Matt Kroc Transitions to Janae Kroc

Off Topic
63

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
largely because society is becoming less bigoted over time.

[/quote]

Strongly disagree.

Society isn’t any less bigoted today than it was 5, 20, 200 or 2000 years ago. We’re just bigoted about different things than we were in the past.

I don’t think the human condition allows us to not be bigoted, and that may very well be WHY we’ve thrived as a species. It’s more likely than not an inherent instinct at this point, born in our ancestors necessitated by survival.

And the answer to your hard question is rather simple. It’s hard to understand and/or empathize with something foreign to you, or that you can’t fathom experiencing. Of course people without gender identity issues are going to have a “hard” time understanding, as the vast majority never, ever will, despite their screaming at the top of their lungs they do. They don’t. There is nothing wrong with it being hard for someone, because it being hard doesn’t mean they are going to be an asshole about it.

As a flippant example. It’s hard for me to understand how on earth fucking anyone can enjoy golf. That shit is the worst, and those that actively try and watch it on TV baffle me. That said, I’m not boycotting it, or telling people not to play. In fact, I couldn’t give two shits if people do, even though it is hard to understand how on Earth they do it.

I feel like you’re looking for intolerance that isn’t there. [/quote]

I’m not necessarily going to disagree with you that we become bigoted toward different things, but I think you’re doing a huge disservice to societal progress if you don’t acknowledge how far we’ve come in regards to alternative lifestyles, ethnic differences, treatment of the underprivileged, etc. I’d be curious as to where you think we’re assuming new bigotries, though.

I also take no issue with the inability to understand where Kroc is coming from, but cognitive dissonance suggests acknowledging his/her struggles and being ok with the decision to live as male and female conflicts with a value system. That’s what I’m looking to hear about and I’d like to know more about where that comes from.

64

[quote]Aero51 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:
I thought the Matt Kroc news was a joke initially. Like a story from the Onion.

Here are my thoughts on the transgender trend:

I think just like there can be aberrations during gestation regarding hearts, brains, etc., so can there be abberations with sex organs. A quick googling told me that 1 in 1,666 babies is born with ambiguous genetalia. So I wonder how many males actually have immature ovaries or a small penis/large clitoris? And how many women have undescended testicles or the like? It’s not really all that far-fetched.

And having a mix of sex organs could most definitely affect one’s hormonal panel, etc. In the past, someone identifying as the opposite sex was labeled as a freak. But the tide of public opinion is changing. And people are getting more brave about “being who they want to be.”

I’m still suffering a bit of cognitive dissonance with this issue, though.[/quote]

It’s demeaning to refer to it as a “trend.” In reality, it’s people coming out of hiding who were there all along, largely because society is becoming less bigoted over time.

This is a question born of genuine curiosity and I’m not trying to call you out or bait you: what specifically is hard about this, in your mind? Do you believe his perspective?
[/quote]

Not addressed to me, but:

I largely get being yourself, but I don’t get the multiple personalities. I’m all for people being themselves, but the idea of changing clothes, swapping your name, and acting entirely differently seems more like playing dress up. If you want to act like you want, do it, the needing physical changes to “be yourself” I don’t get. Specifically I don’t understand the dual and diametrically opposed personalities in this case. I don’t get how sometimes being yourself is “Alpha Male” and sometimes it means being a “girly girl”.

If gender is now removed from both biology and sex I don’t see much difference between a cross dresser and being “gender fluid”. I don’t understand how there are classes where transgender people can go to learn how to act like who they are supposed to naturally be. I honestly don’t get what the word gender now is supposed to mean. The best I can get is that it means what stereotype of each sex you want to act like and be treated like.

There is a large part of the whole idea that bothers me about stereotyping of the sexes. I’m a girl now so I think like A, look like B, dress like C, and talk like D. Is that really what a girl is? The funny part is that there is some backlash among feminist groups and the like for just that. If a woman can be and act and dress like anything or anyone, changing this inner gender thing shouldn’t affect anything about a person.

