A hot take on transgender ideology (and gender ideology)

I think transgender ideology is a bit strange, tbh.

Look at this link on "oversocialization": OVERSOCIALIZATION (Industrial Society and its Future) (xahlee.org)

I think oversocialization is an idea that Ted Kaczynski came up with, and a very good idea at that. Transgender ideology is an example of oversocialization. I think gender is a convenient pattern that we have put way too much stock into. We took what should have been a practical concept, and did terrible intellectual gymnastics with it to the point of fucking it up. Gender has long been a concept that constricts the way we think and function and is quite frankly, bullshit. The mere existence of transgender people should show us quite clearly that our gender notions have been unsubstantiated and constricting bullshit, but we are slow at pulling ourselves out of this mire of our creation. Too slow.

Even transgender individuals conform to conventional gender norms, just in an inverse way (hence, oversocialization). Their being genuine people stands to correct what we have been messing up for so long, but they end up further substantiating the crux of gender norms by calling themselves "trans-"gender as if some sort of deviant. See, this doesn't actually say gender norms are wrong, but that there is more to it than is initially evident, and thus history repeats itself with terrible intellectual gymnastics piled on top of terrible intellectual gymnastics. We keep complexifying and making significant this concept past a fruitful level and would do best to simplify and render it less significant. Stop giving gender in any form or manifestation such teeming definition and contrast if you don't want it to rupture.

I am male, but I relate to a lot to feminine characteristics. I like flowers, women's clothing, pink, and sometimes display girly behavior among other things. In the past I have gotten very intense feelings of gender dysphoria and seriously thought I would have rather been born female. Yet none of that opposes my sense of masculinity, at least not in recent years, because I (with exceptions due to inevitable social conditioning) stopped seeing the world through a gendered lens. By this I mean I just simply don't notice anything in a gendered context; I don't recognize cis, trans, binary, nonbinary, etc.

I am not oversocialized. Were I, I would be something other than cis for sure.



Alright,
Like I said, a hot take. Yet hopefully one that some found thought-provoking.


:lol:


EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flames

The amount of transphobia on this forum is disgusting. :doh:

---

(edit: apparently flames did not direct this at me, but I will still keep my response here)

Oh no, no that wasn’t the point.

The point is that gender has been a terrible concept for a long time (hence, why transgender people exist/need to exist) but I see the direction in which we are moving (establishment of non-cis ideology) as adding to it rather than dismantling it.

Gender ideology is an oversocialized concept, and so consequently is transgender ideology. The best solution is to subtract not add, is what I am trying to say.

Please don’t misunderstand my point because I love the transgender people in my life very much. I merely think the are marching in the wrong direction for something that is truly valid, themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeliMeat

Ok, this thread has had a lot of excitement, lol. When I posted this thread I was trying to illustrate a specific facet of gender ideologies, but I was still ignorant of some things involving the relationship between gender and biology. A lot of posts here have discussed this relationship and helped me learn some things that I was previously unaware of, so I thank you all for that. Yet still, I had intended to touch on the more social facets of gender which have been barely grazed over in this thread, so I want to clarify some things I had in mind when creating the thread.

Look at this link on "oversocialization": OVERSOCIALIZATION (Industrial Society and its Future) (xahlee.org)

Years ago I began experiencing body dysmorphia/gender dysphoria (I don't anymore). At the height of this dysphoric experience I would feel a phantom awareness of female genitalia. Thing is, this experience of mine was the result of social causes rather than biological ones. Growing up, I was surrounded by people who said men do men things and women do women things, so the social conditioning allowed no room for a grey area. There is no clear limit to how far we can stretch gender past a biological basis so these gender notions would extend past biology and onto completely arbitrary ground.

A few examples of the ideology in my social sphere:
Men cook outdoors with grills whereas women cook indoors and use ovens
Men drive trucks whereas women drive anything but trucks
Men like football and boxing whereas women like volleyball and tennis
Men wear clothes for utility whereas women where clothes for fashion
Men don't like pink or purple whereas women do
Men are cool and collected whereas women are emotive and dramatic
Men like action movies whereas women like romantic comedies

I could go on and on and on with this...

Based on this, if one is properly socialized, they are expected to adhere to these conventions that in truth stray far beyond the buddy between your legs or anything else biological. For people who are properly socialized yet may break the society's gender code, there are feelings of dysphoria if one notices they broke the rules. It is also important to emphasize that when men are expected to do all of their respective things without deviation and women are expected to do all of their respective things without deviation, it creates this sort of "all or nothing" mentality. So when somebody breaks the code they are likely to experience some jolting vacillation of identity, and the shock alone is often enough to make people feel marginalized or like some sort of Frankenstein's monster, or even make them think they have done something immoral.

That identity shock and "all or nothing" mentality can consequently lead to someone not identifying with their sex anymore (either in the presence or absence of a biological reason to do so as well, it doesn't matter). For some people, as I experienced, this can lead to phantom limb syndrome. I would get phantom awareness of a vagina I never had, and the detail of this awareness would increase as I learned more about vaginal anatomy (note: I did not will this to happen, it was automatic). The fact that the sensation could change based on knowledge of the anatomy indicates, at least for me, that this was not caused by my biology, but by my psychological state at the time.

The "gender jolt" can be subtle and short in duration, but if recurrent becomes a nagging itch. This can lead to someone wanting to end the torture and just scratch that itch by transitioning, either sexually or ideologically or both, and forget the painful grey areas ignored by social conventions. This is what I meant when I said transgender people merely conform to typical gender norms in an inverse way. I see much of the direction in which gender ideology is headed as an extension of the norms rather than remodeling or dismantling them.

---

:thinking: I like pussy, I have a dick, means I'm am male e_e .. to me its as simple as that. (biologically male). IF one is biologically male and capable of procreation, one is meant to be like that by nature. IF the operating system in one's brain or one's brain wiring does not fall in line with one's biological sex.. to me that just means deviancy which can be due to several reasons all of which imply certain levels of defectiveness.. and ends in one being disinclined to fulfill one's biological purpose in life: procreation with the opposite sex.

Society seems to hold a lot of ideas and values which can be cast aside as most people and in general society seems really fucking dumb to me, therefore there is little to no reason to be pressured by what ppl in general think or feel as it only becomes relevant if one allows it to be. So what if one is a guy and likes flowers? Almost every fucking botanist who is a guy likes plants. So what if you like writing sappy petry? Plenty of male poets out there.

This all comes down to ppl's inability to override their fear of rejection by the tribe and it gets better with age and experience. e_e I used to worry about what ppl thought or felt until I discovered most ppl are utter morons and society thinks and does a lot of really stupid bullshit. That solved the problem for me at least:

Tribe dumb like rock, it better if Grug stick with what Grug think right.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/c7...4954bd7d2b.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shotgunfingers

:thinking: I like pussy, I have a dick, means I'm am male e_e .. to me its as simple as that. (biologically male). IF one is biologically male and capable of procreation, one is meant to be like that by nature. IF the operating system in one's brain or one's brain wiring does not fall in line with one's biological sex.. to me that just means deviancy which can be due to several reasons all of which imply certain levels of defectiveness.. and ends in one being disinclined to fulfill one's biological purpose in life: procreation with the opposite sex.

Society seems to hold a lot of ideas and values which can be cast aside as most people and in general society seems really fucking dumb to me, therefore there is little to no reason to be pressured by what ppl in general think or feel as it only becomes relevant if one allows it to be. So what if one is a guy and likes flowers? Almost every fucking botanist who is a guy likes plants. So what if you like writing sappy petry? Plenty of male poets out there.

This all comes down to ppl's inability to override their fear of rejection by the tribe and it gets better with age and experience. e_e I used to worry about what ppl thought or felt until I discovered most ppl are utter morons and society thinks and does a lot of really stupid bullshit. That solved the problem for me at least:

Tribe dumb like rock, it better if Grug stick with what Grug think right.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/c7...4954bd7d2b.png

---

Well, Grug seems to get it I suppose. Then again, Grug doesn't seem to get much of anything...

Sometimes there’s talk of dysmorphia. I hardly am aware of the body parts I have most of the time, let alone those I don’t, so perhaps I’m particularly unsuited for understanding this, but I have a hard time believing that people can be biologically wired to feel awareness of body parts they never had. If this “glitch” can occur after conception, where are all the women who feel a phantom awareness of larger breasts? Or men having phantom awareness of a bigger dick? And if, say, a man said he felt like he should have a 12-foot-dick, would surgery really be the best way to address that?

Anyway — the trans ideology is rooted in confused thinking and preys on distressed young people. I’m worried at how quickly it’s been growing.

And I think it’s part of a larger trend of essentialism. People are reduced to discrete categories which uniform traits are assigned to, while individuals’ subjective experiences are devalued, even while “lived experience” is such an increasingly popular phrase to toss out. You can see it in how Americans approach race: a black man is like every other black man because of his skin color, regardless of any other differences. Obama and Harris are celebrated for being “black”, even though they’re richer than 99% of people, their families didn’t experience slavery or were the perpetrators of slavery, and actively harmed a lot of black people, and it’s assumed that they have somehow a similar experience as a black person from a ghetto. It’s similar with “gender” — a man feels this way; a woman feels that way; if you feel this way or that way you’re a man or woman; easy as that.

The amount of transphobia on this forum is disgusting. :doh:

it is true that identity politics confuses because while one is supposed to deconstruct all of these social constructs like race and gender, one's identity as a race, gender, etc. is held as all important if it is a marginalized identity. it's like setting the machine to "construct" and "deconstruct" at the same time. it leaves this feeling that one can't quite wrap their head around it all. when the mind can't make sense, then one is left with faith or no faith to settle the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

it is true that identity politics confuses because while one is supposed to deconstruct all of these social constructs like race and gender, one's identity as a race, gender, etc. is held as all important if it is a marginalized identity. it's like setting the machine to "construct" and "deconstruct" at the same time. it leaves this feeling that one can't quite wrap their head around it all. when the mind can't make sense, then one is left with faith or no faith to settle the difference.

---

Blind faith is, ....well...., blind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flames

The amount of transphobia on this forum is disgusting. :doh:

---

Oh no, no that wasn’t the point.

The point is that gender has been a terrible concept for a long time (hence, why transgender people exist/need to exist) but I see the direction in which we are moving (establishment of non-cis ideology) as adding to it rather than dismantling it.

Gender ideology is an oversocialized concept, and so consequently is transgender ideology. The best solution is to subtract not add, is what I am trying to say.

Please don’t misunderstand my point because I love the transgender people in my life very much. I merely think the are marching in the wrong direction for something that is truly valid, thenselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeliMeat

Oh no, no that wasn’t the point.

The point is that gender has been a terrible concept for a long time (hence, why transgender people exist/need to exist) but I see the direction in which we are moving (establishment of non-cis ideology) as adding to it rather than dismantling it.

Gender ideology is an oversocialized concept, and so consequently is transgender ideology. The best solution is to subtract not add, is what I am trying to say.

Please don’t misunderstand my point because I love the transgender people in my life very much. I merely think the are marching in the wrong direction for something that is truly valid, thenselves.

---

No, I wasn’t talking about you. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flames

No, I wasn’t talking about you. :)

---

About who then

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flames

No, I wasn’t talking about you. :)

---

:thinking: is it really transphobia if one isn't afraid of them tho?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shotgunfingers

:thinking: is it really transphobia if one isn't afraid of them tho?

---

Ok, you made me laugh. :p I still don’t like your opinion, but I’m not going to cancel you over it lol. Unless you’re, like, physically harming or bullying any transgender people but I don’t think you’re that type of person. :p

@DeliMeat I had some similarish ideas I posted HERE

The "genetics" argument against transsexuality is problematic to me.

What happens if we discover that the biological origin of transsexuality is itself genetic? If we were to employ an appeal to nature—as anti-trans. activists do when they employ X/Y chromosomal differences to define gender—we would be forced to conclude that transsexuality, as a natural part of the human condition, is not an aberration, except in so far as society wants it to be. It would be one component of a much larger tree of human variability, and must play a role in any scheme that's used to classify human sex differences.

If it happened because the mother ate something that poisoned her womb, then that's a thornier philosophical question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

The "genetics" argument against transsexuality is problematic to me.

What happens if we discover that the biological origin of transsexuality is itself genetic? If we were to employ an appeal to nature—as anti-trans. activists do when they employ X/Y chromosomal differences to define gender—we would be forced to conclude that transsexuality, as a natural part of the human condition, is not an aberration, except in so far as society wants it to be. It would be one component of a much larger tree of human variability, and must play a role in any scheme that's used to classify human sex differences.

If it happened because the mother ate something that poisoned her womb, then that's a thornier philosophical question.

---

It's not an issue if you separate sex from gender-feelings. In other words, sex is determined chromosomally by the sex chromosomes. How they feel about their biological sex is separate from that. Whether they feel that way because of some wiring in their brain, a genetic mutation not in the sex chromosomes, or some other reason doesn't change their biological sex. They can be separate.

lol @flames given the trashy and self-destructive ways I know a lot of cis straight people behave I don't think they really have any room to call other people 'defective.' Even though maybe objectively speaking it is a defect in ways but not too sure about that as they have also often gotten a lot of political and social power. I think it often has a pro-social benefit in the form of entertainment and sex work.

It's also natural in the sense to me that people often aren't always strictly one thing over another but a hybrid version of both or a period of changing into another thing- like a metamorphosis.

Quote:

---

it is true that identity politics confuses because while one is supposed to deconstruct all of these social constructs like race and gender, one's identity as a race, gender, etc. is held as all important if it is a marginalized identity.

---

Yeah I think the media/society should stop this idea that any one group are some innocent persecuted angels even though there is still a problem of being bullied for X. They do this for women, gays, blacks, trans, "the working middle class" as this attempt to seem morally superior when they actually don't do anything to correct the issue as they need the other group to always be an eternal victim so they can be the 'Heroes' anyway. So nothing ever really gets changed and both sides don't come to any understanding or peaceful resolution. Reality is too complicated for one group to always be in a victimized status. Most people are a mixture of "perpetrator" and "victim." And if they push the issue too much it makes people think it's naturally wrong and part of satan's agenda anyway.

in my language there's no real distinction between gender and sex when it comes to these things, we have only one term to describe trans people, they're "transessuali" = transsexual. and that's it.

i like this simplicity because sex and gender do obviously overlap and I find it complicates things further to distinguish between "what you ought to be" "what you feel" "what you really are" "what you wish you were" "the errors nature made" etc etc...

transsexuality always existed, so much that in archaic times and in some places still today, transsexuals were considered sort of holy and their deviation was entitled with divine roles, in other cases it was condemned, but point is, it always existed. like hermaphrodites exist.

the distinction between sex and gender comes into play because of this impossibility to ascertain whether a trans person is this or that, so that "I'm a man in the body of a biological woman" excuses both divides and tells people exactly what's in front of them. or maybe it's a way to create more understanding around this topic, by taking apart and labeling the single parts that constitute a sexual being, like we all are.

with this, idk what i want to say, because the matter is not made any simpler by giving out 3 thousand terms or analyzing the single digits that make up the total part.

what i really wonder about this all is : would we still have the need to identify as "something else" if all genders were truly equal and allowed to express themselves without condemnation? and i imagine the answer would probably be, no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

what i really wonder about this all is : would we still have the need to identify as "something else" if all genders were truly equal and allowed to express themselves without condemnation? and i imagine the answer would probably be, no.

---

Yeah, a lot of all of this has to do with stereotypes and expecting everyone to conform to those stereotypes imo like the OP was getting at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

It's not an issue if you separate sex from gender-feelings. In other words, sex is determined chromosomally by the sex chromosomes. How they feel about their biological sex is separate from that. Whether they feel that way because of some wiring in their brain, a genetic mutation not in the sex chromosomes, or some other reason doesn't change their biological sex. They can be separate.

---

I suspect that what trans people experience is more than simply "a feeling".

