Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
silence_kit
Jul 14, 2011

by the sex ghost
Honestly, I think that the attempts made by posters in this thread to clearly demarcate the "valid" identities from the "invalid" identities are bogus and are just self-delusional attempts to give their own personal opinions about society a fake legitimacy. The decision of which identities are acceptable ones is totally arbitrary and depends on what social attitudes are with respect to the identities at the time. Maybe one day furries and people who believe that they have headmates will become socially acceptable too and thus will become "valid" identities.

silence_kit fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Jun 21, 2014

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Captain Oblivious
Oct 12, 2007

I'm not like other posters

silence_kit posted:

Honestly, I think that the attempts made by posters in this thread to clearly demarcate the "valid" identities from the "invalid" identities are bogus and are just self-delusional attempts to give their own personal opinions about society a fake legitimacy. The decision of which identities are acceptable ones is totally arbitrary and depends on what social attitudes are with respect to the identities at the time. Maybe one day furries and people who believe that they have headmates will become socially acceptable too and thus will become "valid" identities.

Except people have already spoken at length about matters of medical fact which differentiate, say, transgender from furries.

One of these things is medically plausible while the other is, in fact, literally impossible.

Dazzling Addar
Mar 27, 2010

He may have a funny face, but he's THE BEST KONG
The "why do we laugh at people who want to be wolves when Trans" argument is matched only in its banality by its inexplicable resilience. That said, by exploring it, we can also learn a bit about why all of these other identities have popped up. As others have mentioned, there is a rich history of many different cultures from many different periods of time dealing issues of gender as a malleable, changeable thing. It is not some recent phenomenon, though to the disinterested observer, it might seem like it. Now, I'm not a neuroscientist even if I do know some of the basics of brain chemicals, but I am a psychology major. Mental health care can be a very tricky proposition because it is, with our current level of understanding, impossible to create a "cure" to a condition like a physician might treat a wound with antiseptics and stitches. When we can't rely on self-evident instances of recovery, we have to go by self-report, trends, and precedent.

What that means is, in regards to trans issues, there is no magic bullet and we have to rely on our collective medical experience as well as what the patients themselves believe. In this case, our collective experience shows that transition is the best available treatment option. Of the hundreds of different ways physicians and psychiatrists have attempted to tackle this issue over the years, making the body the match the mind has proven to be both the most feasible and most effective. It is not a perfect treatment option, but in medicine especially, we cannot let perfect be the enemy of good.

As an aside: sexual reassignment surgery is not a procedure everyone chooses to undergo, and if and when they do, it is typically at the end of a long process of less physically traumatic transitional steps. The old horror story of the middle aged man facing a midlife crisis, spending all of his money on a hasty and ill considered transition, and then deeply regretting it almost immediately has become more and more removed from reality as time has passed and younger people have begun to pursue this process earlier and psychiatric oversight has improved. When it does happen, it speaks more of the dangers of a lifestyle of instant gratification than anything else.

So, now for the big question: what separates trans issues from people who want to be wolves, dragons, wolfdragons, and Benedict Cumberbatch? The big answer is actually kind of simple: the history just isn't there. While those who have felt like they would be better off as animals have doubtless existed for as long as human civilization has, they have never existed in as significant number and consistency as people on the trans spectrum. When these individuals do crop up, it is usually more appropriate to view their symptoms as a manifestation of a preexisting disorder. More importantly, People Who Want To Be Wolves has not emerged as a political group advocating for rights and recognition in any significant sense. If this were to happen, then I believe that a look into the medical and psychiatric history of similar symptoms would be in order. I am not intrinsically opposed to People Who Want To Be Wolves as long as that is what the best available treatment option is. Of course, given the logistical difficulties presented by Being A Wolf in comparison to a different gender, this does not strike me as particularly likely.