But I fully admit that I just don’t get it. It doesn’t make sense, and I can’t grasp the motivations.
[/quote]

You are correct, because some of the preaching’s don’t make sense and they are sometimes bullshit. Physical characteristics do have an influence on mental characteristics and visa versa. In physics this is called two-way coupling. The point is, this “anyone can be anything” attitude is crap and is a byproduct of our entitlement generation. [/quote]
Oh god, there it is. “Entitlement generation.” Lol. Are you going to talk about the “pussification of America” next?

Gender roles are largely arbitrary. If you think that choosing not to accept some arbitrary role that you had no say in is about entitlement, then enjoy life in chains, bruh.

65

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]aeyogi wrote:

The civilized parts of the world are far more tolerant than at any time in history. We do not discriminate against different races and cultures, we treat women as equal to me, we accept homosexual and transgender people, and we are accepting of different religions.

Last I checked we have not started to burn people at the stake for playing golf.
[/quote]

You’re ignoring the forest for the trees. All those things we are tolerant of, we weren’t of before correct? So that means we are now intolerant of that which was once the accepted opinion.

We’re now intolerant of slave owners.
We’re now intolerant of spousal rape, wife beating.
We’re now intolerant of selling your daughter into marriage.
We’re now intolerant of child labor.
We’re now intolerant of tyrant kings and queens, dictators.
We’re bigoted towards those things now, that were once seen as the norm.
I could go on, but if you don’t get it now, I’m not looking to hold your hand here.

Being bigoted isn’t always bad. Being discriminatory isn’t always bad. Those words have meanings, denotations. Stop relying on the connotation, feelings, to guide the thought process.

We aren’t an advanced society. Yes we have a lot of cool technology and some sweet ass medical care, but we are still the barbaric heathens that first roamed the fields, just a lot more subtle about it, much less impulsive and appreciate the benefit of society which requires certain norms or morals to function. [/quote]

I am not sure if I understand your posts.

Are you saying that because we are a more moral society and we hold people accountable for hurting others, that we are in fact actually just transferring our intolerance to another population?

For that to be the case, you would have to give up on any belief in an inherent right and wrong, and accept that all actions are equally acceptable regardless of the impact to others.

66

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

I’m not necessarily going to disagree with you that we become bigoted toward different things, but I think you’re doing a huge disservice to societal progress if you don’t acknowledge how far we’ve come in regards to alternative lifestyles, ethnic differences, treatment of the underprivileged, etc.[/quote]

Don’t confuse my understanding that we aren’t less bigoted, just bigoted about different things, as me saying we aren’t better (generally speaking, and in a great number of things, but certainly far from all or perfect) than we were in the past. I’m not saying we aren’t better of for the shift in bigotry, just that bigotry is still very much a part of our society, and it is a very necessary part.

It’s never going away…

I gave a short list in a post above, but in reality its really a rather simple concept. For to now be accepting of group X, we have just turned the bigotry towards those that don’t accept group X. No new bigotry was assumed, the same bigotry was just transferred.

Again, bigotry is part of life, and necessary for social survival. I feel like people look at sweeping social shifts in bigotry away from something they like as some new awakening and enlightening of mankind, when in reality it is just shifting the bigotry to the “old” idea of what was or wasn’t acceptable.

67

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]Aero51 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:
I thought the Matt Kroc news was a joke initially. Like a story from the Onion.

Here are my thoughts on the transgender trend:

I think just like there can be aberrations during gestation regarding hearts, brains, etc., so can there be abberations with sex organs. A quick googling told me that 1 in 1,666 babies is born with ambiguous genetalia. So I wonder how many males actually have immature ovaries or a small penis/large clitoris? And how many women have undescended testicles or the like? It’s not really all that far-fetched.

And having a mix of sex organs could most definitely affect one’s hormonal panel, etc. In the past, someone identifying as the opposite sex was labeled as a freak. But the tide of public opinion is changing. And people are getting more brave about “being who they want to be.”

I’m still suffering a bit of cognitive dissonance with this issue, though.[/quote]

It’s demeaning to refer to it as a “trend.” In reality, it’s people coming out of hiding who were there all along, largely because society is becoming less bigoted over time.