Perhaps some sort of fundamental misalignment* (with biological sex) in embodied awareness which intrinsically relies and is relied upon by the body in a mutually informing and connected whole.

*Using the word misalignment is probably transphobic but w/e.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leckysupport

I suspect that what trans people experience is more than simply "a feeling".

Perhaps some sort of fundamental misalignment* (with biological sex) in embodied awareness which is intrinsically relies and is relied upon by the body in a mutually informing and connected whole.

*Using the word misalignment is probably transphobic but w/e.

---

What if like the OP suggests, the link to my longer post in the JK thread, and what ooo suggests above is really the larger issue? What if a sex wasn't expected to be any certain way? Then being how they are, dressing however they want, acting like themselves wouldn't necessarily be a disconnect, right? Because right now, it's only accentuating stereotypes. You have people teaching kids that if they like "boy things" they're a boy, and if they like "girl things" they're a girl. I remember when I was a kid people would freak out if a boy played with dolls or something. Oh no, he's gay! It's still not ok apparently, but now it goes even farther, now he's not even a boy anymore. That's how far this is being pushed, and that's really harmful imo. Just let them be who they are, you know?

Regarding body dysmorphia, maybe that would be lessened, or maybe they'd still have it, but people have dysmorphia in ways that aren't associated with sex also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

What if like the OP suggests, the link to my longer post in the JK thread, and what ooo suggests above is really the larger issue? What if a sex wasn't expected to be any certain way? Then being how they are, dressing however they want, acting like themselves wouldn't necessarily be a disconnect, right? Because right now, it's only accentuating stereotypes. You have people teaching kids that if they like "boy things" they're a boy, and if they like "girl things" they're a girl. I remember when I was a kid people would freak out if a boy played with dolls or something. Oh no, he's gay! It's still not ok apparently, but now it goes even farther, now he's not even a boy anymore. That's how far this is being pushed, and that's really harmful imo. Just let them be who they are, you know?

Regarding body dysmorphia, maybe that would be lessened, or maybe they'd still have it, but people have dysmorphia in ways that aren't associated with sex also.

---

Btw I agree with you almost entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

If it happened because the mother ate something that poisoned her womb, then that's a thornier philosophical question.

---

There's also polyfluoroalkyls that break off from plastics accumulating in the biosphere due to human negligence. They have both negative endocrine and neurological effects. This is also why the rate of mental disorders is skyrocketing imo.

I hate when people strawman toxicology as if you think there's some malicious intelligence responsible - no, actually, we invent stupid devices to fulfill temporary needs without grasping their long-term side effects, and they screw us. Most problems with the world are the result of accidents.

If there's a possible physical cause for a problem and also a possible social one, I say we should always Occam to the physical explanation first; they're usually more direct than social causes, which are slower and more ethereal.


I think toxicology is the more charitable answer than genetics, though. If we find a cause to be genetic, there's always going to be that group who argues that this trait's constant presence in the gene pool is a justification for constantly culling it off, lest its numbers balloon and hurt human genetic health; or, if a trait is infertile, that they need to be euthanized for our social health.
The problem with this is that even though a lot of us would consider this stance "inhumane" and dread its implementation, on a grander sociological scale, it's a "strong" stance in that it makes cultures more efficient, so societies that do this are prone to outcompete those that don't.
This makes it a hard position to argue against because it is the more rational stance - if you disagree with it, then you need an ulterior counterargument to defeat it; in this case, an alternate, temporary cause like toxicology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

lol @flames given the trashy and self-destructive ways I know a lot of cis straight people behave I don't think they really have any room to call other people 'defective.' Even though maybe objectively speaking it is a defect in ways but not too sure about that as they have also often gotten a lot of political and social power. I think it often has a pro-social benefit in the form of entertainment and sex work.

It's also natural in the sense to me that people often aren't always strictly one thing over another but a hybrid version of both or a period of changing into another thing- like a metamorphosis.

---

I’m happy you can understand where I’m coming from and cut me some slack here, even though some other people think I’m being some cookie cutter Fi police bitch, and you have told me in a previous post of yours that you have a desire to leave this place because of the increasing amount of politically corrective SJW Nazism polluting the waters. Maybe I’m even a living example of your point that people aren’t black and white and can be a hybrid of two extremes. I guess I could be somewhere between vulgar immoral terrorist and elitist SJW prude. :lol: Nah, I wouldn’t even place myself on the spectrum. I spent most of my life calling myself a Democrat, because I was made to believe that you are either a Republican or a Democrat and whichever of the two was your opposing party is your evil inverse that you are nothing like and meant to eradicate if possible.... In reality, I don’t think they are even opposites of a spectrum - they do a lot of the same shit but have superficially conflicting forms of propaganda to make it to the top. I’m actually a Socialist that does not like or want to associate with either of the political alignments, or promote the continued existence of either mob mentalities or a system that functions solely on the two party system that was never intended to give the common people any true form of power.

Some of the more toxic cultural norms shared by cis straight people aren’t inherently incorrect just because the underdogs say so, and we must go along with it because the rebellion is always the right side in the face of the oppressive Empire... but a good amount of what we’re raised to think is “normal” without questioning from the majority cis straight white patriarchy (feel free to add in whatever buzzwords I missed :lol:) is simply designed to trample on the minorities that threaten that majority. Nowadays, the Internet and modern technology give us the ability to discover millions of other people that aren’t society’s standards and those people have been able to find unity in a way they never could have before we had this junk. When so many people are outcasts in the exact same fashion (for the same reason) they begin to realize they are supposed to be that way and they are just as normal as the “regular” people that outnumber them and control us. And the normies feel threatened by this and want to maintain the status quo they created. So, homophobic people, for example, will joke that they are not because they’re not scared of some fags - but they really are scared of the idea that they will outnumber them one day if we accept their existence as another kind of normal.

I’m not saying Nazis and Jews are really supposed to coexist in harmony and they’re both right in what they believe, but things that run deeper... like things we are born as that we can’t change... I think should coexist with equality, like white vs black, straight vs gay... Just because one thing is more abundant than the other doesn’t mean they’re not all normal ways of being human. It’s not something we should kill each other over and I don’t think I’m unreasonable in suggesting that. If my wish for humanity to get on the same page regarding that, and my rare displays of shaming things others say or do that defies that as a end goal for our species makes me an “SJW”, so be it. I’d rather be harshly silenced for apparently being some delusional special snowflake hellbent on brainwashing the masses than normalize us turning against each other when we should be focusing on better things we can do until we go extinct and run out of time to do it. :)

I don’t think I’m better than people who don’t have the same vision because their opposing visions exist for a reason, too. We evolved to instinctively react these ways in our heads so we can choose the best option for our survival. Unity and individualized tribalism both play an important role in our history. Nature gave us these options because the harsh truth is that one way of living might not succeed in our survival - there has to be several unconscious instincts to act off so that something will work and inevitably one will prove to be correct over the rest. Maybe I’m wrong and we’re destined to divide ourselves as much as we can and eliminate the weaker tribes until the chosen group establish their supreme dominance and therefore secure the infinite existence of human kind - minorities in this scenario exist only to cause endless war until we wipe each other out off the face of the planet altogether when they simply could have submitted to the majority normies until they no longer existed in the first place. But I tend to think this is the philosophy behind genocides, race wars, cultural erasure, eternal conflict and other things most people with common sense nowadays deem evil.

The other option is for us to keep embracing co existence of every distinct group of people no matter how different until we achieve peace and therefore secure our infinite survival because we will no longer needlessly kill each other to extinction and instead focus on even greater means of survival that we’ve been pushing off in favor of our inability to support each other’s existence. Yes, unfortunately this route means that what is considered a majority type of people today will eventually become a minority and that feels scary to a lot of us, but nature is only going to allow what differing trait among us becomes the majority that has the most potential for success. So, yeah, white people will be a minority one day as we keep mixing with other races at a growing rate, but skin color won’t make or break our future. Unfortunately, this also means being homosexual will always be the minority to heterosexuality, because only one orientation provides procreation. BUT both will keep growing bigger as our population peaks so the acceptance of the “unnatural” disposition will get bigger as well and not threaten the majority in the process - homosexuality has always been a naturally occurring thing in numerous animals on earth besides us and was never the reason any of them went extinct. :p

Alright, I’ve done enough waxing philosophical for one day. :lol:

@flames

Nah you were just voicing your concerns and I mostly agree with you. <3 You weren't trying to overly police what ppl say or what to think or how to behave or anything so there was nothing at all with voicing ur opinion. Don't worry I love you. =D

I agree there is too much trans bullying- I mean the trans people often aren't nice about it and have been rude/bullied others themselves but I think when you've been treated like crap a lot of your life you get tired of being nice and start demanding and taking respect rather than being all polite about it so I don't really blame them for being this way.... but it's also true that objectively speaking, most people are just going to be kind of straight and cisgendered and normal ((and boring and value Fi haha)) and that's the way society just is and so society is kind of naturally shaped to the default Basic Bitch whether we like it or not. So often times we are more forced to be like them instead of them being more like us. So I don't like the equal rights thing often because it just really turns into a thing where I am heteronormatized more than they are homo-tized. And it's kinda dumb and too pc because obviously, we're not all equal. BUT we should still be equal under the law cuz the law is supposed to be blind and about balanncing the scales.

Actually I had a talk with this with my mom this morning and it wasn't about gays/trans specifically but about another minority group and basically it came down to my mom saying the minority should work extra harder to be accepted by the majority because they are the minority and you have to appeal to the majority as it's much safer that way but I said that goes both ways though and said the majority should also listen to the minority. As almost everybody has minority traits they need acceptance from. I do think it goes both ways, I mean if you truly want a peaceful resolution & not wish to simply be the one that holds the whip. I shouldn't be forced to always bend over backwards for a breeder ((I used the term breeder affectionately there! Mostly.. hehe)) if they aren't gonna do the same for me sometimes that isn't fair or right. We're not all 'equal' as in we're not all the same but I think we should all be considered equal under the law- as the law is supposed to be the equalizing force. Diversity is what I want, not Sameness.

@squark

I admit I'm a bit sheltered but I don't know any straight guys that played with dolls/barbies much as a kid. I'm sure there's lots of them though that if they tried to 'come out' about it then everybody would just start thinking they were gay hence the stereotypes become even firmer. So why even do it if it's just gonna raise annoying questions and bring up stereotypes.

I played with barbies as a kid but not really in a 'polite way' - I made them have brutal fight scenes with each other lol so it was kinda like gay/str8 mixed I guess.

I fit the stereotype of gay in that I am really non athletic lol @ my 1D Se but I know so many gays who are very good at sports.

So uhh...as somebody that struggled with gender for awhile and finally came to the conclusion that I'm some kind of agender, there does seem to be a lot of interesting evidence for gender being a structural part of the brain. For example, I found out that people that relate with feeling like they are probably on some kind of autistic spectrum, are much more often to identify the way I do, where they feel like they are both genders or neither or in between.

There's also studies done by the Chinese that found MTF transgenders have brain scans that closely match genetic females and not genetic males (before they take hormones, that is). And certain things, like left-handedness, increases your probably for being gay, bisexual, transgender, cross-dresser, having fetishes, things like that, which definitely comes from the brain. There's also a condition, known as AIS, where a genetic male will not react to the testosterone in their body and will develop and look like and feel like and enjoy sex like a female with men. They may not even know they are XY until they hit puberty and have a medical problem and then find testicles where their ovaries should be. There's also something that goes on with mothers where if they already had a son, each son born after has a higher chance of being gay and I think that percentage goes up with each birth - https://www.pnas.org/content/115/2/234. It's all pretty interesting.

Conversely, there's a lot of hate and backlash in Western society, where for whatever reasons, people want to pretend gender is just a subjective thing created by society and look to justify that, rather than do a more scientific look in the brain. Now that's not to say there isn't some truth to that either, but the real truth has got to be somewhere in the middle somewhere. So it seems a bit naive for Western people to trivial gender as enforced by society or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nobody

So uhh...as somebody that struggled with gender for awhile and finally came to the conclusion that I'm some kind of agender, there does seem to be a lot of interesting evidence for gender being a structural part of the brain. For example, I found out that people that relate with feeling like they are probably on some kind of autistic spectrum, are much more often to identify the way I do, where they feel like they are both genders or neither or in between.

There's also studies done by the Chinese that found MTF transgenders have brain scans that closely match genetic females and not genetic males (before they take hormones, that is). And certain things, like left-handedness, increases your probably for being gay, bisexual, transgender, cross-dresser, having fetishes, things like that, which definitely comes from the brain. There's also a condition, known as AIS, where a genetic male will not react to the testosterone in their body and will develop and look like and feel like and enjoy sex like a female with men. They may not even know they are XY until they hit puberty and have a medical problem and then find testicles where their ovaries should be. There's also something that goes on with mothers where if they already had a son, each son born after has a higher chance of being gay and I think that percentage goes up with each birth - https://www.pnas.org/content/115/2/234. It's all pretty interesting.

Conversely, there's a lot of hate and backlash in Western society, where for whatever reasons, people want to pretend gender is just a subjective thing created by society and look to justify that, rather than do a more scientific look in the brain. Now that's not to say there isn't some truth to that either, but the real truth has got to be somewhere in the middle somewhere. So it seems a bit naive for Western people to trivial gender as enforced by society or something like that.

---

:thinking: hmm, yeah it would make sense that there is a biological cause for how they feel / think.

I had a bisexual gf in college and she had a lot of non normie friends / they felt alienated by normal society for being different. Its through her and interacting with them that I discovered that I can't override my standard normie vanilla heterosexual nature. Its hardwired into me. e_e I felt very out of place and weirded out being with her tbh.. and gradually came to realize I just didn't belong because I was like most ppl :/

I'm 100% convinced she can't help being herself, curiously she had other oddities like almost dying at birth and inability to smell things, used to nervously always ask me to check if she smells bad, or if food smells good and so on. Told me she can't sense any smells.

Take note. It’s the Fe egos that perpetuate cancel culture if you don’t share the same views as they do.

There is no “theory” behind gender. You’re either a man or a woman, girl or boy, masculine or feminine. The parameters for defining what belongs in what category could change due to different cultures and time periods, but much of it is tied to how gender is saddled as the social satellite of biology- male or female.

You can say you’re born male but you identify as a feminine gender, but just because that’s what you identify as, doesn’t change the fact that you were still born physically male and people are naturally going to have a hard time accepting you as a “she” if you exhibit physical markers that you’re actually a “he.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flames

Ok, you made me laugh. :p I still don’t like your opinion, but I’m not going to cancel you over it lol. Unless you’re, like, physically harming or bullying any transgender people but I don’t think you’re that type of person. :p

---

My argument basically revolves around that fact that people like me who are heterosexual & cisgender can't help being like this and much like I don't expect a gay man to be attracted to females, you guys shouldn't expect me to feel attracted to biological men. When I say that men are disgusting I mean it. I experience physical revulsion and disgust if I have to interact with another guy sexually and its off-putting seeing men interact sexually. This isn't something I can control or overcome. 4DSi-DisgustMicroexpression.JPG .

I tried explaining this to my bisexual gf at the time as well, e_e but for all her NF talk of empathy & idealism, she basically found it bizarre and hard to understand why most other ppl don't find both sexes appealing, which is understandable, because it isn't something she experiences.

I think asking me to be tolerant is ok, constantly pushing this stuff in my face however isn't, but that's what happens nowadays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shotgunfingers

IF the operating system in one's brain or one's brain wiring does not fall in line with one's biological sex.. to me that just means deviancy which can be due to several reasons all of which imply certain levels of defectiveness.. and ends in one being disinclined to fulfill one's biological purpose in life: procreation with the opposite sex.