Now, as for the teeming throngs (?) of confused teenagers on tumblr claiming to be the headmate of Shigeru Miyamoto's transNorwegian talking cat. People derive a sense of connectedness and stability from belonging to a part of a group, especially if that group is unique and special. It is hardly surprising that lonely children, when given a space to essentially say and do whatever, would make seemingly outrageous claims to make themselves feel less small and inconsequential. Some of these labels might have merit, or at least have enough potential to not be dismissed out of hand. A person of one ethnicity identifying as another, for instance, feels like a possible phenomenon that might legitimately happen in certain areas of the world. Most likely not one a middle-class white kid from Minnesota would experience, of course. The majority of these tumblr cases are easily explained as attention-seeking behavior with little basis in reality. Those that aren't should be deferred to a mental healthcare provider.

The long and the short of it: an identity does not just spring from the aether fully formed. An identity without some semblance of history and cohesion is meaningless, and giving an identity meaning takes a lot more than moping around on the internet sharing imagined persecutions with your friends.

silence_kit
Jul 14, 2011

by the sex ghost

Captain Oblivious posted:

Except people have already spoken at length about matters of medical fact which differentiate, say, transgender from furries.

I suspect a lot of posters in this thread who are bringing up the claim that MTF transsexuals are born with female brains, love to categorically deny in other threads that there are biological differences in the brains of men and women. This kind of stuff is all about whatever is ideologically convenient.

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

silence_kit posted:

I suspect a lot of posters in this thread who are bringing up the claim that MTF transsexuals are born with female brains, love to categorically deny in other threads that there are biological differences in the brains of men and women. This kind of stuff is all about whatever is ideologically convenient.

It pleases me to imagine that my enemies have no integrity and are secretly gigantic hypocrites.

silence_kit
Jul 14, 2011

by the sex ghost

Dazzling Addar posted:

So, now for the big question: what separates trans issues from people who want to be wolves, dragons, wolfdragons, and Benedict Cumberbatch? The big answer is actually kind of simple: the history just isn't there. While those who have felt like they would be better off as animals have doubtless existed for as long as human civilization has, they have never existed in as significant number and consistency as people on the trans spectrum. When these individuals do crop up, it is usually more appropriate to view their symptoms as a manifestation of a preexisting disorder. More importantly, People Who Want To Be Wolves has not emerged as a political group advocating for rights and recognition in any significant sense. If this were to happen, then I believe that a look into the medical and psychiatric history of similar symptoms would be in order. I am not intrinsically opposed to People Who Want To Be Wolves as long as that is what the best available treatment option is. Of course, given the logistical difficulties presented by Being A Wolf in comparison to a different gender, this does not strike me as particularly likely.

This is just a longer way of saying what I said earlier. The distinction between the "valid" and "invalid" identities is that the "valid" ones are popular and socially acceptable, and the "invalid" ones are not.

silence_kit fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Jun 22, 2014

Dazzling Addar
Mar 27, 2010

He may have a funny face, but he's THE BEST KONG

silence_kit posted:

This is just a longer way of saying what I said earlier. The distinction between the "valid" and "invalid" identities is that the "valid" ones are more popular and more socially acceptable, and the "invalid" ones are not.

Well, of course? Human society has progressed in this way since its inception. This is not exactly some great revelation. As our knowledge grows and solidifies, our attitudes and policies change to reflect that.

Cocaine Bear
Nov 4, 2011

ACAB

It's almost as though identity is culturally constructed and, by its very nature, arbitrary. When we ascribe or reject labels and values to these identities we are, in fact, imbuing them with meaning, but at its most logical conclusion they are still arbitrary. We work around the male-female binary because it's easy for most to understand. That binary, as imperfect as any dichotomy, breaks down completely when we introduce identity to the equation and move past the (comparatively) simple biological realities.

Sexual identity, along with all identity, is socially constructed. There are certainly biological components to it, but you'd be pretty hard pressed to find any medical, physiological, or psychological professional to lend any weight to an argument that associates physiology with the desire to gently caress someone dressed up in a wolf suit. In many ways some of these sexual categories are simply cases of fetishisation*. We have terms for foot fetishes and S&M because sufficient numbers of people have (to varying degrees) similar emotional and sexual feelings that are ascribed to certain objects or behaviours. As far as I can tell there isn't much in the way of discrimination against these groups because they generally engage in it with each like-minded folks and it is their personal life (though as with pretty much anything, I'm sure some level of discrimination does exist or would if it were more out in the open). If some group came out against people with latex fetishes and began causing them harm or discriminating against them based on their sexual practices, I think it would be a problem worth addressing beyond the occasional fringe academic study.