This is a question born of genuine curiosity and I’m not trying to call you out or bait you: what specifically is hard about this, in your mind? Do you believe his perspective?
[/quote]

Not addressed to me, but:

I largely get being yourself, but I don’t get the multiple personalities. I’m all for people being themselves, but the idea of changing clothes, swapping your name, and acting entirely differently seems more like playing dress up. If you want to act like you want, do it, the needing physical changes to “be yourself” I don’t get. Specifically I don’t understand the dual and diametrically opposed personalities in this case. I don’t get how sometimes being yourself is “Alpha Male” and sometimes it means being a “girly girl”.

If gender is now removed from both biology and sex I don’t see much difference between a cross dresser and being “gender fluid”. I don’t understand how there are classes where transgender people can go to learn how to act like who they are supposed to naturally be. I honestly don’t get what the word gender now is supposed to mean. The best I can get is that it means what stereotype of each sex you want to act like and be treated like.

There is a large part of the whole idea that bothers me about stereotyping of the sexes. I’m a girl now so I think like A, look like B, dress like C, and talk like D. Is that really what a girl is? The funny part is that there is some backlash among feminist groups and the like for just that. If a woman can be and act and dress like anything or anyone, changing this inner gender thing shouldn’t affect anything about a person.

But I fully admit that I just don’t get it. It doesn’t make sense, and I can’t grasp the motivations.
[/quote]

You are correct, because some of the preaching’s don’t make sense and they are sometimes bullshit. Physical characteristics do have an influence on mental characteristics and visa versa. In physics this is called two-way coupling. The point is, this “anyone can be anything” attitude is crap and is a byproduct of our entitlement generation. [/quote]
Oh god, there it is. “Entitlement generation.” Lol. Are you going to talk about the “pussification of America” next?

Gender roles are largely arbitrary. If you think that choosing not to accept some arbitrary role that you had no say in is about entitlement, then enjoy life in chains, bruh.[/quote]

Gender roles are not largely arbitrary. They are based on biological realities of raising children. Specifically that women are infinitely more capable as mothers and therefore less capable at gathering resources(especially if they choose to bear children).
Most other societal factors in gender can be extrapolated from this biological reality.

68

I respect the lifting and nutrition knowledge of Kroc. Kroc is a far greater lifter (and certainly bodybuilder) than I ever was or will be. I’ve enjoyed his articles and learned from them.

I also defend Kroc’s right to believe he is a woman, to pick his name, to wear a dress, and to even go around pretending he is a woman. That’s his business not mine. I would have totally ignored his situation but for his making things public. That’s “tolerance.”

I, however, reject, as matter of both science and faith, that he is anything but an amazingly huge man in a dress.

Yes, biology and sex is sometimes a spectrum, but Kroc was not a hermaphrodite dancing on the grey edge. Kroc is a dude. An impressive dude, in fact.

What he has are mental problems and/or kinks where he likes to wear dresses and pretend he is a lesbian.

This is not intolerant, nor “homophobic” (the dumbest word I’ve ever heard), nor any of the other stupid phrases used to shut down intelligent conversation.

He’s a dude. In a dress.

I tolerate his choice. I am certainly not going to try to stop him (or any other dude that wants to wear a dress). To the contrary, I defend his right to make such a silly choice.

What is intolerant and “phobic” are those who are afraid of the decisions of liked-minded people as myself, who can see this nonsense for a silly choice and whose decisions rest on basic biology and 4,000 years of Judaeo-Christian teachings.

Inevitably, we will be shouted down, called names, and well, not “tolerated” for daring to hold un-PC beliefs.

The Tolerance Movement," if it was a real movement, would leave people alone (e.g., the poor Christian wedding couple who are being persecuted for their religious beliefs in the USA), just as we leave others alone.

