I can relate to that very well. What I’m getting at though is that there are a lot of negative connotations attached to abnormal, which are more often than not, not true.
True, but being TG is correlated to increased suicide, depression, est. This could be linked to societal acceptance but also just being mentally in the wrong body has to contribute. There is nothing good about being born in a body you find sexually uncomfortable. It’s why they seek treatment and alterations.
I felt the need to point out that I used a Copernicus quote to respond to ED and I don’t think anybody picked up on it. It would have been really funny but you guys ruined the joke.
1 Like
People here (ED) seem to have the notion that there is some sort of shame attached to having a disorder. There is no shame at all in that. Mental or otherwise. The fact that there is a treatment for the TG (sex reassignment) means that there is something to treat and re-order. It’s an abnormality the people profess not to choose that causes them to seek expensive, harsh, and drastic treatment. I’m not sure what else to even call something like that. If it isn’t a disorder, how can there be treatments? Seriously, like I asked already, what am I supposed to call that?
I had to go back and look at that again. Pretty clever! I never knew the origin of that quote, but you used it very well.
Are you indicating that your ‘gut feeling’ is limited to those three individuals? Or does it perchance extend to every person who had a penis at birth and now identifies and lives as a woman? (Not to mention the persons born with a vagina who now identify/live as men.)
This is precisely why I pushed Push to define his terms. Transgendered individuals are certainly ‘abnormal’ in the denotative sense of being ‘not average’–but then (as I indicated in a previous post) so is being 7 feet tall, having an IQ of 180, and/or being able to bench 500#. Unfortunately, the word ‘abnormal’ also connotes ‘pathological.’ Push was trying to blur the denotative and connotative aspects of the word to suit his rhetorical goals.
Edited for clarity
And there it is! You’ve concluded that some pleasure is derived by the whole play to use women’s bathrooms when that really may not be the case with everybody. That’s the tricky part about that lenses I was alluding to previously.
On the other hand, if someone is putting on a freakshow in front of kids, laws be damned, a beatdown is in order.
The issue being argued here is not whether it is a disorder; the issue is whether it is a MENTAL disorder–whether it reflects an abnormality of cognitive/emotional functioning on the part of the TG individual.
Put another way: Push (and others) would say that a TG individual has a diseased mind in a sound body. In contrast, a TG individual (along with the APA, the American Psychological Association, and many other mental-health organizations) would say that the TG individual has a sound mind in the wrong body.
PowerPuff had an interesting take on this issue earlier, when she speculated that transgenderism might be better characterized as a physical disorder.
Edited for clarity
Well, if guys that used to have penises are lavishing in the luxury of the ladies lavatories I would have to question their sanity. And old tradition around here is to make the visiting wrestling team use the women’s locker room to get ready for the match. They were horrendous. Anywhere near the toilets was unspeakable.
1 Like
I don’t really see the difference morally or ethically, but you need to be consistent. If it is a disorder and their minds are fine, you are claiming that their body is disordered or diseased not that it’s the wrong one. What is your evidence that krock’s body has a disorder?