I believe the best way to approach this is practically and from the point of harm reduction. To comparing what the gays went through historically and still do today with SJW battles over signs on a bathroom door that include pansexuals is a loving joke (and a pretty offensive one at that). When someone can prove that there is harm being done to a distinct segment of the population it will become a topic for academics, politicians, and society as a whole to study and consider. Until then we're wasting our time handing out endless labels and making people feel more welcome despite their (often self appointed) "otherness". I think people should have the right to identify however they want and do whatever they enjoy, provided it doesn't infringe upon or harm anyone else (and being offended doesn't count). Beyond that I think it's a pretty trumped up cause that seems like a passing fad that likely won't last very long (are we likely to see Bronies hanging around in significant groups in a generation? how about two? how about 500 years?).

Finally, as many have pointed out there simply isn't enough history to warrant the vast majority of these groups being even mentioned in passing when reviewing the what legitimately oppressed groups have experienced. To return to really dumb example, gay people will be around in 500 years; most (if not the vast majority) of these groups, IMO, will absolutely not.

tl;dr - Unless it becomes a problem for a statistically significant portion of society these groups and individuals can probably be safely ignored. Otherkin have not and likely will never face a modicum of the challenges the LGBTQ community face daily and have endured for as long as society has been around. Do what you want with consenting, like-minded adults and leave each other alone.


*I'd rather avoid getting into a long discussion of fetishisation and the literature behind it, but I think for simplicity sake the comparison isn't stretched too thinly here.

Hodgepodge
Jan 29, 2006
Probation
Can't post for 273 days!

SALT CURES HAM posted:

The stuff I'm talking about is when people say things like "learning a new language is cultural appropriation" or "watching movies made by non-white people is cultural appropriation" or "eating at a Chinese restaurant is cultural appropriation." There's sane examples of it, and they're not what I'm talking about.

So, they basically don't know anything about the concept but its name?

Eh, those of us who've actually been to grad school should team up with actual trans people to publicly laugh at the posers. They're already a laughingstock though, so I'm not sure what else can be done.

silence_kit posted:

This is just a longer way of saying what I said earlier. The distinction between the "valid" and "invalid" identities is that the "valid" ones are popular and socially acceptable, and the "invalid" ones are not.

You think trans people have "popular and socially acceptable" identities? You need a reality check there, buddy.

Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Jun 22, 2014

Mukip
Jan 27, 2011

by Reene

Sharkie posted:

Cool let's look at what their findings were:


So trans people have a higher risk of suicide than people who aren't trans. This we know because, surprise, living in a society that is very discriminatory against you isn't healthy. The report doesn't link it causally to srs as you seem to be implying. Read that conclusion once again: they're not advocating "stop doing srs," they're advocating "perform srs and follow-up care." I'm also interested to hear if you have some alternative therapy that no one has heard of.

The report itself doesn't advocate for or against SRS specifically; it simply says that there's no evidence that having an op solves any of their problems. The report does say that special attention should be given to post-op transsexuals, but presumably that's because their suicide rate is so high, not because the report is coming out in favour of the operations.

I was willing to entertain the idea for a while, but all the arguements in favour of gender reassignment surgery appear to be emotional appeals.

Here's another interesting article from a doctor who stopped doing these types of operations:
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2004/11/surgical-sex

quote:

Dr Paul Mc.Hugh
I think the issue of sex-change for males is no longer one in which much can be said for the other side. But I have learned from the experience that the toughest challenge is trying to gain agreement to seek empirical evidence for opinions about sex and sexual behavior, even when the opinions seem on their face unreasonable. One might expect that those who claim that sexual identity has no biological or physical basis would bring forth more evidence to persuade others. But as I’ve learned, there is a deep prejudice in favor of the idea that nature is totally malleable.