---

completely on it's own and separate from any discussion on human gender constructs, we need, as a socieyt, to look at this anthropomorphizing we do with evolution. it reminds me of the ancient peoples making a deity of the sun our rock happens to circle and acting like the star had feelings.

like....'evolution isn't a process but has feelings and wants grandbabies very seriously.'

medically, biological sex is a spectrum, not a dichotomy.


you start out a heap of genes as the little zygote you were from your parents' gametes, and your zygote has developmental processes, and those are based off the interaction of the environment with the directions assembling you. Sometimes there was an unusual pattern in blueprint, and instead of having your clitoris develop the eight and change inches it would and be inside your body and human growth chamber ability growing, and the feed-the-tiny-offspring's-human-brain milk sacs growing when you're almost an adult, the directions are distinct enough that you have in the blueprint info SOME of these characteristics develop and not others. Or perhaps the directs are not distinct but a process was interrupted in another way. Well, if you're not going to spend your energy on constructing a human growth chamber womb, you might as well get taller, etc. People can end up being born what is called intersex on the sex spectrum. It's a very interesting place to be. You're not ONLY female and not ONLY a male; in a way, you're medically both at once. And people might try to convince you you're neither and should change your body or your behavior in order to pretend you're only one, and they might communicate that only then would you be worthy of love or human kinship.


humans have stupid ideas sometimes :D


intersex is so common that if you were to think of it this way, it would be as common: every person in the world with redhair, there are that many people in the world who are intersex.


we get this idea that we're really, really different from each other, but that's just not the case. There are, for instance, people of any sex who have more in come with another person who doesn't share their sex but shares every other facet of all their other characteristics, same musical taste, same relationships with past exes, same curly golden blonde hair and brown skin, same dimples when they grin, same eyeglasses prescription, etc. And those two have more in common with each other than either does with people who happen to have the same sex group they do.


one person has the capacity to move along the spectrum of sexual characteristics, which is why as a young boy you can have breast tissue or as a woman you can stare at your chin and be surprised it's growing a single beard hair. Men have nipples. Women have a variety of adam's apple sizes. You can have chromosomes for female sexual traits that don't compile. Same for having male sex directions and them not compiling. Men die of cancer of the breast. the clitoris and penis are analogous structures, started out the same and barely differ. one hangs outside the body.


intersex people can still have arousal. i think, given that, humans of all sexes can stop terrifying ourselves that the water's gonna make us less male or the menopause will make us less female and that either of those things will mean we won't want sex and no one will want sex with us. There are people in their seventies still getting it on. Why do ppl spend so much time scarying themselves over things about their sex and thinking they're a different species physically from other people? you're not.

Quote:

---

Conversely, there's a lot of hate and backlash in Western society, where for whatever reasons, people want to pretend gender is just a subjective thing created by society and look to justify that, rather than do a more scientific look in the brain.

---

Yeah! That was such a good point, thank you. I mean - it's pretty funny and annoying how so many people think GLBT are part of the Illuminati's Agenda when the Illuminati have hated my guts my entire life as I've always exposed them. They really are bigoted and refuse to confront their prejudices and I don't throw that phrase around lightly everytime there is a small misunderstanding or with normal people but it happens consistently enough where it's problem.

Yes, we are just born that way scientifically it's not some conspiracy theory to get you to french kiss Reptile Demons. Some breeders are really stupid sometimes. xD

also, it makes sense that someone's brain scans differ from other peoples' based even ONLY on their behaviors---because you're literally rewriting your brain AS YOU READ THIS by all your choices.

Remember hearing how eyewitnesses remember about remembering about the situation they observed rather than remember the actual incident completely?

This is a great thing....it's how we can manage trauma...it's how we can learn...it's how we grow our relationships and rethink our ideologies.

People tried to tie the validity of being lbgtqia+ to whether someone's brainscan showed something distinct....there are many problems with that, not least of all that they can start targetting and harassing 'Kevin who says he's gay but whose brain is the same on scans as his brothers'. Then his well-meaning but religious parents, looking at the unproven supposition that ONLY the people with brains that look a certain way are REALLY gay, send Kevin to 'you're not gay, buddy' reprogramming camp and refuse to allow him to date males and disown him when he does as an adult because they think it's enabling his delusions.










"Can You Tell Which Brains Are Male? Neither Can These Scientists
Scientists who tried very hard to find distinct differences between male and female brains say they can’t do it.
The volumes (green = large, yellow = small) of brain regions in 42 adults, showing the overlap between the forms that brains of females and brains of males can take.

The volumes (green = large, yellow = small) of brain regions in 42 adults, showing the overlap between the forms that brains of females and brains of males can take. Image courtesy of Zohar Berman and Daphna Joel. / Tel Aviv University
Nov. 30, 2015, 8:59 PM PST / Updated Nov. 30, 2015, 9:25 PM PST
By Maggie Fox
Scientists who tried very hard to find differences between male and female brains said they couldn’t do it — not with brain scans and not even by asking seemingly obvious questions such as whether someone likes boxing or worries about his or her mother.

They couldn’t find any single pattern that distinguishes between a male brain and a female brain, and say only a very small percentage of people fall under clear all-male or all female brain patterns.

“Our study demonstrates that although there are sex/gender differences in brain structure, brains do not fall into two classes, one typical of males and the other typical of females, nor are they aligned along a ‘male brain–female brain’ continuum,” Daphna Joel of Tel Aviv University and colleagues wrote.

"Brains do not fall into two classes, one typical of males and the other typical of females."

In fact, they found, most people are somewhere between clichéd ideas of male and female when it comes to brains, they said.

Joel’s team looked at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the brains of more than 1,400 people of all ages from around the world, including Americans, Chinese, Germans and Australians.

They did find some regions of the brain that tended to indicate sex differences. But when they considered these regions together across all their brain scans, the picture just got muddy, they reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Anywhere between 23 percent and 53 percent of the MRIs had at least one region with a “male-end” score and one region with a “female-end” score, they found. And at the most, 8 percent of the brain scans showed someone whose brain regions all scored “male” or “female.”

"There are very few individuals who are consistently at the ‘female-end’ or at the ‘male-end’."

“Our study demonstrates that, although there are sex/gender differences in the brain, human brains do not belong to one of two distinct categories: male brain/female brain,” they wrote.

Recommended

WELLNESS
Fall survival guide: COVID-19 safety advice, parenting tips, recipe ideas and more

WELLNESS
Best kid sunscreen from Neutrogena, Aveeno and more
Other researchers have found some of the seemingly clear differences between male and female brains may be cultural rather than biological -- spatial sense, for instance.

Just to be really certain, they looked at a study of 157 women and 106 men done at a large Midwestern university that was designed to tease out sex differences in thinking. It included subjects such a gambling, housework, playing golf, watching porn or cosmetics that could be considered about as stereotypical as possible when it comes to gender differences.

Even there, they couldn’t find a consistent pattern that predicted whether someone was male or female.

“In other words, even when considering highly stereotypical gender behaviors, there are very few individuals who are consistently at the ‘female-end’ or at the ‘male-end’, but there are many individuals who have both ‘female-end’ and ‘male-end’ characteristics,” they wrote."" https://www.nbcnews.com/better/welln...-these-n471751




When it comes to whether someone's REALLY anything, believe people know themselves better than you do because it's incredibly unreasonable to believe otherwise in virtually all cases.Actively challenge disequity or bullying of or inconsiderate digging at ppl who are lbgtqia+ about their status. So what if Todd realises he's gay at a stage in his life that you are not used to people realizing that at? It's Todd's path. Some people don't really get into exploring their sexuality until they're older.


But we can't cling to brainscans as some proof of someone not being stereotypically male enough to be heterosexual and thus being gay. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

@nanashi

In many gay relationships one person is male and the other less male/more female like just like in heterosexuality, opposites attract and complement each other. That doesn't really go away just cuz it's different gender combination. There isn't one way to be gay anymore there is one way to be str8.

Except liking war movies, first-person shooter video games, guns, intense & serious political debates, logically explaining things nobody cares about, cowboy westerns, getting into drunken bar fights to impress women, working on your truck a lot, the tv show 'Breaking Bad' and The Walking Dead. ... That's being pretty straight male. =D lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

@nanashi

In many gay relationships one person is male and the other less male/more female like just like in heterosexuality, opposites attract and complement each other. That doesn't really go away just cuz it's different gender combination. There isn't one way to be gay anymore there is one way to be str8.

Except liking war movies, first-person shooter video games, guns, intense & serious political debates, logically explaining things nobody cares about, cowboy westerns, getting into drunken bar fights to impress women, working on your truck a lot, the tv show 'Breaking Bad' and The Walking Dead. ... That's being pretty straight male. =D lol.

---

I've noticed the balancing. I describe it by socionics...like the IEI man is drawn to the SLE based on how the SLE mind complements the IEI's own mind's skillsets, how they pay attention to the world. The Ni types are a bit like wizards who notice the heightened tangible awareness of Se types. We see that their perception is more of the physics of the world...the potential energy of bodies in motion...the gravity effect in the room on objects...the kinesthetics...without comparing them as people to animals...it's like when we can see a dog is processing a lot of other smells/sounds that we either can barely discern or aren't even aware of.


I think we probably agree but I'm not interested in using the terms 'feminine' when I mean Fe skills, just like I don't call math 'asian'. Ive seen that help the hate ideologies, so i try to strip the conflations away. Probably why I like socionics so much...my EII mom has a completely distinct way of viewing her ideal relationships and attraction than I do.

"Except liking war movies, first-person shooter video games, guns, intense & serious political debates, logically explaining things nobody cares about, cowboy westerns, getting into drunken bar fights to impress women, working on your truck a lot, the tv show 'Breaking Bad' and The Walking Dead. ... That's being pretty straight male. "
This describes me completely, and every other T who uses a lot of Se I know, regardless of their sex and regardless of their sexuality. It describes SO MANY GAY MEN. It doesn't describe hetero men who are F types that I know or hetero men who are Ti types who disvalue Se. It does describe hetero women I know. It does not actually equal 'hetero male'.


my problem with the walking dead was I only liked the zombie parts and found the humans' nonviolent stories profoundly boring. And I'm a practicing pacifist.my EII female friend LOVES the Walking Dead. I prefer first person shooters, even as a kid. Not because they were male. Because they were about a goal and used a lot of Te skills. I prefered debates, not because they were 'male' in some way. I absolutely enjoy working on my vehicles...because it involves skills I have and doesn't require me to have facility with Si but lets me play with a my semi-functioning Se. I identify with cowhand western movie characters and plots (not based on how they pee), yes, I like being seen as physically strong by someone I'm attracted to and would definitely consider it a plus if they saw me in a brawl if I handled myself well and was in the brawl for a good reason (fi valuing). I love shooting guns, and i've shot a machine gun, beretta (handgun), rifle, blah blah...as a kid. I don't shoot anymore. It doesn't matter that I love it. I also liked hydrocyanic acid as a kid. I don't let myself get into my joys as much if i'm surrounded by people offing themselves more when there are more of those joys. I have other joys. I'll live. Brawls kill less often, so I am not opposed to them as much as to guns in my life. same with some drugs.


And we both know I explain things all the time some people don't care about. :D


I know you're maybe less affected by ppl conflating gender and sex or just inured to it, and I'm not saying you're bad or something for using it. But you are wholly male and gay and IEI. I don't see you as not masculine. I see you IEI. And I don't get how IEI isn't male. That's like saying redheads aren't muscular.

Why'd the conflating even start? In part I think people just decided only some men were what they liked and called all the other men 'girl-like'. Instead of recognizing they themselves only were attracted to LSEs or something.
Using 'feminine' for all the IEI, EII, SEI, ESE, IEE, and EIE traits doesn't work because we get these hetero female SLE/LIE/LSE/SLI/LSI/ILE/LII and hetero IEI/ESI/EII/IEE/EIE/SEI/ESE male couples.

I don't really mind Fe being called 'Feminine', although I'm sure when some people use it they are trying to use it as an insult. It is feminine in the sense it's about group feeling & personal feelings (which can be Fi but is also a Fe thing) rather than external Te data. Which by it's very nature is the opposite of Fe. I mean Te is very 'straight man like' compared to Fe- that's objective enough. The definition isn't really perfect in a Te/Fi sense but I understand what people mean when they say that lol.

I just laugh at somebody trying to bully me for my feminine traits. I feel more bad for them more than anything that their view of how male/female like is so limited and rigid. Are you really saying over 50% of the human population is a weakness? Calling me 'feminine' like it's some bad thing, bitch please. xD It's just beyond moronic really. I can't even get offended by it any more- I guess all the shit I put up with it over the years has made me really tough to it. Although I still feel very male and not trans. Obviously if they want a more manlier man that fits their view of how a man should be like, they can go to the truck stop and get one or whatever. No skin off my back!

Yeah those things I would say are more high dimensional Te and Se? Stereotypes are based on truth anyway. They are true more often than not that's why they are stereotypes. Getting offended at stereotypes really isn't the answer ime- it's how we laugh and find the common Fe ground of things for me. Often it's about some people trying to provoke things but not necessarily in a malicious way.

A very, very Fe song but lololol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEU3J7AXWqE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

@squark

I admit I'm a bit sheltered but I don't know any straight guys that played with dolls/barbies much as a kid. I'm sure there's lots of them though that if they tried to 'come out' about it then everybody would just start thinking they were gay hence the stereotypes become even firmer. So why even do it if it's just gonna raise annoying questions and bring up stereotypes.

I played with barbies as a kid but not really in a 'polite way' - I made them have brutal fight scenes with each other lol so it was kinda like gay/str8 mixed I guess.

I fit the stereotype of gay in that I am really non athletic lol @ my 1D Se but I know so many gays who are very good at sports.

---

I do know hetero feeler guys who for example took their T sister's Barbies and in an non sexual way changed their clothes and played out scenarios with them like putting them in rollerblades, etc ; teared up in middle school that they wanted to babysit but no adults would ask them because they were a guy even though they were great with kids.


I've worked with a thousand kids, and I have seen dudes that were allowed to be their personality and their sex and their sexuality and were doing human things like cuddling babies and working in childcare and doing nurturing things. I've seen women and girls that were allowed to be their personality and their sex and their sexuality and were doing human things like working on their vehicles and other peoples' vehicles and offering their male colleagues at work the hex wrench they carry with them so the young guy could adjust his bike seat, get in physical fights (assault) instead of using their words, love debates and engage in them when other people wandered off.

I've also seen the opposite...where people are behaviorally conditioned to NOT act like they have either their personality, sex, or sexuality or a combination of them. Those people can act out caricatures of the gender roles like they're Stepford husbands/wives.

I've seen little boys who love wearing nail polish but aren't seeing themselves as by sex a female and are not thinking they have to give up playing with a baby doll or liking finger nail polish if they want to keep having the body they have or the personality they have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

I don't really mind Fe being called 'Feminine', although I'm sure when some people use it they are trying to use it as an insult. It is feminine in the sense it's about group feeling & personal feelings (which can be Fi but is also a Fe thing) rather than external Te data.

---

what is clitoral about group feeling?

I mean we've all seen Fe polr hetero women and ESE men running sports shows and keeping up the camaraderie. .

We've seen personal feelings of Bob Ross painting us into some meditative state.

We've seen Te scientists who happen to be hetero women.

Nothing about that Fe video that says womanish.It screams Beta NF sexuality regardless of what she's got in her pants. I could definitely see any Beta NF man HETERO or GAY jump into the same acting/singing role if she had a sick day...and he'd get it done with the exact same vibe with no problem.

Now imagine a Thinker woman trying to pull that off. Regardless of her sexuality and how 'hot' her body was, a thinker woman would NOT give off the vibe you're showcasing here with the Fe. There's nothing womanish about the Fe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shotgunfingers

My argument basically revolves around that fact that people like me who are heterosexual & cisgender can't help being like this and much like I don't expect a gay man to be attracted to females, you guys shouldn't expect me to feel attracted to biological men. When I say that men are disgusting I mean it. I experience physical revulsion and disgust if I have to interact with another guy sexually and its off-putting seeing men interact sexually. This isn't something I can control or overcome. 4DSi-DisgustMicroexpression.JPG .