69

[quote]Aero51 wrote:
So, I am not trying to be a jerk here, but is this “gender transitioning” that seems to be so common today brought on by group-think amongst men? What strikes me is how rarely you see the converse - women transitioning to men. And I am not trying to be a bigger jerk by saying this, but could additives that we use so commonly in everyday things (such as plastics) that are known and proven to reduce testosterone or increase estrogen production, contributing to this cultural shift? It seems strange, that is all, between how quickly it happens and how men seem to be overwhelmingly more moved than women.[/quote]

It is not as rare as you may think, my wife has had several women co workers that became men.

73

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

Gender roles are largely arbitrary. [/quote]

I would say they are actually carved out from millennia of evolution, but in today’s world much more elastic than in previous generations.

74

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

He’s a dude. In a dress.

[/quote]

To quote “Ted”:

“There are no chicks with dicks… only dudes with tits…”

I have nothing but mad respect for Kroc. In a singlet, or in a dress. One of my greatest motivational influences in powerlifting.

Perhaps I shall drink an Appletini in his honor. Love that dude/chick.

75

[quote]aeyogi wrote:

Are you saying that because we are a more moral society and we hold people accountable for hurting others, that we are in fact actually just transferring our intolerance to another population?[/quote]

Yes.

We’ve been intolerant of pedophiles for a long, long time now, and that likely won’t change. We are bigoted towards them, and for good reason. Not only does it help protect our children and by extension societies function, our bigotry towards those that think sex with children is good, cements the moral opposition to that evil.

[quote]For that to be the case, you would have to give up on any belief in an inherent right and wrong, and accept that all actions are equally acceptable regardless of the impact to others.

[/quote]

What? No. Not at all.

Human societies of the past did not act in a moral way in some respects, and then either suddenly or slowly they came around to be intolerant of the immoral acts they once were tolerant of. Understanding this doesn’t necessitate moral relativism. In fact, understanding this has nothing to do with morals.

Again, connotation v denotation of words. Stop feeling your way through my post and think about it. You’ll figure it out.

76

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I respect the lifting and nutrition knowledge of Kroc. Kroc is a far greater lifter (and certainly bodybuilder) than I ever was or will be. I’ve enjoyed his articles and learned from them.

I also defend Kroc’s right to believe he is a woman, to pick his name, to wear a dress, and to even go around pretending he is a woman. That’s his business not mine. I would have totally ignored his situation but for his making things public. That’s “tolerance.”

I, however, reject, as matter of both science and faith, that he is anything but an amazingly huge man in a dress.

Yes, biology and sex is sometimes a spectrum, but Kroc was not a hermaphrodite dancing on the grey edge. Kroc is a dude. An impressive dude, in fact.

What he has are mental problems and/or kinks where he likes to wear dresses and pretend he is a lesbian.

This is not intolerant, nor “homophobic” (the dumbest word I’ve ever heard), nor any of the other stupid phrases used to shut down intelligent conversation.

He’s a dude. In a dress.

I tolerate his choice. I am certainly not going to try to stop him (or any other dude that wants to wear a dress). To the contrary, I defend his right to make such a silly choice.

What is intolerant and “phobic” are those who are afraid of the decisions of liked-minded people as myself, who can see this nonsense for a silly choice and whose decisions rest on basic biology and 4,000 years of Judaeo-Christian teachings.

Inevitably, we will be shouted down, called names, and well, not “tolerated” for daring to hold un-PC beliefs.

The Tolerance Movement," if it was a real movement, would leave people alone (e.g., the poor Christian wedding couple who are being persecuted for their religious beliefs in the USA), just as we leave others alone.
[/quote]

I agree with all of this.

Just look at his instagram selfies.

77

What is intolerant and “phobic” are those who are afraid of the decisions of liked-minded people as myself, who can see this nonsense for a silly choice and whose decisions rest on basic biology and 4,000 years of Judaeo-Christian teachings.

Oh Jewbacca my well learned friend…if only it where a choice…sigh.
AT what point in your developement did you decide to be “straight”?

As the only known transgender/genderfluid person that is out and about on this site, I will finally chime in.