Without any fixed position on what is given in human nature, any manipulation of it can be defended as legitimate. A practice that appears to give people what they want—and what some of them are prepared to clamor for—turns out to be difficult to combat with ordinary professional experience and wisdom. Even controlled trials or careful follow-up studies to ensure that the practice itself is not damaging are often resisted and the results rejected.

Mukip fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Jun 22, 2014

SALT CURES HAM
Jan 4, 2011

Hodgepodge posted:

So, they basically don't know anything about the concept but its name?

No, they're using the concept as a way to push lefties towards radical right-wing ideas. I imagine they understand it just fine and are just being malicious.

e: also jesus gently caress, how about let people decide for themselves whether SRS is right for them instead of giving it a blanket yes or no? It helps some people and doesn't help others.

Hodgepodge
Jan 29, 2006
Probation
Can't post for 273 days!

SALT CURES HAM posted:

No, they're using the concept as a way to push lefties towards radical right-wing ideas. I imagine they understand it just fine and are just being malicious.

Eh, if anything, it reminds me of right-wing Christians trying to apply the Laws of Thermodynamics to evolution.

Mukip
Jan 27, 2011

by Reene

SALT CURES HAM posted:

e: also jesus gently caress, how about let people decide for themselves whether SRS is right for them instead of giving it a blanket yes or no? It helps some people and doesn't help others.

Well, it receives public funding for a start. So if there's no evidence that SRS actually accomplishes anything then it should probably be de-funded at least.

moebius2778
May 3, 2013

Mukip posted:

The report itself doesn't advocate for or against SRS specifically; it simply says that there's no evidence that having an op solves any of their problems. The report does say that special attention should be given to post-op transsexuals, but presumably that's because their suicide rate is so high, not because the report is coming out in favour of the operations.

Actually, the study says "This study design sheds new light on transsexual persons' health after sex reassignment. It does not, however, address whether sex reassignment is an effective treatment or not." Which is to say, the study doesn't find any evidence about the efficacy of SRS, because that's not what the study was trying to determine. So they didn't actually collect any evidence about the efficacy of SRS.

Which is completely obvious once you look at the control population.

Mukip
Jan 27, 2011

by Reene
You're right, my description there is pretty bad.

Gazpacho
Jun 18, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
Slippery Tilde

Mukip posted:

all the arguements in favour of gender reassignment surgery appear to be emotional appeals.
This isn't a thread about reassignment surgery and you didn't read what I gave you to read.

A big flaming stink
Apr 26, 2010

Hodgepodge posted:

When I've dealt with "cultural appropriation," it has tended to be along the lines of white people stealing artwork from native people, then telling them that a bunch of white dudes know more about their culture than they do.

did you miss the tempest in the teacup about miley cyrus twerking?

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

silence_kit posted:

Honestly, I think that the attempts made by posters in this thread to clearly demarcate the "valid" identities from the "invalid" identities are bogus and are just self-delusional attempts to give their own personal opinions about society a fake legitimacy. The decision of which identities are acceptable ones is totally arbitrary and depends on what social attitudes are with respect to the identities at the time. Maybe one day furries and people who believe that they have headmates will become socially acceptable too and thus will become "valid" identities.

Oh bullshit. We've got medical studies that show differences in brain structure for transgenders or a case of actual multiple personalities or schizophrenia. That's how we know those are valid. That you are mentally a species that we split from millions if not billions of years ago and have no anatomical connection to, or that you are possessed by the "soul" of a fictional character, while not presenting with any defined psychological or neurological phenomena marks it as pretty clear that those are not valid.

silence_kit posted:

This is just a longer way of saying what I said earlier. The distinction between the "valid" and "invalid" identities is that the "valid" ones are popular and socially acceptable, and the "invalid" ones are not.