I tried explaining this to my bisexual gf at the time as well, e_e but for all her NF talk of empathy & idealism, she basically found it bizarre and hard to understand why most other ppl don't find both sexes appealing, which is understandable, because it isn't something she experiences.

I think asking me to be tolerant is ok, constantly pushing this stuff in my face however isn't, but that's what happens nowadays.

---

Not being attracted to trans people doesn’t make you transphobic, dude. :p That’s not the part of your post that didn’t sit right with me. I can pick out what was transphobic, but I don’t feel the need to unless you want to ask. With that being said, you are very polite with everything you have to say and you’re not truly being disrespectful towards anyone, so there isn’t much to say there.

edit: there is a post by another user somewhere below you that is so wildly retarded that I wouldn’t even try touching it with a stick even if I wanted to and that stuck out to me way more than your post did :p

Reposting my old post on masculine vs feminine:

Men and women will both have a mix of masculine and feminine. Males on average will be more masculine relative to females and vice versa.
Variations of course due to things like testosterone, estrogen, race, parental influences growing up (Father's influence will affect masculinity in women and mother's influence will affect femininity in men) etc etc

Masculine and Feminine styles of thinking

Masculine thinking tends to focus on what separates one phenomena from one another. It looks for contrasts between things to better label them. It takes things apart, like a machine and analyzes them. It prefers to look at things from the outside with emotional detachment. The masculine way tends to prefer specialization, to dig deep into something specific.

Example: Look at all the political/religious topics on this forum. Deep into the conversations it will be pretty much *mostly* dudes.

Feminine thinking likes to focus on the whole, how the parts connect to one another, the overall picture. In looking at a group of people, it wants to see how they relate to one another. Instead of freezing phenomena in time in order to examine them, it focuses on the organic process itself, how one thing grows into another. This form of thinking leads to insights when the hidden connections between things suddenly become visible in intuitive flashes. As opposed to specialization, it is more interested in how different fields or forms of knowledge can connect to one another.

Example: The greatest scientists in the world utilized feminine style thinking to open their minds to as many explanations as possible, making discoveries through intuitions, etc.

Masculine and Feminine styles of Action

Masculine action- When it comes to taking action, the masculine tendency is to move forward, explore the situation, attack, and vanquish. If there are obstacles in the way, it will try to push through them.

Example: The top 1% of society in terms of wealth will always be men. Why? Their masculinity helps them work 80 hour weeks and stay focused on boring shit for long periods of time. If there's a task to cut down a billion trees with axes, some crazy mother fuckin dudes will be there to do it trust me lol.

Masculine also makes for GREAT entertainment lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A3k2iIVOoc

Feminine action- Patience, resilience, flexibility. Prefers to first withdraw from the immediate situation and contemplate more deeply the options. It will often look for ways to avoid the conflict, to smooth out relations, to win without having to go into battle. Sometimes the best action is nonaction- let the dynamic play itself out to understand it better; let the enemy hang itself by its aggressive actions.

Example: Queen Elizabeth I, her primary strategy was to wait and see in battle; instead of jumping into battle when Spain invaded, she decided to hold the army back, allowing the harsh weather conditions to slow down their advance.

Masculine and Feminine styles of self-assessment

Masculine self-assessment- Men tend to look outward when they make mistakes. Also feel that they are completely responsible for success in life. They are blind to the element of luck and help of others.

Feminine self-assessment- Women tend to do the opposite - when their is failure, they tend to blame themselves and look inward. If there is success, they are more prone to look at the role of others in helping them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lolita

Take note. It’s the Fe egos that perpetuate cancel culture if you don’t share the same views as they do.

---

It’s not limited to any type and I’ve seen various types participate in it. But I actually think it’s more Fi than anything - IEEs and ESIs seem to be the biggest types behind it, in my opinion. Fi is the function of values/morals and likes/dislikes and prefers to avoid the things that defy that (especially -Fi and/or when coupled with Se) or move towards what embodies it. ESI is literally cancel culture served as a type - they will not hesitate to cut anyone out of their life the very minute they see one thing about them that they don’t like or goes against their values, and they give zero chances for the other person to get back in contact with them or change/prove them wrong and sometimes they preface it by telling you why you suck, if you’re lucky. That is so very bizarre and unlike me that it never ceases to shell shock me when it happens to me, personally. I am rubbed the wrong why by that behavior and even when I try to incorporate the mindset myself I cannot enforce it very long (when I try to, it’s usually because I’m hanging around someone extremely toxic and someone else is urging me to cut them off because I never will myself).

I don’t really care about cancel culture either way, but I tend to dislike it more than anything. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and I can’t ignore how complex we all are and what we are capable of doing or becoming, or that with good there’s always bad, vice versa, etc. Unless we’re canceling rapists or pedophiles and other sick fucks, then I’m all in. ;) I am actually attracted to shitty people most of the time and swing the door wide open for them. But there are still a handful of people I think I have ‘canceled’ - not that I’m entirely sure what that’s even supposed to mean because from what I’ve seen it seems to range from only talking shit about them when their name comes up to intricately trying to destroy their life lol.

I know Fe likes to flow with the group norms or feelings so they may lean into the habit, too. But a lot of times they totally forget or ignore the things it looks like they’re fighting for as soon as they’ve left the crowd they were with or they’re morally ambiguous/flexible in general; they can also have a strong sense of values but knowingly break them or frequently hang with people that do. I’m sure there’s other things I’m missing as well.

A lot of the morals the cancel culture people hold are not the same as what the mainstream holds, which is a reason why so many people hate on it besides thinking they’re taking shit too far.

Not everything you hate is Fe. :P

Quote:

---

what is clitoral about group feeling?

---

"Women are more emotional and males are more logical." Of course that's a crude, not totally true stereotype but it's a stereotype for a reason. No disrespect but you prove that stereotype right here yourself with how often every single day you blow up and get angry at what people post... if you want to be respected as a T type I really wish you wouldn't emotionally lose your cool so much.

Fe being thought of as 'feminine' really isn't a big deal to me - although it is simplistic and overly general and kind of elementary school kiddish. Which part of me doesn't mind because I think that's better than being some faux-intellectual with a ruler up their ass at all times. (Not saying you are acting that way that comment wasn't directed towards you, but some people here do.) It was just some silly video to laugh at not psychoanalyze weirdly...

Quote:

---

Nothing about that Fe video that says womanish.

---

Fe relates to femininity not 'womanish' as obviously there is mannish woman. But even those women seem to feel things deeply and make decisions based on their emotions... they probably are still more logical than me mind you, but then again so is a throw pillow from Good Will.

cancel culture ive seen it more applied on those who perpetuate ideas similar to the one shared by OP, Rowling, me etc. if you dont suck up to wtv mainstream ideology is in trend nowadays you're a bigot and immoral for not allowing everyone their own true identity...ugh

it's like those duded who took the statues down because theyre threat to freedom, while the only threat to freedom is their nazism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

"Women are more emotional and males are more logical." Of course that's a crude, not totally true stereotype but it's a stereotype for a reason. No disrespect but you prove that stereotype right here yourself with how often every single day you blow up and get angry at what people post... if you want to be respected as a T type I really wish you wouldn't emotionally lose your cool so much.

Fe being thought of as 'feminine' really isn't a big deal to me - although it is simplistic and overly general and kind of elementary school kiddish. Which part of me doesn't mind because I think that's better than being some faux-intellectual with a ruler up their ass at all times. (Not saying you are acting that way that comment wasn't directed towards you, but some people here do.) It was just some silly video to laugh at not psychoanalyze weirdly...



Fe relates to femininity not 'womanish' as obviously there is mannish woman. But even those women seem to feel things deeply and make decisions based on their emotions... they probably are still more logical than me mind you, but then again so is a throw pillow from Good Will.

---

You're doing it again. Posting something untrue and generalizing, like if I were to say gays are pedophiles. And then you are surprised when I'm upset by it. That aside, I've made it clear that I've been told I have PTSD. I am utterly upfront about my incredibly intense experience of events and how strong my emotional reactions are. And I'm not surprised by any of it. Some of my earliest memories are of fleeing my home to not be murdered. We did that several times when I was in kindergarten/1st grade.

Yes, we know the sexism doesn't bother you much. that doesn't mean it isn't a problem. The house slaves might not be as bothered by the slaves outside being called dirty animals.

You brought up a video as an example and then asked an NT not to examine the example. That's not how I work.

I know you don't want it Te-ed and Ni-creatived, but that's what I've got. And I'm communicating what I see. If you don't want to talk about how Fe isn't Black or Female or Trans we don't have to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

cancel culture ive seen it more applied on those who perpetuate ideas similar to the one shared by OP, Rowling, me etc. if you dont suck up to wtv mainstream ideology is in trend nowadays you're a bigot and immoral for not allowing everyone their own true identity...ugh

it's like those duded who took the statues down because theyre threat to freedom, while the only threat to freedom is their nazism

---

suck up? or like hurl hate and derision at people?

I'm tired of religious ppl trying to make me agree with them I hate or look down on ppl who are gay. 'Ra! Ra! they're an abomination!' And they look over at me with their Alex Jones facial expressions, and I die a little inside from boredom

Quote:

---

Posting something untrue and generalizing, like if I were to say gays are pedophiles.

---

It's a generalization but it's not totally untrue. Is that comment about pedophilia supposed to get under my skin? Because it doesn't. Perhaps it's true that the gay community has a problem with pedophilia than other communities. So? We should fix that and stop avoiding it just because it's a not very pc thing to say. It doesn't mean gays aren't worthy of respect and love as a whole, obviously. It's like saying women don't deserve equal rights or protection under the law because they are often turned on and chase Chad assholes that just break their heart instead of the nice nerdy guy. Or that we shouldn't respect black males since they are more likely to be caught up in the criminal justice system...

A darker trait that a group does shouldn't be so alamaring and talking about those traits we shouldn't have to always idiotically say 'well we don't mean *all*' as that should be implied naturally. This is why SJW stuff is so problematic, it often has to infantilize & victimize the group wanting special rights (it goes a lot deeper than wanting equality usually) as if they are holier than thou more than other people when there isn't really any such thing... every minority group should take responsibility of the own trauma they cause and stop playing victim- if what they want is respect from the majority. It makes a lot of sense if you think about it.

Also these abuse stories you say always sound really exaggerated and reminds me of what Teal Swan does so they are hard to believe and like you are trying to manipulate pity to make you look more in the right. I don't see a T type doing this sort of thing... I would just believe them a lot more if they weren't such an obvious attempt at using pity and victimhood.

Generalizations are based on truth and people are always going to have them in their minds when dealing with others. I don't care if a person looks at me as a pedo because I know myself & I do not want sex with their kids... they can think that all they want but I know myself. And I can only really prove them wrong by not having sex with kids... If a person's stereotype or generalizations have no weight you probably shouldn't care much either. The fact that you get so sensitive about it just me makes me think that you are just secretly afraid you fit every single one... and really, who cares if you fit some stereotypical traits.

Quote:

---

Yes, we know the sexism doesn't bother you much.

---

Males are expendable and treated like shit in society. The person that's being sexist here is you. =D If you want to fight sexism then stop selfishly just seeing one side of the issue. Feminism is a cancer on society as it's not equal rights so much as a self-absorbed and spoiled white female just wanting their own way narcisisstically under the guise of some illusionary 'goodness.' I can't get behind that. White women have pretty much ruined feminism.

Quote:

---

I know you don't want it Te-ed and Ni-creatived, but that's what I've got. And I'm communicating what I see. If you don't want to talk about how Fe isn't Black or Female or Trans we don't have to.

---

Fe is pretty feminine/Female like though - I don't get where the black or trans thing comes into play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nanashi

suck up? or like hurl hate and derision at people?

I'm tired of religious ppl trying to make me agree with them I hate or look down on ppl who are gay. 'Ra! Ra! they're an abomination!' And they look over at me with their Alex Jones facial expressions, and I die a little inside from boredom

---

i find that the western world is pretty liberal with views concerning one's sexual identity "it's easy to change ur sex today, just take a pill!", it's all profit for someone (pharma)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

i find that the western world is pretty liberal with views concerning one's sexual identity "it's easy to change ur sex today, just take a pill!", it's all profit for someone (pharma)

---

Wait, can they turn a lesbian straight? Because I know one I'd like to have play on my ball team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

i find that the western world is pretty liberal with views concerning one's sexual identity "it's easy to change ur sex today, just take a pill!", it's all profit for someone (pharma)

---

profit? yeah, it's profit if you decide you're a machinist at heart and want to take my machining program, too. Does that mean you shouldn't be alowed to alter yourself in the learning-to-machine way?

I mean...I'm profiting if you attend my machining school, so does it then follow that you're to be stopped from the process? or that you're mentally ill for wanting to give it a go? is there something deeply important about you not going through the machine education transformation?

This thread is hilarious after you’ve smoked a joint, especially when you’ve never cancelled anyone :lol:

Everyone needs to take life less seriously. :popcorn:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asd

is this not phantom limb syndrome? Could you explain what you mean by it in context of transgender people?

---

Phantom limb syndrome exists where someone has a limb and then loses it. I’ve never heard of people born with a missing limb experiencing anything like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asd

Yeah that’s what I meant

you mentioned dysmorphia in context of transgender people and then said something that sounds closest to phantom limb syndrome (dysmorphia is intense obsession and dysfunctional anxiety around some perceived physical “flaw”)

---

I see. I meant that often I read articles saying that transsexuals feel they don’t have the right body or right equipment. I don’t think that’s a biological impulse, like they were born with a “female brain” in a male body or something. It’s a psychological problem, not a biological one, to the extent that the two can be distinguished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asd

Interesting although the psychology influences the biology and vice versa but does dysphoria (what you mentioned - feeling like you’re in the wrong body) really involve literal awareness of body parts they don’t have or they just feel like they were born in the wrong body? Cuz I’ve never heard of the former wrt dysphoria

---

Some of the most intense dysphoria I used to get involved sensation of body parts I have never had. I intend on making a post clarifying some points of mine and adding it to the original post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

i find that the western world is pretty liberal with views concerning one's sexual identity "it's easy to change ur sex today, just take a pill!", it's all profit for someone (pharma)

---

Sexual identity and gender have actually been explored and not set-in-stone culturally since pretty much the beginning of humanity. There are numerous examples from across the globe throughout history (Africans, American Indians, Sumerians, etc) of cultures that have not held rigid gender norms, not constrained the idea of gender to one's sex at birth, and held queerness in high regard and as a part of normal life. I recognize the temptation to view these changing ideas as a Western concoction borne of liberalism, but LGBTQ+ identities have existed in multiplicity across so many varying cultures and civilizations that it's kind of a misguided notion (not directing that at you, just in general:)). I loathe big Pharma and the extraction of profit and value from marginalized people's struggles as well, but I don't think that should discount/discredit in any way the people who should receive those services.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aciaradh

Sexual identity and gender have actually been explored and not set-in-stone culturally since pretty much the beginning of humanity. There are numerous examples from across the globe throughout history (Africans, American Indians, Sumerians, etc) of cultures that have not held rigid gender norms, not constrained the idea of gender to one's sex at birth, and held queerness in high regard and as a part of normal life. I recognize the temptation to view these changing ideas as a Western concoction borne of liberalism, but LGBTQ+ identities have existed in multiplicity across so many varying cultures and civilizations that it's kind of a misguided notion (not directing that at you, just in general:)). I loathe big Pharma and the extraction of profit and value from marginalized people's struggles as well, but I don't think that should discount/discredit in any way the people who should receive those services.