I, like many other non-straight people out there knew at an early age we where and are different.
It may have been playing with the girls instead of the boys. It may have been something as simple as a fascination with the clothing.
It may have been watching the 1976 Olympics and Nadia, wondering why I would not be growing up to be a beautiful female gymnast.

In 8th grade, I watched Ms. X (same age) walk into science class with a pair of beautiful breasts she seemingly had grown over the summer.
The boys where goo-goo over it, but my reaction was one of …sigh, I hopefully will have a body that beautiful one day.

We do not fully understand the complex nature of the genes involved, nor how gene expression works and transfers as everyone starts as having two X (female) chromosomes which one then converts over to a Y chromosome.

If you where to follow a philisophy such as Taoism (which I do), you understand that by nature there is a Yin and a Yang, and within both is the seed of the other. Similar to what you find in the human body. A male not only has a large amount of Test, but also a small amount of estrogen as well. A female then has the Estrogen/progesterone as dominant, with a small amount of test.

I bring this up because as a general overview, there is a larger amount of male to female (XY back to XX) transformations, then there are female to male (XX to XY) transformations. So the underlying thought is that there is a disproportionately larger amount of the “other” hormone within the base hormone that could cause the person to have the feelings that they do.

In a lot of instances, using the Yin/ Yang dicotomy…at a certain point you have Maximum density which at a certain point converts back over to the minimum of the other. Think of the cycle of the moon. Once it hits Full, it has no choice but to convert over towards new moon status.

What I am getting at is a lot of males will over-compensate for the feelings they have internally. They will do this by becoming Hypersexual, Strong(er), Bigger and try to be Tough(er). They do not want to be perceived as frail, meek, wierd…an outsider et al.

While overcompensating, they/we/I actually diminish our self worth. We have that public narrative about the fagman, lesbo et al not being as apt to provide in society as well as the straight community does.

This has hurt society through history. It is a known fact that both Leonardo and Michealangeolo where homosexual. Think what the world would have lost had these two not existed. Hell, Jesus surrounded himself with long haired hippy gypsies for fucks sake.

Also, there is a difference between what you perceive in the head as far as your body and your sexuality. While for the most part, possibly like Janae I enjoy the fruits of my physical labor… I too feel like I am in the “wrong” body. This is known as body dysphoria. What you live in and perceive is not what you feel you should be in. I hope that she will chime in here at some point.

As far as my sexuality goes… I have had relations with both sexes ( being polite here) and have enjoyed the experience with both. I am attracted to a certain “energy” not a specific gender. I do have a specific body type that I am attracted to, such as Dana Lynn Bailey. If i happen to come across a male with that same body build, then yes i would be attracted to it.

But like many things it still goes much deeper than that…
Also, I am really surprised at how civil this entire thread has been.
Is it because this is “KROC” that we are talking about, and not some “trailer trash” Jerry Springer kid ? maybe, but I would hope not.
Is it because we now have 2 people of prominence in our little world that we are aware of who are out and about ? i would hope not.

Please, feel free to ASK QUESTIONS and I will do my best from My Perspective to answer them. Brutal honesty seems to be my hallmark.
Remember though that this is My life Experience and Perspective. Yours will differ based upon Religious upbringing, Scientific backround,
personal experience and so many other factors…

I do believe that we are a little less bigoted than we have been. I cannot believe for the second time in a week I am agreeing with Beans, but stranger things have been known to happen.

anyway…

lets see where this thread continues on to . … …

78

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:

[quote] Jewbacca wrote:
What is intolerant and “phobic” are those who are afraid of the decisions of liked-minded people as myself, who can see this nonsense for a silly choice and whose decisions rest on basic biology and 4,000 years of Judaeo-Christian teachings. [/quote]

Ah, but that is not the choice of which I speak.

I have no idea if the mental illness/delusion/kink whatever Mr. Kroc and you have is a choice or not. I suspect for some, it is. And for some it is very hard and cruel mental illness. It doesn’t matter.

What IS a choice, however, is the decision to give into the delusion or mental illness or whatever it is and pull a dress over his size 58 shoulders.

It is this choice – to give into delusion, that I call silly.

