for it shouldn't require confirmation from a psychiatrist that you are trans - no one can determine that but you. If there needs to be a gate keeping process I would much rather than the medical treatment require a psychiatrist to check you are of sound mind, rather than be making the diagnosis themselves. This splitting off being trans itself puts better focus on treating the actual issues - both HRT etc, and counselling for what mental illness the person does have.

I don't know, it's a pretty thorny issue. On the one hand you have the right to bodily autonomy, where I think restrictions on what we can do with or to our own bodies are unethical. But I still think there is a strong public interest in making sure that the decisions we make about our own bodies are informed ones, and I instinctively recoil from the idea of allowing people to just get whatever procedures they want done on a whim. For specifically trans* purposes, I think it's a good thing that we have to put the brakes on and explore our identities, and the possibility that its true shape may be something we haven't considered (genderqueer, feminine male/masculine female, bigender). But I guess if the therapist thinks that the person shouldn't transition and they are convinced that they should, I come down on the trans* person's side.

I have more to say on this subject but I have to run, sorry.