---

sure, I agree with u and wrote the same things about the long history of sexual "deviations" in the first page of this thread. in Italy for example we have a long history of "femminielli", trans women that were regarded sort of holy by the community and in more recent times (1800?) they were castrated in order to sing with a better high voice in the operas.

so, yes, identifying with the opposite sex has always been a thing, but I do wonder, as I wrote in the other post under the same premise, if this would still be the case if genders were actually treated and could express themselves truly equally and freely. because, if everybody had the right to act as they wish, what would be the reasons to become something else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

sure, I agree with u and wrote the same things about the long history of sexual "deviations" in the first page of this thread. in Italy for example we have a long history of "femminielli", trans women that were regarded sort of holy by the community and in more recent times (1800?) they were castrated in order to sing with a better high voice in the operas.

so, yes, identifying with the opposite sex has always been a thing, but I do wonder, as I wrote in the other post under the same premise, if this would still be the case if genders were actually treated and could express themselves truly equally and freely. because, if everybody had the right to act as they wish, what would be the reasons to become something else?

---

Ah gosh, I missed that, sorry. I know what you mean though. Have you read "Gender Trouble" by Judith Butler by chance? It kind of explores this question. Basically, its thesis is that gender is not something inherent within us, but rather primarily something we do/perform instead.

But at the same time, even if transgenderism doesn't exist prior to gender (but rather a result of gender, another structure), I don't think that would negate its legitimacy. And most other queer/feminist theorists (excluding TERFs) would likely agree. Because gender, as it stands right now, is perhaps foremost an act of signification between an individual and society, I believe how that individual expresses themselves should be dictated by them, rather than subject to societal hegemony. If we think of the whole performance of gender like a play, where males and females have different roles, just because they're ultimately roles and imaginary doesn't mean that one of them isn't ultimately much more "our role to play." If the whole binary breaks down eventually (which is what I personally hope for), obviously there won't be a need for the concept--as these innate qualities in people won't need to be signified through the concept of gender. But as studies have shown, people identify as trans for so many different combinations of reasons, and there will inevitably be individuals who still feel they would be more comfortable with breasts or without a penis for example, even once the binary disintegrates. It's just that this act would no longer be considered "trans," but rather regarded simply as a natural part of normal life and biology. I haven't thought through this enough to clearly articulate my thoughts, so I'm sorry. But I hope that kinda makes sense :)

@aciaradh

yep, i agree entirely. my questions are more revolved to an utopia rather than "what is", i'm aware that we live in a human reality that is made of 2 primary genders and that their roles is important for merely basic reproductive reasons and this has always changed our culture and costumes etc, and in this reality we just have to accept that there are people who feel like they're born in the wrong body because their way of thinking and experiencing life is different from that of their peers with their same sex, and since they don't conform to that, they opt to be in the alternative, because belonging to a group is part of human nature ? idk, really it's a pretty mind breaking thing...

as a woman who identifies as one, ive always wished my boobs were smaller, i wish i was all smaller, i hated my body, and still do tbh, so it's really mind blowing to think that there are people who have to add the gender-sex-identity pain in the ass to the pile of shit that every day life already presents ourselves with. my biggest empathy for this. but seriously can't stop thinking of how "it should be in an ideal world", even for these people to be in peace, why couldnt we just accept ourselves as we are, in the body we're given? it's the same question i make to myself everyday.

the pharma thing is because of this too, because it's the fast way out, it's the easy solution for the current alternative. and it's so easy that it can go without thinking, appealing to those deep and new fears that all kids experience, and lately ive seen "so many" (not really so many but i think it's becoming more common) of them start transitioning where u would have never expected it from them. like a trend. smth to brag about, to get some insta love or smth. hm... like, usually u can tell when someone, like a man in front of u is particularly feminine, or a woman particularly masculine, and id expect these people to transition, not someone who's always behaved, posed, supported super feminine views, sometimes even exaggeratedly, and then they transition and im left really confused by this all and i think there's a lot of psycho confusion behind it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nanashi

also, it makes sense that someone's brain scans differ from other peoples' based even ONLY on their behaviors---because you're literally rewriting your brain AS YOU READ THIS by all your choices.

Remember hearing how eyewitnesses remember about remembering about the situation they observed rather than remember the actual incident completely?

This is a great thing....it's how we can manage trauma...it's how we can learn...it's how we grow our relationships and rethink our ideologies.

People tried to tie the validity of being lbgtqia+ to whether someone's brainscan showed something distinct....there are many problems with that, not least of all that they can start targetting and harassing 'Kevin who says he's gay but whose brain is the same on scans as his brothers'. Then his well-meaning but religious parents, looking at the unproven supposition that ONLY the people with brains that look a certain way are REALLY gay, send Kevin to 'you're not gay, buddy' reprogramming camp and refuse to allow him to date males and disown him when he does as an adult because they think it's enabling his delusions.










"Can You Tell Which Brains Are Male? Neither Can These Scientists
Scientists who tried very hard to find distinct differences between male and female brains say they can’t do it.
The volumes (green = large, yellow = small) of brain regions in 42 adults, showing the overlap between the forms that brains of females and brains of males can take.

The volumes (green = large, yellow = small) of brain regions in 42 adults, showing the overlap between the forms that brains of females and brains of males can take. Image courtesy of Zohar Berman and Daphna Joel. / Tel Aviv University
Nov. 30, 2015, 8:59 PM PST / Updated Nov. 30, 2015, 9:25 PM PST
By Maggie Fox
Scientists who tried very hard to find differences between male and female brains said they couldn’t do it — not with brain scans and not even by asking seemingly obvious questions such as whether someone likes boxing or worries about his or her mother.

They couldn’t find any single pattern that distinguishes between a male brain and a female brain, and say only a very small percentage of people fall under clear all-male or all female brain patterns.

“Our study demonstrates that although there are sex/gender differences in brain structure, brains do not fall into two classes, one typical of males and the other typical of females, nor are they aligned along a ‘male brain–female brain’ continuum,” Daphna Joel of Tel Aviv University and colleagues wrote.

"Brains do not fall into two classes, one typical of males and the other typical of females."

In fact, they found, most people are somewhere between clichéd ideas of male and female when it comes to brains, they said.

Joel’s team looked at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the brains of more than 1,400 people of all ages from around the world, including Americans, Chinese, Germans and Australians.

They did find some regions of the brain that tended to indicate sex differences. But when they considered these regions together across all their brain scans, the picture just got muddy, they reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Anywhere between 23 percent and 53 percent of the MRIs had at least one region with a “male-end” score and one region with a “female-end” score, they found. And at the most, 8 percent of the brain scans showed someone whose brain regions all scored “male” or “female.”

"There are very few individuals who are consistently at the ‘female-end’ or at the ‘male-end’."

“Our study demonstrates that, although there are sex/gender differences in the brain, human brains do not belong to one of two distinct categories: male brain/female brain,” they wrote.

Recommended

WELLNESS
Fall survival guide: COVID-19 safety advice, parenting tips, recipe ideas and more

WELLNESS
Best kid sunscreen from Neutrogena, Aveeno and more
Other researchers have found some of the seemingly clear differences between male and female brains may be cultural rather than biological -- spatial sense, for instance.

Just to be really certain, they looked at a study of 157 women and 106 men done at a large Midwestern university that was designed to tease out sex differences in thinking. It included subjects such a gambling, housework, playing golf, watching porn or cosmetics that could be considered about as stereotypical as possible when it comes to gender differences.

Even there, they couldn’t find a consistent pattern that predicted whether someone was male or female.

“In other words, even when considering highly stereotypical gender behaviors, there are very few individuals who are consistently at the ‘female-end’ or at the ‘male-end’, but there are many individuals who have both ‘female-end’ and ‘male-end’ characteristics,” they wrote."" https://www.nbcnews.com/better/welln...-these-n471751




When it comes to whether someone's REALLY anything, believe people know themselves better than you do because it's incredibly unreasonable to believe otherwise in virtually all cases.Actively challenge disequity or bullying of or inconsiderate digging at ppl who are lbgtqia+ about their status. So what if Todd realises he's gay at a stage in his life that you are not used to people realizing that at? It's Todd's path. Some people don't really get into exploring their sexuality until they're older.


But we can't cling to brainscans as some proof of someone not being stereotypically male enough to be heterosexual and thus being gay. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

---

Oh jeez, the Western propaganda machine strikes again. Ignoring the obvious fact that sexual dysmorphism is a thing and anyone claiming that men and women's brains are going to be the same obviously has an agenda, let's look at some real research and not this Buzzfeed-esque thing you've linked here. And just for the record, nobody is saying the difference is going to huge. Humans share 99% DNA with chimpanzees, yet we are pretty distinctively different in our intelligence and appearance. If this article was actually scientific, it wouldn't look to support its hypothesis, it would explain how its hypothesis could be right AND WRONG and look at how the study could be biased or flawed and try to account for that. All things that actual research does and I'm going to link below.

And yes, I'm slightly agitated that you posted this because it's bringing back memories of the asshats that want to suggest this is all made up or influenced by society or something. Like my god, I guess I know how gays must have felt when people claimed they could convert them straight with therapy or something. I mean, wow, just wow. People are so quick to discount what other people know about themselves, it's incredible.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes...20orientation.

Brain structure[edit]

General[edit]

Several studies have found a correlation between gender identity and brain structure.^[8] A first-of-its-kind study by Zhou et al. (1995) found that in a region of the brain called the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region which is known for sex and anxiety responses (and which is affected by prenatal androgens),^[9] cadavers of six persons who were described as having been male-to-female transsexual or transgender persons in life had female-normal BSTc size, similar to the study's cadavers of cisgender women. While those identified as transsexual had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including cadavers of non-transsexual male and female controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still had sizes typical for their gender. No relationship to sexual orientation was found.^[10]
In a follow-up study, Kruijver et al. (2000) looked at the number of neurons in BSTc instead of volumes. They found the same results as Zhou et al. (1995), but with even more dramatic differences. One MtF subject, who had never gone on hormones, was also included and matched up with the female neuron counts nonetheless.^[11]
In 2002, a follow-up study by Chung et al. found that significant sexual dimorphism (variation between sexes) in BSTc did not become established until adulthood. Chung et al. theorized that either changes in fetal hormone levels produce changes in BSTc synaptic density, neuronal activity, or neurochemical content which later lead to size and neuron count changes in BSTc, or that the size of BSTc is affected by the generation of a gender identity inconsistent with one's assigned sex.[SUP][12][/SUP]
It has been suggested that the BSTc differences may be due to the effects of hormone replacement therapy. It has also been suggested that because pedophilic offenders have also been found to have a reduced BSTc, a feminine BSTc may be a marker for paraphilias rather than transsexuality.^[2]
In a review of the evidence in 2006, Gooren confirmed the earlier research as supporting the concept of transsexuality as a sexual differentiation disorder of the sex dimorphic brain.^[13] Dick Swaab (2004) concurs.^[14]
In 2008, a new region with properties similar to that of BSTc in regards to transsexuality was found by Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab: the interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH3), part of the hypothalamic uncinate nucleus. The same method of controlling for hormone usage was used as in Zhou et al. (1995) and Kruijver et al. (2000). The differences were even more pronounced than with BSTc; control males averaged 1.9 times the volume and 2.3 times the neurons as control females, yet regardless of hormone exposure, MtF transsexuals were within the female range and the FtM transsexual within the male range.^[15]
A 2009 MRI study by Luders et al. of 24 MtF transsexuals not yet treated with cross-sex hormones found that regional gray matter concentrations were more similar to those of cisgender men than to those of cisgender women, but there was a significantly larger volume of gray matter in the right putamen compared to cisgender men. Like earlier studies, it concluded that transsexuality was associated with a distinct cerebral pattern.[SUP][16][/SUP] (MRI allows easier study of larger brain structures, but independent nuclei are not visible due to lack of contrast between different neurological tissue types, hence other studies on e.g. BSTc were done by dissecting brains post-mortem.)
An additional feature was studied comparing 18 female-to-male transsexuals who had not yet received cross-sex hormones with 24 male and 19 female gynephilic controls, using an MRI technique called diffusion tensor imaging or DTI.^[17] DTI is a specialized technique for visualizing white matter of the brain, and white matter structure is one of the differences in neuroanatomy between men and women. The study took into account fractional anisotropy values for white matter in the medial and posterior parts of the right superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF), the forceps minor, and the corticospinal tract. Rametti et al. (2010) discovered that, "Compared to control females, FtM showed higher FA values in posterior part of the right SLF, the forceps minor and corticospinal tract. Compared to control males, FtM showed only lower FA values in the corticospinal tract."^[17] The white matter pattern in female-to-male transsexuals was found to be shifted in the direction of biological males.
Hulshoff Pol et al. (2006) studied the gross brain volume of 8 male-to-female transsexuals and in six female-to-male transsexuals undergoing hormone treatment. They found that hormones changed the sizes of the hypothalamus in a gender consistent manner: treatment with male hormones shifted the hypothalamus towards the male direction in the same way as in male controls, and treatment with female hormones shifted the hypothalamus towards the female direction in the same way as female controls. They concluded: "The findings suggest that, throughout life, gonadal hormones remain essential for maintaining aspects of sex-specific differences in the human brain."^[18]
A 2016 review agreed with the other reviews when considering androphilic trans women and gynephilic trans men. It reported that hormone treatment may have large effects on the brain, and that cortical thickness, which is generally thicker in cisgender women's brains than in cisgender men's brains, may also be thicker in trans women's brains, but is present in a different location to cisgender women's brains.^[2] It also stated that for both trans women and trans men, "cross-sex hormone treatment affects the gross morphology as well as the white matter microstructure of the brain. Changes are to be expected when hormones reach the brain in pharmacological doses. Consequently, one cannot take hormone-treated transsexual brain patterns as evidence of the transsexual brain phenotype because the treatment alters brain morphology and obscures the pre-treatment brain pattern."^[2]
Androphilic male-to-female transsexuals[edit]

(edit: I'm going to stop bolding stuff because if people actually want to read it, they can and I'm pretty much bolding everything at this point to make my point)

Studies have shown that androphilic male-to-female transsexuals show a shift towards the female direction in brain anatomy. In 2009, a German team of radiologists led by Gizewski compared 12 androphilic transsexuals with 12 cisgender males and 12 cisgender females. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), they found that when shown erotica, the cisgender men responded in several brain regions that the cisgender women did not, and that the sample of androphilic transsexuals was shifted towards the female direction in brain responses.^[19]
In another study, Rametti and colleagues used diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to compare 18 androphilic male-to-female transsexuals with 19 gynephilic males and 19 androphilic cisgender females. The androphilic transsexuals differed from both control groups in multiple brain areas, including the superior longitudinal fasciculus, the right anterior cingulum, the right forceps minor, and the right corticospinal tract. The study authors concluded that androphilic transsexuals were halfway between the patterns exhibited by male and female controls.^[20]
A 2016 review reported that early-onset androphilic transgender women have a brain structure similar to cisgender women's and unlike cisgender men's, but that they have their own brain phenotype.^[2]
Gynephilic male-to-female transsexuals[edit]

Research on gynephilic trans women is considerably limited.^[2] While MRI taken on gynephilic male-to-female transsexuals have likewise shown differences in the brain from non-transsexuals, no feminization of the brain's structure have been identified.^[2] Neuroscientists Ivanka Savic and Stefan Arver at the Karolinska Institute used MRI to compare 24 gynephilic male-to-female transsexuals with 24 cisgender male and 24 cisgender female controls. None of the study participants were on hormone treatment. The researchers found sex-typical differentiation between the MtF transsexuals and cisgender males, and the cisgender females; but the gynephilic transsexuals "displayed also singular features and differed from both control groups by having reduced thalamus and putamen volumes and elevated GM volumes in the right insular and inferior frontal cortex and an area covering the right angular gyrus".^[21]
The researchers concluded that:

Contrary to the primary hypothesis, no sex-atypical features with signs of 'feminization' were detected in the transsexual group ... The present study does not support the dogma that [male-to-female transsexuals] have atypical sex dimorphism in the brain but confirms the previously reported sex differences. The observed differences between MtF-TR and controls raise the question as to whether gender dysphoria may be associated with changes in multiple structures and involve a network (rather than a single nodal area).^[21]