If a person had schizophrenia and the voices in his head told him to go run around naked and taunt Jewish people as “devils” (which happened to me today, actually, or I’d have a better example), we would not celebrate this.

We would (hopefully) get him to a safe place, have him take his meds, and monitor him. In fact, I presume this is what happened after the CP police wrestled the man to the ground.

As stated earlier, the naked man is not a perfect analogy, in that persons with the mental illness of gender confusion are generally not a danger to themselves or others, but the underlying thesis is.

Specifically, just as the world, and the people in it, are not required to ignore reality and pretend the voices the man hears are real, we should not required to accept the self-delusion of gender confused people.

And yet we are called all sorts of names for refusing to accept this delusion.

The treatment for Kroc’s mental illness may be to let him pretend to be a girl and play dress up. I doubt it, but defer to Mr. Kroc and his doctors on this.

But just as I don’t have to accept the naked devil-calling man’s delusions as true, I don’t have to accept Mr. Kroc as anything other than what he is — a man in a dress. A very large man in a dress.

And for people to be offended that I refuse to accept a false reality – well, that’s just silly.

1 Like
79

[quote]pushharder wrote:

The Krocs and the Jenners and the rest of the weirdos (yep, they are weirdos, not heroes) don’t give me near as much consternation as their applauders. Their applauders, typically, are the ones who insist on being intolerant of my intolerance…for weirdos. A bunch of fuckin’ cheerleaders – those are the ones who cluck, cluck, cluck – busybody hens who want to mold everyone into their pretty lil progressive clan of diversity boosters.
[/quote]

Well said.

The Emperor hath not clothes, but death to those who dare point it out.

80

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]aeyogi wrote:

Are you saying that because we are a more moral society and we hold people accountable for hurting others, that we are in fact actually just transferring our intolerance to another population?[/quote]

Yes.

We’ve been intolerant of pedophiles for a long, long time now, and that likely won’t change. We are bigoted towards them, and for good reason. Not only does it help protect our children and by extension societies function, our bigotry towards those that think sex with children is good, cements the moral opposition to that evil.

[quote]For that to be the case, you would have to give up on any belief in an inherent right and wrong, and accept that all actions are equally acceptable regardless of the impact to others.

[/quote]

What? No. Not at all.

Human societies of the past did not act in a moral way in some respects, and then either suddenly or slowly they came around to be intolerant of the immoral acts they once were tolerant of. Understanding this doesn’t necessitate moral relativism. In fact, understanding this has nothing to do with morals.

Again, connotation v denotation of words. Stop feeling your way through my post and think about it. You’ll figure it out. [/quote]

Okay, so this is just about semantics.

The Merriam-Webster website defines tolerance as follows: Willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own.

I suppose we could argue whether prohibiting actions which are harmful to others, like pedophilia, is a form of intolerance or not; but I am not much of a philosopher, so I will leave this alone.

81

Years ago I read an article about the East German Olympic team doping program and how it affected the athletes who weren’t always given any choice in the matter, especially the women. There was this one woman whose use of steroids had so affected her that first she became a lesbian, but eventually living as a woman just didn’t feel right anymore so she had a sex change into a man. What really impressed me was she didn’t have those thoughts or feelings before they started feeding her steroids.

That got me thinking and doing some research. Because I wondered if taking androgen’s could have that big of an affect on a woman’s gender specific brain mapping, what are the mental risks to a man taking an estrogen based steroid like Deca, or a steroid that aromatizes. If you look in pharma forum there is lots of discussion about Gyno or ball shrinkage, and how to deal with them, but potential mental changes is something that rarely gets discussed. You might see someone write that Deca made them weepy and it’s treated like it is a bit of a joke but nobody really talks about it.

From what I have learned, I am starting to think that it is possible to cause some serious changes in gender specific brain mapping and a lot the changes can be permanent. For example something I have been wondering about with Bruce Jenner is did he always feel like he was Caitlyn right from the time he was a small child. Or is Caitlyn something that came along later in life, maybe after using steroids so he could pursue Olympic glory.