No, the difference is we can do an MRI for one set and see "yep, matches known cases" and the other set aren't grounded in reality. What would eventually become us split off from what would eventually become a squid back in the Cambrian era. Half a billion years later, the neurological structure is completely different and the theory of mind is different, so yes, we can say with perfect knowledge that you are not actually a squid, and to identify as one is not valid. You might be a candidate for being diagnosed with any other of a number of neurological conditions, but those don't validate your self diagnosis that we have proven is false.

Mukip
Jan 27, 2011

by Reene

Gazpacho posted:

This isn't a thread about reassignment surgery and you didn't read what I gave you to read.

I did miss your post the first time around, sorry. I'll make a new thread if I want to continue with this.

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless
What if there was a person claiming to be transgendered, and yet when you looked at their brain via MRI they ended up having a typical brain for their assigned-at-birth gender? So a guy saying he's a trans woman, but when you look at their brain it looks very much like an average male brain. Are they faking it, or what?

Is it necessary for transgenderism to be "backed up" by neuroscience for it to be valid?

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

Blue Star posted:

What if there was a person claiming to be transgendered, and yet when you looked at their brain via MRI they ended up having a typical brain for their assigned-at-birth gender? So a guy saying he's a trans woman, but when you look at their brain it looks very much like an average male brain. Are they faking it, or what?

Is it necessary for transgenderism to be "backed up" by neuroscience for it to be valid?

It helps if it's backed up by things like the willing embrace of painful, humiliating medical intervention and acceptance of being made into a near-total pariah for life who must take medication forever.

Once furries start shelling out thousands to willingly transform their bodies to escape lifelong depression and anxiety, we can talk.

Posting on the internet sets a really low bar as far as commitment goes.

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

Blue Star posted:

What if there was a person claiming to be transgendered, and yet when you looked at their brain via MRI they ended up having a typical brain for their assigned-at-birth gender? So a guy saying he's a trans woman, but when you look at their brain it looks very much like an average male brain. Are they faking it, or what?
Someone tried a similar attempt at being clever a few pages back, I'll repeat the response to it again: And if my aunt had a penis she'd be my uncle.

If things were totally different obviously things would be totally different. But we have science backing it up, and posters have been posting links to studies backing it for pages, so it isn't.

quote:

Is it necessary for transgenderism to be "backed up" by neuroscience for it to be valid?
Neuroscience isn't the only relevant field, but yes, that is how science works. You make a claim, test it, compile the results, and either incorporate the claim into the existing understanding or the world or discard it as invalid. Transgenderism has been studied across multiple fields for decades with the results verified and incorporated into our understanding, which is how we know it is valid. Thinking you are actually a squid has not been substantiated and directly contradicts theories studied across multiple fields for decades with the results verified, that's how we know that claiming you are actually a squid is not valid. It is possible you present as something else and your personal belief you are a squid is an aspect of what is really going on, but it does not mean that you are really a squid in a human's body.

goatse.cx
Nov 21, 2013

Fried Chicken posted:

Oh bullshit. We've got medical studies that show differences in brain structure for transgenders or a case of actual multiple personalities or schizophrenia. That's how we know those are valid. That you are mentally a species that we split from millions if not billions of years ago and have no anatomical connection to, or that you are possessed by the "soul" of a fictional character, while not presenting with any defined psychological or neurological phenomena marks it as pretty clear that those are not valid.



I thought the nature of MPD is controversial at best. When has it been proven to be a real thing?

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless

Fried Chicken posted:

Someone tried a similar attempt at being clever a few pages back, I'll repeat the response to it again: And if my aunt had a penis she'd be my uncle.

If things were totally different obviously things would be totally different. But we have science backing it up, and posters have been posting links to studies backing it for pages, so it isn't.

My argument was in FAVOR of transgenderism, not against. It's like homosexuality: people are arguing back and forth over whether it's innate/in-born or if it's a conscious choice, but the reality is that it doesn't matter. Could the same be true of transgenderism? Just like we don't need to test a gay or bi person to see if they're really genetically gay or if they just up and arbitrarily decided to be gay/bi one day, maybe all this talk of neuroscience is pointless. There are people who obviously feel strongly enough about their gender that they decide to undergo invasive and dangerous and irreversible surgery, as well as open themselves up to ridicule, harassment, mockery, and even violence. And yet more people are "coming out". That should be evidence enough that transgenderism is valid.