Berglund et al. (2008) tested the response of gynephilic MtF transsexuals to two steroids hypothesized to be sex pheromones: the progestin-like 4,16-androstadien-3-one (AND) and the estrogen-like 1,3,5(10),16-tetraen-3-ol (EST). Despite the difference in sexual orientation, the MtFs' hypothalamic networks activated in response to the AND pheromone, like the androphilic female control groups. Both groups experienced amygdala activation in response to EST. Gynephilic male control groups experienced hypothalamic activation in response to EST. However, the MtF subjects also experienced limited hypothalamic activation to EST. The researchers concluded that in terms of pheromone activation, MtFs occupy an intermediate position with predominantly female features.^[22] The MtF transsexual subjects had not undergone any hormonal treatment at the time of the study, according to their own declaration beforehand, and confirmed by repeated tests of hormonal levels.^[22]
A 2016 review reported that gynephilic trans women differ from both cisgender male and female controls in non-dimorphic brain areas.^[2]
Gynephilic female-to-male transsexuals[edit]

Fewer studies have been performed on the brain structure of transgender men than on transgender women.^[2] A team of neuroscientists, led by Nawata in Japan, used a technique called single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to compare the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) of 11 gynephilic FtM transsexuals with that of 9 androphilic cis females. Although the study did not include a sample of biological males so that a conclusion of "male shift" could be made, the study did reveal that the gynephilic FtM transsexuals showed significant decrease in blood flow in the left anterior cingulate cortex and a significant increase in the right insula, two brain regions known to respond during sexual arousal.^[23]
A 2016 review reported that the brain structure of early-onset gynephilic trans men generally corresponds to their assigned sex, but that they have their own phenotype with respect to cortical thickness, subcortical structures, and white matter microstructure, especially in the right hemisphere.^[2] Morphological increments observed in the brains of trans men might be due to the anabolic effects of testosterone.^[2]
Prenatal androgen exposure[edit]

Prenatal androgen exposure, the lack thereof, or poor sensitivity to prenatal androgens are commonly cited mechanisms to explain the above discoveries. To test this, studies have examined the differences between transsexuals and cisgender individuals in digit ratio (a generally accepted marker for prenatal androgen exposure). A meta-analysis concluded that the effect sizes for this association were small or nonexistent.^[24]
Congenital adrenal hyperplasia in persons with XX sex chromosomes results in what is considered to be excess exposure to prenatal androgens, resulting in masculinization of the genitalia and, typically, controversial prenatal hormone treatment^[25] and postnatal surgical interventions.^[26] Individuals with CAH are usually raised as girls and tend to have similar cognitive abilities to the typical female, including spatial ability, verbal ability, language lateralization, handedness and aggression. Research has shown that people with CAH and XX chromosomes will be more likely to be same sex attracted,^[25] and at least 5.2% of these individuals develop serious gender dysphoria.^[27]
In males with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency, conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone is disrupted, decreasing the masculinization of genitalia. Individuals with this condition are typically raised as females due to their feminine appearance at a young age. However, more than half of males with this condition raised as females become males later in their life. Scientists speculate that the definition of masculine characteristics during puberty and the increased social status afforded to men are two possible motivations for a female-to-male transition.^[27]

So whatever, I said my peace. Everyone can continue to pretend these things don't exist, that's it's just social conditioning or social contracts or some other weird thing people want to wish it away to. I don't care, but that's the actual science for anyone that's interested in a more objective truth about this.

Ok, this thread has had a lot of excitement, lol. When I posted this thread I was trying to illustrate a specific facet of gender ideologies, but I was still ignorant of some things involving the relationship between gender and biology. A lot of posts here have discussed this relationship and helped me learn some things that I was previously unaware of, so I thank you all for that. Yet still, I had intended to touch on the more social facets of gender which have been barely grazed over in this thread, so I want to clarify some things I had in mind when creating the thread.

Look at this link on "oversocialization": OVERSOCIALIZATION (Industrial Society and its Future) (xahlee.org)

Years ago I began experiencing body dysmorphia/gender dysphoria (I don't anymore). At the height of this dysphoric experience I would feel a phantom awareness of female genitalia. Thing is, this experience of mine was the result of social causes rather than biological ones. Growing up, I was surrounded by people who said men do men things and women do women things, so the social conditioning allowed no room for a grey area. There is no clear limit to how far we can stretch gender past a biological basis so these gender notions would extend past biology and onto completely arbitrary ground.

A few examples of the ideology in my social sphere:
Men cook outdoors with grills whereas women cook indoors and use ovens
Men drive trucks whereas women drive anything but trucks
Men like football and boxing whereas women like volleyball and tennis
Men wear clothes for utility whereas women where clothes for fashion
Men don't like pink or purple whereas women do
Men are cool and collected whereas women are emotive and dramatic
Men like action movies whereas women like romantic comedies

I could go on and on and on with this...

Based on this, if one is properly socialized, they are expected to adhere to these conventions that in truth stray far beyond the buddy between your legs or anything else biological. For people who are properly socialized yet may break the society's gender code, there are feelings of dysphoria if one notices they broke the rules. It is also important to emphasize that when men are expected to do all of their respective things without deviation and women are expected to do all of their respective things without deviation, it creates this sort of "all or nothing" mentality. So when somebody breaks the code they are likely to experience some jolting vacillation of identity, and the shock alone is often enough to make people feel marginalized or like some sort of Frankenstein's monster, or even make them think they have done something immoral.

That identity shock and "all or nothing" mentality can consequently lead to someone not identifying with their sex anymore (either in the presence or absence of a biological reason to do so as well, it doesn't matter). For some people, as I experienced, this can lead to phantom limb syndrome. I would get phantom awareness of a vagina I never had, and the detail of this awareness would increase as I learned more about vaginal anatomy (note: I did not will this to happen, it was automatic). The fact that the sensation could change based on knowledge of the anatomy indicates, at least for me, that this was not caused by my biology, but by my psychological state at the time.

The "gender jolt" can be subtle and short in duration, but if recurrent becomes a nagging itch. This can lead to someone wanting to end the torture and just scratch that itch by transitioning, either sexually or ideologically or both, and forget the painful grey areas ignored by social conventions. This is what I meant when I said transgender people merely conform to typical gender norms in an inverse way. I see much of the direction in which gender ideology is headed as an extension of the norms rather than remodeling or dismantling them.

Quote:

---

This is what I meant when I said transgender people merely conform to typical gender norms in an inverse way.

---

Yeah I almost see it as a conservative thing in a sense because they are often adhering to what most heterosexual normative society thinks of as manly vs not manly etc. It is not at all really a breaking of boundaries of what men and women can do based on our genders/biological sex but a complete acceptance of them. Maybe there are trans people that aren't like this- but this is definitely how it's portrayed in the media and what I got from 'the movement's' message.

But the fight for 'GLBT rights' has almost always been a very conservative Delta-ish thing when you think about it. The right to get married, the right to serve in the military, the right to be as assholeish as any 'straight guy' - these are all very right-wing things. The right to be a sex hound was a bit more liberal, but all that got was a negative reputation because of the AIDS and disease thing, and rightfully so. "Radical genderqueers" are made fun of in both sides of the aisle and not respected in a political sense. But even the mild genderqueer people aren't respected as it's just viewed on the road to being rainbow radical. It's like being 'a little bit retarded.' The dominant message is, you can be different- as long as you're trying to be the same.

I only wanted the right to be myself without being bullied so much, I don't care about being equal to that heteronormative conservative crap. Kind of ironic but I don't feel unmanly at all even though I am so stereotypically unmanly in many ways according to straight society lol. Delta SJWisms never really worked for me because I never wanted to be included in something straight- I truly like being GAY or QUEER - as in being different. Gays accepted in the heterosexual framework of life- mehhh. That makes me vomit kind of. Gays and straights aren't 'equal.' If we were equal- there would be no straight or gay to begin with. So I kinda hate that saying. But some people think that if you don't think you're 'equal' to something- that means you intrinsically think that you are either below or above that thing which is not true as people aren't 2nd grade math problems. I can peacefully co-exist around straight people, and I don't think it's a better or worse thing (gahh Delta Fi valuers...) - but I'm not EQUAL to them.

Now I have the option to marry, or serve in the military - or be a conservative gay man if I wanted to but I don't want any of those things.... so I can't feel that empowered if we 'won' some conservative battle that only affected a Delta ST gay man and not me. Forgive me that I can't get all thrilled about that shit. But anyway sorry for going off topic as this thread is about trans not gay guys.

Honestly, it's more conceivable than not that one day, perhaps in our lifetimes, we'll have the technology to alter humans beings at the level of DNA, at which point the differences between a "person" and a "transperson" become impenetrably metaphysical and abstract, even for some treatises on philosophy.

Science may never advance to that stage. Or, transsexualism could simply be a passing trend that never reappears to cause controversy; an unusual manifestation of what is otherwise a wildly overstated human desire for self-expression. I personally doubt both of these claims, but I guess we'll see.

Regardless, issues that are irresolvable by debate are resolved one way or another. A very clever observation I once heard was this: if philosophers can't decide an answer to a question, engineers and investors will. That's a succinct characterization of our own time whether or not it continues to be the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

Yeah I almost see it as a conservative thing in a sense because they are often adhering to what most heterosexual normative society thinks of as manly vs not manly etc. It is not at all really a breaking of boundaries of what men and women can do based on our genders/biological sex but a complete acceptance of them. Maybe there are trans people that aren't like this- but this is definitely how it's portrayed in the media and what I got from 'the movement's' message.

But the fight for 'GLBT rights' has almost always been a very conservative Delta-ish thing when you think about it. The right to get married, the right to serve in the military, the right to be as assholeish as any 'straight guy' - these are all very right-wing things. The right to be a sex hound was a bit more liberal, but all that got was a negative reputation because of the AIDS and disease thing, and rightfully so. "Radical genderqueers" are made fun of in both sides of the aisle and not respected in a political sense. But even the mild genderqueer people aren't respected as it's just viewed on the road to being rainbow radical. It's like being 'a little bit retarded.' The dominant message is, you can be different- as long as you're trying to be the same.

I only wanted the right to be myself without being bullied so much, I don't care about being equal to that heteronormative conservative crap. Kind of ironic but I don't feel unmanly at all even though I am so stereotypically unmanly in many ways according to straight society lol. Delta SJWisms never really worked for me because I never wanted to be included in something straight- I truly like being GAY or QUEER - as in being different. Gays accepted in the heterosexual framework of life- mehhh. That makes me vomit kind of. Gays and straights aren't 'equal.' If we were equal- there would be no straight or gay to begin with. So I kinda hate that saying. But some people think that if you don't think you're 'equal' to something- that means you intrinsically think that you are either below or above that thing which is not true as people aren't 2nd grade math problems. I can peacefully co-exist around straight people, and I don't think it's a better or worse thing (gahh Delta Fi valuers...) - but I'm not EQUAL to them.

Now I have the option to marry, or serve in the military - or be a conservative gay man if I wanted to but I don't want any of those things.... so I can't feel that empowered if we 'won' some conservative battle that only affected a Delta ST gay man and not me. Forgive me that I can't get all thrilled about that shit. But anyway sorry for going off topic as this thread is about trans not gay guys.

---

:popcorn: fighting for rights is like begging for approval from one's parents instead of having the power to just be oneself and accepting that the world might reject that. There is no freedom there. There is also no charm or romance in being open and accepted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

[COLOR=#333333]It's a generalization but it's not totally untrue. Is that comment about pedophilia supposed to get under my skin? Because it doesn't. Perhaps it's true that the gay community has a problem with pedophilia than other communities. So? We should fix that and stop avoiding it just because it's a not very pc thing to say. It doesn't mean gays aren't worthy of respect and love as a whole, obviously.

---

A) both the generalization about women and the one about gay people are untrue and not just untrue but put both groups in the crosshairs of violent usually men. And that's not the only reason to not spread the myths. The other reason is ANYONE can be into a confident and unhealthy person (like for instance you have been into confident but unhealthy ppl) without (you) being a woman. And ANYONE can be a pedophile (without being gay). And another reason not to spread the myth--that these diverse groups of people (women and also gay ppl) are somehow monoliths that INHERENTLY have this one unhealthy behavior--is that there is so much research...so much...oodles of research....research for days...showing people start treating them DIFFERENTLY based on you spreading the myth---AND THEY TREAT THEMSELVES DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THESE NEGATIVE MYTHS.


B) Also, I'm the forum member who fucking deconstructed the bullshit argument and went and researched and hunted what I suspected could be there: a fucking mathematical analysis that clearly demonstrates that gay people are not more likely to be pedos and that it's been shitty misinterpretations (jumping to conclusions) and broad generalizations and fed with general homohate (analogous to systemic sexism and misogynystic culture) which TOGETHER have been perpetuating and propping up this myth that gay people are more likely to fucking molest kids. That has an impact on a gay person growing up to hear that.

And when I talk about having someone's back, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about: someone going and dispelling that and step in front of snowballing myths that are rolling around and disparaging someone who's gay, ats opposed to the other path: helping the unhealthy myth get spread.


And it's something you have done by taking your own self-admitted attraction to a few confident SLE who also were, regretably, not self-directed enough to make a good life with you instead of getting arrested and then you extrapolating that one pattern you USED TO HAVE and saying ALL WOMEN HAVE THIS PATTERN and not only that they exhibit it but that it's MAGICALLY inherent in women.

And the pause followed by a firm 'but the myth is there for a reason' is so far beneath you. You're more cognitively incisive than this. You're more interested in truth than this, and I am disappointed and feel let down. I'm not saying you're evil or something. I don't believe people are evil. That doesn't make sense. You are causing harm.

I am not expecting you to react like 'bow down to nanashi,' and I don't expect you to have my back. You didn't sign up for that, and it's unfair of me to expect someone to go to the lengths for me I would for them. You direct your own life, and I'm glad you do.

But I'm not going to stand here and not point out that you're spreading evil things about women that have serious consequences for real people right now. This has been my point all along...that you spreading this 'women are all this way and inherently so' myth has heinous consequences for a lot of them and shapes how they are seen and how society responds to them.

@nanashi @BandD

Ya’ll got me like :shifty: then got me like :whistle: Oh but then I’m like :popcorn:

Quote:

---

And that's not the only reason to not spread the myths. The other reason is ANYONE can be into a confident and unhealthy person (like for instance you have been into confident but unhealthy ppl)

---

The person I was into was unhealthy but I wouldn't call him confident by a long shot. He was pretty insecure, and that was part of why I liked him. I'm NOT ATTRACTED TO CONFIDENT PEOPLE like some people are, that thing u spread about confidence being universal appealing just isn't true.

Quote:

---

And another reason not to spread the myth--that these diverse groups of people (women and also gay ppl) are somehow monoliths that INHERENTLY have this one unhealthy behavior--is that there is so much research...so much...oodles of research....research for days...showing people start treating them DIFFERENTLY based on you spreading the myth---AND THEY TREAT THEMSELVES DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THESE NEGATIVE MYTHS.

---

I'm kinda curious about this from a logical standpoint but I don't think we are going to get anywhere if people are too emotional about this. Of course there will be much more heterosexual pedophiles as there are more str8s but I don't really see it being linked to straight or gay but kind of a perverse sexuality in and of itself as from what I know, pedophiles don't really have any inherent gender bias. They usually prefer minor kids regardless if it's a boy or girl so "technically" they're bisexual. Proportionally even if it was proven that gays are more likely to be pedophiles - that wouldn't mean gays are inherently bad people. Just the ones that decide to go after kids. That was my point- which u don't seem to be getting. A minority can have something 'wrong' objectively occur more often and a higher rate within their population - but still be worthy of equal treatment under the law... a higher occurrence or rate doesn't mean it 'it will happen for sure if you are that minority group.' Do you have any data from unbiased sources that state heterosexuals are more likely to molest kids?