Something I relate to that which really got my attention was when I learned about the use of Arimidex as a treatment for male transsexuals who have decided to de-transition and go back to living as a male. Apparently it is not uncommon to de-transition for a while, then go back on hormones and do it more than once. They think the reason why this happens is they have become addicted to estrogen. Which sounds plausible because it is a powerful mind, mood, altering chemical that also affects the release of other mind mood altering chemicals like serotonin.

The nature of addiction is that once you become addicted to a drug that addiction doesn’t go away even if you stop using it for an extended period of time. Once addicted, even a small amount of a drug can trigger cravings for more. That is why in AA they say one drink is too many a thousand is not enough. So using Arimidex to keep the estrogen level low prevents triggering cravings which cause them to relapse.

Another thing I have been wondering about is the use of nolvadex and clomid. Both of those are synthetic estrogen, so I wonder what their effect on the brain is. I also wonder if the estrogen those drugs displace from other parts of the body can cause accumulation in the brain, because it is an aromatization site and it does have a lot of receptors to absorb it.

1 Like
83

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
We do not fully understand the complex nature of the genes involved, nor how gene expression works and transfers as everyone starts as having two X (female) chromosomes which one then converts over to a Y chromosome.

…

I bring this up because as a general overview, there is a larger amount of male to female (XY back to XX) transformations, then there are female to male (XX to XY) transformations. So the underlying thought is that there is a disproportionately larger amount of the “other” hormone within the base hormone that could cause the person to have the feelings that they do.
[/quote]

Can you cite any references where it was observed that an X (or Y) chromosome changed into a Y (or X) chromosome?
I’ve never heard of this.
I’ve heard of people having Turnerâ??s syndrome (XO), Klinefelterâ??s syndrome (XXY), and the so-called â??supermaleâ?? (XYY.

84

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Years ago I read an article about the East German Olympic team doping program and how it affected the athletes who weren’t always given any choice in the matter, especially the women. There was this one woman whose use of steroids had so affected her that first she became a lesbian, but eventually living as a woman just didn’t feel right anymore so she had a sex change into a man. What really impressed me was she didn’t have those thoughts or feelings before they started feeding her steroids.

That got me thinking and doing some research. Because I wondered if taking androgen’s could have that big of an affect on a woman’s gender specific brain mapping, what are the mental risks to a man taking an estrogen based steroid like Deca, or a steroid that aromatizes. If you look in pharma forum there is lots of discussion about Gyno or ball shrinkage, and how to deal with them, but potential mental changes is something that rarely gets discussed. You might see someone write that Deca made them weepy and it’s treated like it is a bit of a joke but nobody really talks about it.

From what I have learned, I am starting to think that it is possible to cause some serious changes in gender specific brain mapping and a lot the changes can be permanent. For example something I have been wondering about with Bruce Jenner is did he always feel like he was Caitlyn right from the time he was a small child. Or is Caitlyn something that came along later in life, maybe after using steroids so he could pursue Olympic glory.

Something I relate to that which really got my attention was when I learned about the use of Arimidex as a treatment for male transsexuals who have decided to de-transition and go back to living as a male. Apparently it is not uncommon to de-transition for a while, then go back on hormones and do it more than once. They think the reason why this happens is they have become addicted to estrogen. Which sounds plausible because it is a powerful mind, mood, altering chemical that also affects the release of other mind mood altering chemicals like serotonin.

The nature of addiction is that once you become addicted to a drug that addiction doesn’t go away even if you stop using it for an extended period of time. Once addicted, even a small amount of a drug can trigger cravings for more. That is why in AA they say one drink is too many a thousand is not enough. So using Arimidex to keep the estrogen level low prevents triggering cravings which cause them to relapse.

Another thing I have been wondering about is the use of nolvadex and clomid. Both of those are synthetic estrogen, so I wonder what their effect on the brain is. I also wonder if the estrogen those drugs displace from other parts of the body can cause accumulation in the brain, because it is an aromatization site and it does have a lot of receptors to absorb it.
[/quote]

Interesting post, thanks!