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

Blue Star posted:

My argument was in FAVOR of transgenderism, not against. It's like homosexuality: people are arguing back and forth over whether it's innate/in-born or if it's a conscious choice, but the reality is that it doesn't matter. Could the same be true of transgenderism? Just like we don't need to test a gay or bi person to see if they're really genetically gay or if they just up and arbitrarily decided to be gay/bi one day, maybe all this talk of neuroscience is pointless. There are people who obviously feel strongly enough about their gender that they decide to undergo invasive and dangerous and irreversible surgery, as well as open themselves up to ridicule, harassment, mockery, and even violence. And yet more people are "coming out". That should be evidence enough that transgenderism is valid.

Personal conviction is not proof that something is real. Plenty of people believe complete bullshit. Whether you intend it that way or not, the fact that you are trying to spin it as such is pretty derogatory towards people who do have actual validated conditions by putting the people who just believe in something really hard on the same level as those who have been medically diagnosed and have to deal with that reality every day.

Fried Chicken fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Jun 22, 2014

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless

Fried Chicken posted:

Personal conviction is not proof that something is real. Plenty of people believe complete bullshit. Whether you intend it that way or not, the fact that you are trying to spin it as such is pretty derogatory towards people who do have actual validated conditions by putting the people who just believe in something really hard on the same level as those who have been medically diagnosed and have to deal with that reality every day.

So a trans person isn't real unless they've been medically diagnosed? Can people self-diagnose themselves as trans?

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

Blue Star posted:

So a trans person isn't real unless they've been medically diagnosed? Can people self-diagnose themselves as trans?
I realize you think you are being clever, but you really aren't.

Cocaine Bear
Nov 4, 2011

ACAB

Blue Star posted:

So a trans person isn't real unless they've been medically diagnosed? Can people self-diagnose themselves as trans?

Can we gas this already?

Dazzling Addar
Mar 27, 2010

He may have a funny face, but he's THE BEST KONG

goatse.cx posted:

I thought the nature of MPD is controversial at best. When has it been proven to be a real thing?

Dissociative Identity Disorder, as it is now called, has always been a very... controversial diagnosis. There have been a few cases of some notoriety that exhibit the symptoms, but it is impossible to tell conclusively from such a small sample size. Regrettably, there's no pathogen to observe or physical trauma to the body, so the best we have to go off of are patient's self-report. DID is one of the rarest diagnoses in the field, even after expanding it to include a somewhat broader spectrum of behavior. More cases have been reported in recent years than the past, but that is true for an awful lot of mental illnesses- information (good or bad) is more readily available, meaning more visits to the local psych's office. So, in answer to your question, there have been documented cases of DID but the authenticity of the symptoms are truly known only to the patient (or patients, as the case may be).


Blue Star posted:

So a trans person isn't real unless they've been medically diagnosed? Can people self-diagnose themselves as trans?

Self-diagnosis is somewhat intrinsic to the entire experience. Horrible, unethical people have made people's life decisions for them before, to disastrous effect. If after discussion and exploration of the subject the patient does not exhibit a strong desire or volition to transition, then it is off the table, period. Now, with that said: while self-diagnosis is virtually a necessity, it is still important to seek professional help for both your medical and mental needs. It is honestly quite uncommon for an individual to be "mistaken" about their choice, the real issue is that the transition process begs supervision. It is lengthy and it affects the body in profound ways, even if those ways are the desired effect of the treatment. Unfortunately, many people do not have a great deal of choice in the matter and don't have access to this kind of care. Someone's "authenticity" as a person on the trans spectrum is, however, not for doctors to decide. Also good luck getting your insurance to accept that manner of diagnosis.

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless

Fried Chicken posted:

I realize you think you are being clever, but you really aren't.