Quote:

---

And when I talk about having someone's back, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about

---

Quote:

---

: someone going and dispelling that and step in front of snowballing myths that are rolling around and disparaging someone who's gay, ats opposed to the other path: helping the unhealthy myth get spread.

---

Fair enough, but again- even if it was proven that gays are more likely to molest kids that isn't some sound arguement that gay = bad just like it doesn't mean black = bad because something like 80% of the prison population is black males. Cruelty is I think a negative trait that might have originated more in women - but it doesn't mean women = bad. I understand it's an emotionally charged issue as it's so serious and detrimental but logically that makes no sense. I would say pedophiles are technically bisexual- and nobody says pedos make bis look bad. The official data is it's usually "straight" people doing it but I'd say with real pedos it's more about the age than the gender.

Quote:

---

And it's something you have done by taking your own self-admitted attraction to a few confident SLE who also were, regretably, not self-directed enough to make a good life with you instead of getting arrested and then you extrapolating that one pattern you USED TO HAVE and saying ALL WOMEN HAVE THIS PATTERN and not only that they exhibit it but that it's MAGICALLY inherent in women.

---

Well the guy I talk a lot that I think is SLE could very well be my activity partner or even my identical (although activity is much more likely) He's really kinda shy and introverted for a SLE anyway- although it is possible for SLEs to be shy, he is pretty introverted so the SLE typing was probably bad and me wanting to idealize things because I liked him so much. I don't just get my SLE bad boy = headed for prison joke material from that one guy but multiple men I know lol. It's a stereotype, but I think in some instances Fi polr & high egoic Se can very well lead to that...

More than anything it's a JOKE though - you don't seem to know what a joke is or have the same kind of humor I do.

I don't think I said all women have this pattern... but many if not most do. According to wikipedia, 97% of heterosexual women prefer submissive roles during sex. How do you explain that? Is wikipedia against women now??? lol. I kinda agree with other people's assessment of you, if something is not 100% light and holy you seem to not know how to take it.

Quote:

---

And the pause followed by a firm 'but the myth is there for a reason' is so far beneath you. You're more cognitively incisive than this. You're more interested in truth than this, and I am disappointed and feel let down. I'm not saying you're evil or something. I don't believe people are evil. That doesn't make sense. You are causing harm.

---

I don't think it causes harm- truth and facts that don't necessarily line up with the Illuminati PC version of events shouldn't necessarily 'be harmful.' Cuz again- a minority can have something dark or negative occur more often within that population and still be worthy of respect. We should treat minorities well even though they aren't Disney Mary Sues IRL.... I'm not a pedophile, but I also shouldn't have to pretend to be perfect or without flaws before a bigot decides to give me equal treatment under the law or not bash my brain in. That's all I'm saying. You seem to be arguing that people need to be "perfect" before they get respect from society- and I don't agree with that right-wing conservative assessment. Gay guys have been trying to play the 'good little maid' thing for ages so people would like us better- and it doesn't seem to work. If somebody wants to hate you- they're gonna hate you no matter how 'good' you pretend to be, so I think it's not right that gays do this so much.

But I guess we have to keep virtue signaling and playing this I'm morally better game with people in order to win kudos points for society and I don't like playing that game because it's very, very fake. Imo, we as a society should recognize Shadow traits in groups of people without it provoking us so much or going crazy about it. If you don't agree the shadow traits are there- well there are still some where it should be recognized without it being a big deal. If I can only get respect as a gay man of this fake 100% positive story that isn't true.... I don't think I want that kind of respect as it's based on a lie. ((don't mean the pedo thing, just saying in general...)) It's more of the same 'bandd helped pick me out these fabulous lime green curtains for my new living room but I still think he's a filthy sinner that's headed for hell.' Lololol.

As Marilyn Monroe said if somebody can't handle me at my worst they don't deserve my best either.

If an ugly person — someone born with hardcoded genes that gave them recognizably ugly features — got extensive plastic surgery to look beautiful, is it still objectively correct to call this person ugly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

If an ugly person — someone born with hardcoded genes that gave them recognizably ugly features — got extensive plastic surgery to look beautiful, is it still objectively correct to call this person ugly?

---

You make a lot of comparisons between things that don't quite fit together - idk what that is. For a more apt comparison -- someone with Down's syndrome, or William's syndrome could theoretically get plastic surgery to look as though they do not have these syndromes, but they still have those syndromes. Another example: If you have blue eyes and wear brown contact lenses, you're a blue-eyed person wearing brown contact lenses, not a brown-eyed person.

Phenotype can be disguised, but the genotype is still there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

If an ugly person — someone born with hardcoded genes that gave them recognizably ugly features — got extensive plastic surgery to look beautiful, is it still objectively correct to call this person ugly?

---

TFW people sell you a modded and cleaned up hunk of junk..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

You make a lot of comparisons between things that don't quite fit together - idk what that is. For a more apt comparison -- someone with Down's syndrome, or William's syndrome could theoretically get plastic surgery to look as though they do not have these syndromes, but they still have those syndromes. Another example: If you have blue eyes and wear brown contact lenses, you're a blue-eyed person wearing brown contact lenses, not a brown-eyed person.

Phenotype can be disguised, but the genotype is still there.

---

You've articulated the anti-trans case well, here and in other posts, and you make some good points.

So, where would I disagree? WRT ugliness: it's a genotype as well as a phenotype. The genes that control appearance also don't change when someone is surgically enhanced. This person may only be good looking artificially, but they're still good looking.

But more than that, a sex reassignment operation goes deeper than cosmetic surgery. It also involves pumping someone full of biochemistry-modifying hormones. The analogue to that, WRT to a mentally-challenged person, is to give them a daily "brain pill" that modifies their neuronal firing patterns. The person's genotype hasn't changed, but it has been suppressed and controlled. And while it would be inauthentic to call this person normal, it would also be inauthentic to call them mentally-challenged.

So which is this person's real identity? Honestly, while I lean in the direction of the social-constructionist (pro-trans) camp, I'm pretty unsure. The philosophical problem is irresolvable because "identity" is impossible to define to begin with: sometimes it's something intrinsic and inalienable; other times it's something you earn or which is granted to you; and, increasingly, "intrinsicness" is itself a modifiable quality. There is no definition of identity that's consistent across all the different analogies that people use to make comparisons with transsexualism.

The confusion arises from the fact that both the current pro-transgenderism and anti-transgenderism are wrong. Neither are attempting to take gender as a psychological issue.

Current transgenderism attempts to evade the question by saying that gender is a subjective social construct, and therefore meaningless to discuss gender at all. Or they would say that if the outward appearance is "male" or "female", then that becomes the gender. So it's only a matter of having a sex-change operation.

Anti-transgenderism says that only biological sex is what matters, and denies the fact that there could be psychological gender at all. Or perhaps there is, but somehow the psychological gender is intrinsically linked to the biological sex that you're born with. I would find this argument to be somewhat unconvincing.

Either way, transgenderism needs to come up with what the psychological gender even are. And that biological sex and psychological gender are two different things that need to be treated separately. Ironically, both the transgenderism and anti-transgenderism are Behaviorist, as in they're ignoring the internal, psychological qualities of a person. You also cannot deny the psychological reality that exist within people's consciousness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

But more than that, a sex reassignment operation goes deeper than cosmetic surgery. It also involves pumping someone full of biochemistry-modifying hormones. The analogue to that, WRT to a mentally-challenged person, is to give them a daily "brain pill" that modifies their neuronal firing patterns. The person's genotype hasn't changed, but it has been suppressed and controlled. And while it would be inauthentic to call this person normal, it would also be inauthentic to call them mentally-challenged.

---

Sigh, a diabetic taking insulin is still a diabetic. A mentally-challenged person taking a "brain pill" still has cognitive issues. And someone with hypothyroidism doesn't cease having hypothyroidism when they take thyroid hormone. To say it's "inauthentic" to recognize this is pretty far out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

Sigh, a diabetic taking insulin is still a diabetic. A mentally-challenged person taking a "brain pill" still has cognitive issues. And someone with hypothyroidism doesn't cease having hypothyroidism when they take thyroid hormone. To say it's "inauthentic" to recognize this is pretty far out there.

---

A compact car whose body was replaced with a monster truck body is a monster truck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

A compact car whose body was replaced with a monster truck body is a monster truck.

---

Cars aren't people and don't have genetics. This is what I meant when I said you keep making comparisons that really don't work very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

Cars aren't people and don't have genetics. This is what I meant when I said you keep making comparisons that really don't work very well.

---

But the principle is the same whether its a car or a human being: we already accept that some things can change their fundamental character because of a few exterior modifications. The fact that we choose not to apply this principle to gender is a choice, not because of some natural law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

But the principle is the same whether its a car or a human being: we already accept that some things can change their fundamental character because of a few exterior modifications. The fact that we choose not to apply this principle to gender is a choice, not because of some natural law.

---

No. The principle is not the same at all. If you want to use cars as an example, how about putting a body kit and fake badges on a car -- doesn't change the motor inside it. Looks like something else, but isn't. You can't take that car with the fake badges on it out to the track and expect it to perform like the car it's trying to copy. It looks like it, but it's not it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

"Women are more emotional and males are more logical." Of course that's a crude, not totally true stereotype but it's a stereotype for a reason. No disrespect but you prove that stereotype right here yourself with how often every single day you blow up and get angry at what people post... if you want to be respected as a T type I really wish you wouldn't emotionally lose your cool so much.

Fe being thought of as 'feminine' really isn't a big deal to me - although it is simplistic and overly general and kind of elementary school kiddish. Which part of me doesn't mind because I think that's better than being some faux-intellectual with a ruler up their ass at all times. (Not saying you are acting that way that comment wasn't directed towards you, but some people here do.) It was just some silly video to laugh at not psychoanalyze weirdly...



Fe relates to femininity not 'womanish' as obviously there is mannish woman. But even those women seem to feel things deeply and make decisions based on their emotions... they probably are still more logical than me mind you, but then again so is a throw pillow from Good Will.

---

lol. like men are never angry. like anger is a female instead of HUMAN emotion.
Like rage at seeing you perpetuate misogyny isn't reasonable.

god, BandD, you just shit on the floor all over the place with this stuff. it's so surprising to me. I keep expecting more of you. That's why it weirds me out.

not sure if everyone has deets on intersexuality and how common it is biologically:

https://isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex/

people keep conflating personality types or traits with biological sex. cultural myths, my peeps. you can stop now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZLO5wuYz-4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

No. The principle is not the same at all. If you want to use cars as an example, how about putting a body kit and fake badges on a car -- doesn't change the motor inside it. Looks like something else, but isn't. You can't take that car with the fake badges on it out to the track and expect it to perform like the car it's trying to copy. It looks like it, but it's not it.

---

I don't really want to get into a whole discussion about it, as I could write for hours about this and I don't think it would convince you anyway..But gender is not ontological--it is performative, a nexus between the individual and society. If you want to talk about stripping things down to their essence without the frills and glamour, it'd be worth noting that trans people as a general rule show brain patterns much more in line with those of the sex/gender they identify as (of course sex and gender are not the same thing whatsoever, but this simplifies it nicely for those who don't want to go down that rabbit hole). The right to self-determination is a wonderful thing; what I don't understand is how so many people who are supposedly pillars and bastions of personal liberty and freedom fail to recognize that people should have a right to choose what role they play in society. I understand as well that not everyone will recognize trans people's identities as valid. But LGBTQ+ identities have been notoriously stigmatized and treated as mental illnesses for so long, and if one looks at the medical history of how such orientations and identities have been treated (i.e. not correctly, in service of religious dogma and supporting the traditional order of things), it's so easy to see that the majority of trans stigmatization is a holdover from that.

One of the best ways to break it down though is to look at the margins. Roughly 1 to 2 out of every one hundred individuals born in the U.S. is intersex. If sex is the only thing that makes up gender, and somehow one's mind by its very essence must be one thing or another as defined by their physical anatomy, how should these people be categorized? It just demonstrates how arbitrary, baseless, and ridiculous anti-trans arguments are, as there is a multiplicity of individuals who biologically-speaking do not "fit in" to the binary. You don't have to respond, and I don't even really expect/need you to as I don't have the emotional energy for this. And I'm sorry if this is all gibberish as it's late; but hopefully that makes a little sense at least, even if you disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squark

No. The principle is not the same at all. If you want to use cars as an example, how about putting a body kit and fake badges on a car -- doesn't change the motor inside it. Looks like something else, but isn't. You can't take that car with the fake badges on it out to the track and expect it to perform like the car it's trying to copy. It looks like it, but it's not it.

---

Well, I disagree, and I don't think that we're going to convince each other, so I'll just summarize my position.

* There is no satisfying answer to this question because "identity" has no singular definition: sometimes it's something intrinsic; other times it's something that's completely acquired. People cherry pick and apply the analogies that conform to their preexisting beliefs or their political affiliations.

* It's not the case that a sex reassignment surgery is just a cosmetic alteration -- a person that receives massive doses of hormones is changing their internal biochemistry, the way their muscles grow, and even the way they think at a fundamental level. If it's inauthentic to say that a transwoman is a woman, it's also inauthentic to call this person a man. As an aside, a 'gender spectrum' may not be the worst form of classification in this case.

* Anti-trans folks talk about the genotype as though it's hardwired into the human soul. There is evidence now that gut bacteria release chemicals which alter how the body works, how the brain works, and how genes are expressed and activated via epigenetics. Gut bacteria aren't intrinsic to the human body, but they have a colossal effect on both phenotype and genotype. Even social interaction can activate or deactivate genes. Genes aren't a sacred codex, but are altered (if not structurally, then functionally) all the time via the most trivial causes.

* It's not known whether or not transsexuality is itself a genetic phenomenon. If we discover a "transsexuality genotype" which makes people feel like a different gender, then transsexuality would be natural enough to deserve the same status as classical gender differences. The same appeal to nature can be made, for transsexuality, as is often made for classifying gender according to XX/XY chromosomal differences.

@squark. For what it's worth, I'm still on the fence about whether or not this whole thing is just a temporary fad. I'm aware that people can be convinced to hold the most outrageous beliefs and commit the most self-destructive actions. I really, truly cannot fathom these people's state of mind. I'm sorry to say, however, that the arguments levied against transsexuality aren't particularly decisive.

I doubt it's just a fad. People have said the same thing about being gay and it's kind of stupid. Yeah, people really choose to be misunderstood as deviants, discriminated against in society for eons- often times murdered by insecure people who can't handle their own attractions, scapegoated for all the world's ills etc. all because it's trendy to do so. I agree the media can be "too PC" with the gay/trans thing many times (probably because they are aiming for 'shock value' and they are trying to purposefully rile up some ignorant breeders for ratings) but come on now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xerxe

Well, I disagree, and I don't think that we're going to convince each other, so I'll just summarize my position.

* There is no satisfying answer to this question because "identity" has no singular definition: sometimes it's something intrinsic; other times it's something that's completely acquired. People cherry pick and apply the analogies that conform to their preexisting beliefs or their political affiliations.

---

I think the question is, should we treat abstract ideas and entities just as real as physical entities? Is "masculine" just as real as "male"? I would say yes.

If biological sex determined everything, then there's no point in talking about psychology. We might as well as biologically determine everything. But an abstract computer program can affect the hardware in the physical world, and potentially, it can start to change its own hardware or it can affect things in the physical world.

The neo-Darwinian, "selfish gene" theory imply that the body is nothing but a vessel for the gene to carry and replicate itself. The mammal is mostly a visual being, and so it must rely on visual or some other sensual markers in order for it to mate. It does not know what "masculine" or "feminine" means. But we humans know what "masculine" or "feminine" mean without relying on any sensual markers. We can abstractly know and understand that just from reading texts, for example. We become attracted to people chatting online or reading fictional books.

The Meme evolution theory imply that abstract memes are influenced by evolution, which makes the evolution of abstract ideas just as real as the evolution of physical objects. I would say that "male" and "female" are simply physical evolutions, and "masculine" and "feminine" are abstract, memetic evolutions that occurred within a complex social society, and it co-evolved with the biological sex.

I wish the questions of whether transgenderism is a legitimate human experience and how to appropriately handle things like sports were more distinct.

I have concerns about the safety and (yea) personal comfort of cis women. But I'm not about to dictate anyone's mind. (If you're thinking about typology disagreements when you read this, I'm scornful about how pathetic you are.)

I think it's less likely that parents are 'pressuring kids to be transgender' and likelier that they are presenting options, you know? You could be the gender you were born with, or this cool, alternative brand. (:

Is there science involving totally different male and female brains? Maybe that's a blow against feminism? There would be a certain comfort in being excused for my emotionality and receiving acknowledgement for how difficult a desk job is for me, lol

@aciaradh

Jesus Christ, this isn't academia. You don't have to try to impress anyone. When you write unclearly you invite unclear thoughts.

Yes, gender expression is a social construct. So what?

Quote:

---

Additionally, as a non-binary person myself, I reject your somewhat reductive approach in saying “this is what Trans people are like/this is what the Trans community believes.” Not all Trans people “demand” that others see them as their gender, and if you demand that they should not be treated/viewed as their gender then that is likewise a violent act. However, I also reject the notion that non-Trans people cannot hold their own opinions or realize to a large extent what it’s like to be transgender (insofar as that experience is uniform, which ofc it is not).. and so I don’t want to insist that your approach is problematic specifically as a result of that. But your insistence on the opposite (that Trans people are an attention-seeking, abusive monolith) strips agency and self-determination in a fashion similar to how the former approach would, and fails to recognize the humanity and nuance present in Trans people's identities.

---

I'm making a generalization that's true for about 9 in 10 at least. Words aren't violence, and if writing words on an Internet forum can strip people of "agency and self-determination" then I don't know what to tell you.

Quote:

---

I’m still in the process of engaging with feminist, structuralist, and poststructuralist theory at the moment

---

Here's some friendly advice: stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ashlesha

Is there science involving totally different male and female brains? Maybe that's a blow against feminism? There would be a certain comfort in being excused for my emotionality and receiving acknowledgement for how difficult a desk job is for me, lol

---

Why is being emotional something you feel should be excused? Do you wish you weren't? If not, why be ashamed?


I'm also curious if you could elaborate further why men and women having different brains would be a blow to feminism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

Why is being emotional something you feel should be excused? Do you wish you weren't? If not, why be ashamed?

---

That's an interesting question because it prompts me to encounter the fact that yea, i do think I have a female brain actually, but do I think that gives me an excuse for being a hysterical cunt once in awhile? Yes, actually. Sorry

Quote:

---

I'm also curious if you could elaborate further why men and women having different brains would be a blow to feminism.

---

Maybe it was more second wave to think gender isn't real. Third wave is more about things like slut shaming, which is easy to mock, lol, but try being a traumatized 13 year old. :8*

Google "terf brain gender"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

@aciaradh

Jesus Christ, this isn't academia. You don't have to try to impress anyone. When you write unclearly you invite unclear thoughts.

Yes, gender expression is a social construct. So what?



I'm making a generalization that's true for about 9 in 10 at least. Words aren't violence, and if writing words on an Internet forum can strip people of "agency and self-determination" then I don't know what to tell you.



Here's some friendly advice: stop.

---

I'm referring to violence in the sense of removal of choice, I'm sorry if that was unclear. Your words, taken to their logical conclusion--that Trans people abuse children--absolutely does strip people of agency.

I’m not trying to impress anyone; my Ti role gets like that in discussions like this (esp as it's a conversation I'm tired of having) and I apologize for that. But what I’m trying to point out is that so much of the opposition to transgender identities is based on flawed assumptions. I get it if you don’t want to engage, but then you lose the pretense of authority and of good-faith motivations if you dismiss arguments simply because they’re too convoluted/academic (and these arguments are not super esoteric either). I will go back and edit my post to make it more readable; but I don't doubt for a second that you are fully capable of understanding the claims, regardless of whether or not you agree with them. This is a convoluted subject, yes. But so is hard science, and people wouldn’t presume to seriously discuss scientific topics without a willingness to engage with science that has come before. Similarly, if you actually want to have a constructive discussion about the nature of identity, then engagement with philosophical fields is kinda inevitable.


(edit: previous post is now more clear)

@FreelancePoliceman @aciaradh

Here's what my monke brain understands:

-I have good friends who tell me they're trans
-I'm a sort of androgynous guy who, while not trans and fine with my gender, tends to oscillate between more masculine and more feminine modes of expression depending on my mood and those around me, so I feel like I can sort of imagine why you would want to be the opposite gender
-Those friends seem cool and I've never got the "crazy SJW" vibe from them that a lot of people seem to think trans people must have
-To pretty much everyone they look and act way more like the gender that they want to be than the gender they may have been given when they were born, and that's how most people treat them in day-to-day life
-At this point there's basically nothing left of their "original" gender, so why insist on treating them as though they still are?

I don't understand what the problem with them is supposed to be. They have jobs, treat the people around them well, and haven't ever hurt anyone - much less any children - to my knowledge

Sooo we go from 'it's just a fad' to 'eww they abuse kids.'

Well... statistically speaking- according to the Te/Ti data- cis Heterosexuals (especially cis heterosexual males) are the ones most likely to abuse children. I'm not trying to virtue signal- but the data is there lol.

And even if they did- it's actually still a dumb arguement. Breeder males are statistically more likely to abuse children- yet we still give them all the extra privileges and special rights in society. We don't objectively say it's not okay to be a cis straight guy. So not a very good argument. How can we claim we care about the kids like we say we do if breeder males get all these special perks in society yet they are the ones most likely to hurt a kid for real.

It's the tale as told as time. "right"-wing Republican straight people claim they are more moralistic and for family values and the childreeeeen - yet when the kids are born they want nothing to do with them and project the evil in their hearts onto the LGBT community. And you wonder why I don't like most straight people lololol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ashlesha

That's an interesting question because it prompts me to encounter the fact that yea, i do think I have a female brain actually, but do I think that gives me an excuse for being a hysterical cunt once in awhile? Yes, actually. Sorry

---

If you can't be blamed for sometimes being a "cunt," what do you think you can be blamed for, then, if anything?

The attitude I take is that people should be aware of their own proclivities, and arrive at an understanding with themselves of what they're willing and not so willing to change. Everyone has to try to moderate their self against social expectations. Leaning too much either way is bad, but it's up to the individual to find that medium.

I also think everyone, or nearly everyone, has a sense of justice, or more generally of what's right and wrong, and the guilt that comes from violating one's own sense of it damages one's sense of self and ultimately their ability to be content. If you're acting in such a way that you'd call yourself a "cunt" then the shame or guilt you seem to feel you should take as guidance to change how you act. But there's nothing wrong with feeling emotional. Your thoughts and feelings are near the core of how you experience the world, and since you have as much a right to exist as anyone else, you shouldn't feel shame for them. Expressing them is a little more complicated, but as a general rule I'd say that unless you're being casually inconsiderate/rude then you shouldn't feel shame for expressing them either.

Transgenderism is a social contagion much like how anorexia and bulimia were a couple decades ago. There's an unofficial term "rapid onset gender dysphoria". Most youth with gender dysphoria are struggling with other underlying issues, and there is often a general dis-ease with their self-identity. Then due to environmental factors (internet, social groups..) they fixate on the gender aspect of identity. It's hard not to when the trans community immediately affirms everyone with doubts on their gender.

I have no problem with transgender people. However, I am against the immediate affirmation and am dubious about the medicalization of the mental disorder. ESPECIALLY when the individual in question has not fully emotionally matured yet. In the UK they're going to require a 2-year delay before people identifying as trans can get surgery. that's good. hormones and surgery are irreversible. whereas the rate of people who desist after identifying as the other gender is very high.

I think everyone interested in the subject should listen to this podcast (specifically about gender dysphoria in boys).

Here are some points they touch. These people are legit and not just some random theorizers.

So many parents are blindsided when their child comes out as trans.
The counselors and therapists are partly to blame.
These boys are often bright, socially behind, and very online.
Angus noticed that a lot of these boys were playing particular RPG games and it gave them a false illusion of what the female aesthetic really was.
These very intelligent boys, who often have intelligent answers to things, are giving parents very strange and almost immature answers as to why they want to become a woman.
Predatory men online could be further exacerbating the problem.
We’re seeing a rocketing number of people who are saying they’re bisexual.
What benefits do these gender dysphoric boys get by joining a girl clique? (a pre-made identity)
Why are young women so obsessed with dressing up their new toy? (the trans boy being the toy)
So many families are just lost and don’t know what to do.
Want diversity and inclusion? You should see these groups. They’re diverse and they’re all worried about their child.
When you talk to de-transitioners, they all have a level of wisdom about who they are and what they want.
Did Angus see a connection with autism in his surveyed group?
Children are taking fewer and fewer risks in our environment. As a way to rebel, they’re taking risks on their bodies and their personal identity instead. (before it was clothing, hair color, tattoos etc. now it's gotten to be more extreme-)

What you should take away is that you should refrain from immediately affirming someone who tells you that they're questioning their identity. Of course, still be understanding and accepting of their feelings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

If you can't be blamed for sometimes being a "cunt," what do you think you can be blamed for, then, if anything?

The attitude I take is that people should be aware of their own proclivities, and arrive at an understanding with themselves of what they're willing and not so willing to change. Everyone has to try to moderate their self against social expectations. Leaning too much either way is bad, but it's up to the individual to find that medium.

I also think everyone, or nearly everyone, has a sense of justice, or more generally of what's right and wrong, and the guilt that comes from violating one's own sense of it damages one's sense of self and ultimately their ability to be content. If you're acting in such a way that you'd call yourself a "cunt" then the shame or guilt you seem to feel you should take as guidance to change how you act. But there's nothing wrong with feeling emotional. Your thoughts and feelings are near the core of how you experience the world, and since you have as much a right to exist as anyone else, you shouldn't feel shame for them. Expressing them is a little more complicated, but as a general rule I'd say that unless you're being casually inconsiderate/rude then you shouldn't feel shame for expressing them either.

---

after i said what i did, i ended up terrified about how it would be interpreted, because i was thinking of being a "hysterical cunt" as taking a sarcastic tone and getting up from the table or something, as it is so often understood. but it might be interpreted more, like, literally and in a legitimate way, by people who aren't just mad at me anyway lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aciaradh

I'm referring to violence in the sense of removal of choice, I'm sorry if that was unclear. Your words, taken to their logical conclusion--that Trans people abuse children--absolutely does strip people of agency.

---

Unless I'm somehow a wizard and my writing has a mystical effect I've been unaware of, my forum posts don't force anyone to act or not act as they please.

Quote:

---

I’m not trying to impress anyone; my Ti role gets like that in discussions like this (esp as it's a conversation I'm tired of having) and I apologize for that. But what I’m trying to point out is that so much of the opposition to transgender identities is based on flawed assumptions. I get it if you don’t want to engage, but then you lose the pretense of authority and of good-faith motivations if you dismiss arguments simply because they’re too convoluted/academic (and these arguments are not super esoteric either).

---

The problem with avant-garde humanities "theories" -- feminist theory, critical theory -- is not that they're too complex but that the obscure language used masks hazy thought. It's possible in plain language to describe the concepts being discussed; they aren't so complicated. But when you write as you did (I don't mean to insult you, just stating what I see) you bring in too many implicit claims that are irritating to have to go through in order to make a comprehensive reply.

Quote:

---

This is a convoluted subject, yes. But so is hard science, and people wouldn’t presume to talk about scientific subjects without a willingness to engage with science that has come before. Similarly, if you actually want to have a constructive discussion about the nature of identity, then engagement with philosophical fields is kinda inevitable.

---

A better analogy would be theology, where any literate person used to reading super-Latinized English can follow a discussion, but feels lost when reading an intense screed arguing the difference between God's ousia versus prosopon because the relevant jargon is intentionally created to mystify what it refers to, and some of the most intense fights occur over the most vague of conceptions clashing with another vague set of conceptions. This isn't something I can force you to see, so if you disagree and think "feminist theory" or whatever demonstrates or even values clarity of thought, I don't really see the point of further discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ashlesha

after i said what i did, i ended up terrified about how it would be interpreted, because i was thinking of being a "hysterical cunt" as taking a sarcastic tone and getting up from the table or something, as it is so often understood. but it might be interpreted more, like, literally and in a legitimate way, by people who aren't just mad at me anyway lol

---

Were you joking when you said that, then? If so, I apologize for misunderstanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AWellArmedCat

-I'm a sort of androgynous guy who, while not trans and fine with my gender, tends to oscillate between more masculine and more feminine modes of expression depending on my mood and those around me, so I feel like I can sort of imagine why you would want to be the opposite gender

---

I'm interested by what you said here. Just to be clear, my understanding is that you're saying you act sometimes in ways that are seen as stereotypically feminine and sometimes in ways that are seen as stereotypically masculine. What does that have to do with wanting to be seen as a girl?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

Were you joking when you said that, then? If so, I apologize for misunderstanding.

---

so sweet of you to say that when i should think more before i type things to the universe, lol <3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

What does that have to do with wanting to be seen as a girl?

---

It doesn't really. I wasn't trying to say that I understand the experience of gender dysphoria, but rather that I personally don't feel a very strong sense of my gender nor any particular drive to act in ways that someone my gender may be expected to. All I meant by this was that if we imagine that there's a sliding gender dysphoria scale with "I very strongly identify with my assigned gender" on one end and "I very strongly identify with the opposite gender" on the other I feel somewhat in the middle or ambivalent. Because of that it's just as easy for me to imagine identifying strongly with one's assigned gender as it is for me to imagine identifying strongly with its opposite

Some people seem to be anxious around the existence of trans people, the idea of gender being a social construct, or the idea that they can be convinced to go through the wrong puberty. This gender anxiety is due to people wanting to have a firm gender identity or unconscious sex. This does not mean a feminine/masculine gender role. This means, how the person expects their body to be, what hormones would be dominant in their system, their unconscious sex. Most people have this, although it can be quite difficult to notice. The people may believe that trans people existing might threaten their own unconscious sex. "If a man can decide he's a woman, why shouldn't I decide I'm a man for social benefits?" a woman might ask. The thing is, unconscious sex is NOT a choice. Virtually every woman, if she found out that she had gone through a testosterone-based puberty would feel as if her body does not match what she expects it to be. Vice versa for men going though an estrogen-based puberty. This can lead to disgust, despair, anxiety, depression, or what is commonly referred to as gender dysphoria.

You may see people encouraging gender-role atypical people to transition and have a reaction akin to "The trans community is enforcing gender roles!" Unfortunately, it's human nature to assume that most people experience the world as you do. Some people assume that everyone who is feminine wants to be a woman, which is untrue. This can be seen in places such as r/egg_irl, which understandably, causes this gender anxiety that was talked about. Not only is this harmful to gender-role atypical cisgender people, it is also harmful to gender-role atypical transgender people. Trans women can be butch, and trans men can be effeminate.

Some people can not understand unconscious sex and assume that it's related to gender roles. This again, is due to the false assumption that most people experience the world as you do. Some people may legitimately be equally as comfortable in a male body as a female body. And that's okay!

tl;dr gender identity is an innate phenomenon separate from gender roles and physical sex. wanting to be a gender makes you that gender, even if you're not trans.

* I kind of relayed a lot of these ideas from the subconscious sex and intrinsic inclination chapters of Julia Serano's Whipping Girl. Because my memory is somewhat limited, the ideas expressed in the book may be more clear than how I was able to express them.