Is it possible that someone can think that they're trans, but actually aren't? What if someone believes themselves to be trans, gets their brain looked at, and is told "Hmmmm. Your brain looks typical for your sex and birth gender." Does that mean that they cannot get HRT and/or SRS?

You think I'm trolling but I'm being dead loving serious. Does everyone need to be diagnosed with transgenderism before being able to transition?

Dazzling Addar posted:

Self-diagnosis is somewhat intrinsic to the entire experience. Horrible, unethical people have made people's life decisions for them before, to disastrous effect. If after discussion and exploration of the subject the patient does not exhibit a strong desire or volition to transition, then it is off the table, period. Now, with that said: while self-diagnosis is virtually a necessity, it is still important to seek professional help for both your medical and mental needs. It is honestly quite uncommon for an individual to be "mistaken" about their choice, the real issue is that the transition process begs supervision. It is lengthy and it affects the body in profound ways, even if those ways are the desired effect of the treatment. Unfortunately, many people do not have a great deal of choice in the matter and don't have access to this kind of care. Someone's "authenticity" as a person on the trans spectrum is, however, not for doctors to decide. Also good luck getting your insurance to accept that manner of diagnosis.

I understand the need to seek professional medical help. The question I'm asking is, what if you feel very strongly that you might be trans, so you go see the doctor, and then are told "Nope, doesn't look like it. Your brain looks like a cisgendered (wo)man's." Is that the end of it, then?

As for your final point, the ideal would be for UHC which covered everything, but that's for a different thread.

Blue Star fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Jun 22, 2014

boner confessor
Apr 25, 2013

by R. Guyovich
What if there was a person claiming to have a brain tumor, and yet when you looked at their brain via MRI they ended up having a typical brain for their assigned-at-birth health state? So a guy saying he's a tumor haver, but when you look at their brain it looks very much like an average healthy brain. Are they faking it, or what?

Is it necessary for brain tumors to be "backed up" by neuroscience for it to be valid?

goatse.cx posted:

I thought the nature of MPD is controversial at best. When has it been proven to be a real thing?

MPD itself is a spurious idea but it can be either pop-psychology attention seeking or a very real symptom of a very serious brain problem. It doesn't really exist as a functional disorder and tends to crop up among shysters but then again there is a common set of MPD attributes and behaviors that is recognized among people with other mental disorders to add some weight to the idea. For example, MPD can be a sign of epilepsy, schizophrenia, borderline, bipolar, or other as of yet unidentified hallucinatory problems.

boner confessor fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Jun 22, 2014

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless

Popular Thug Drink posted:

What if there was a person claiming to have a brain tumor, and yet when you looked at their brain via MRI they ended up having a typical brain for their assigned-at-birth health state? So a guy saying he's a tumor haver, but when you look at their brain it looks very much like an average healthy brain. Are they faking it, or what?

Is it necessary for brain tumors to be "backed up" by neuroscience for it to be valid?

...What the hell does this even mean? Are you saying that, yes, trans people with brains typical of cisgendered people of the same sex really are either faking it or delusional?

Hodgepodge
Jan 29, 2006
Probation
Can't post for 273 days!

Blue Star posted:

Is it possible that someone can think that they're trans, but actually aren't? What if someone believes themselves to be trans, gets their brain looked at, and is told "Hmmmm. Your brain looks typical for your sex and birth gender." Does that mean that they cannot get HRT and/or SRS?

You think I'm trolling but I'm being dead loving serious. Does everyone need to be diagnosed with transgenderism before being able to transition?

The context for mentioning MRI results was establishing a scientific basis for gender dysphoria. There are similar results that tend to show up for ADD and other disorders. Why would we demand a more restrictive standard in this case? And why would we repeat an experiment every time we use the results?

Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jun 22, 2014

boner confessor
Apr 25, 2013

by R. Guyovich

Blue Star posted:

...What the hell does this even mean? Are you saying that, yes, trans people with brains typical of cisgendered people of the same sex really are either faking it or delusional?

I'm replacing the words in your post in order to make fun of you for making awkward, unfunny posts. Sorry for explaining the joke but I was hoping you would get it. Sorry.

Just in case further elaboration is warranted, there may be some other cause at play for someone who really believes they have an undetectable brain tumor that is worthy of medical attention, and as our knowledge of neurological gender basis grows there could very well be some underlying unwellness at work. There's still no reason to ask what proportion of trans individuals actually are faking it, as that's kind of unwarranted and mean spirited.

The post I made fun of is basically saying "But what if they ARE faking it, what then?" which is a hypothetical that isn't really worth discussion except to educate and then make fun of you.

boner confessor fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jun 22, 2014

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

Fried Chicken posted:

No, the difference is we can do an MRI for one set and see "yep, matches known cases" and the other set aren't grounded in reality. What would eventually become us split off from what would eventually become a squid back in the Cambrian era. Half a billion years later, the neurological structure is completely different and the theory of mind is different, so yes, we can say with perfect knowledge that you are not actually a squid, and to identify as one is not valid. You might be a candidate for being diagnosed with any other of a number of neurological conditions, but those don't validate your self diagnosis that we have proven is false.

How can you say this when we have actual case studies of people with the condition you so casually dismiss?

Silver Nitrate
Oct 17, 2005

WHAT

Popular Thug Drink posted:

MPD itself is a spurious idea but it can be either pop-psychology attention seeking or a very real symptom of a very serious brain problem. It doesn't really exist as a functional disorder and tends to crop up among shysters but then again there is a common set of MPD attributes and behaviors that is recognized among people with other mental disorders to add some weight to the idea. For example, MPD can be a sign of epilepsy, schizophrenia, borderline, bipolar, or other as of yet unidentified hallucinatory problems.

You're forgetting the most important one, which is PTSD. DID is related to extremely serious abuse, usually as a child. It's a coping mechanism that starts off being helpful, i.e. dissociating when really bad things are happening makes it easier to deal with everything else. It unfortunately turns out to be really bad when it continues to happen after the abuse stops.

Dazzling Addar
Mar 27, 2010

He may have a funny face, but he's THE BEST KONG

Blue Star posted:

Is it possible that someone can think that they're trans, but actually aren't? What if someone believes themselves to be trans, gets their brain looked at, and is told "Hmmmm. Your brain looks typical for your sex and birth gender." Does that mean that they cannot get HRT and/or SRS?

You think I'm trolling but I'm being dead loving serious. Does everyone need to be diagnosed with transgenderism before being able to transition?


I understand the need to seek professional medical help. The question I'm asking is, what if you feel very strongly that you might be trans, so you go see the doctor, and then are told "Nope, doesn't look like it. Your brain looks like a cisgendered (wo)man's." Is that the end of it, then?

As for your final point, the ideal would be for UHC which covered everything, but that's for a different thread.

Well, you bring up an interesting hypothetical. For what it's worth, I don't believe that transition should -require- a diagnosis, because there are always edge cases and people who don't have the insurance to see the necessary care providers but enough cash on hand to buy medicine that is really very cheap. I would never recommend an unsupervised transition, but the reality is that sometimes that's what has to happen and restricting that option accomplishes little. Further, I do not think that a specific MRI result is necessary for a diagnosis. People are very fond of trotting out that study, and for good reason, but it is far too complex of a phenomenon to be decided entirely by one structure in the brain. What if the opposite happened? It would ludicrous if, upon getting an MRI with that result, a cis person was forced to transition. As our understanding of gender identity and the biological processes behind it improve, we might be able to get to a point where there is a definitive test for, but that is a long way off.

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

Blue Star posted:

Is it possible that someone can think that they're trans, but actually aren't? What if someone believes themselves to be trans, gets their brain looked at, and is told "Hmmmm. Your brain looks typical for your sex and birth gender." Does that mean that they cannot get HRT and/or SRS?

You think I'm trolling but I'm being dead loving serious. Does everyone need to be diagnosed with transgenderism before being able to transition?

No, you are loving trolling. But in the event anyone else is getting taken in by your crap, yes, you do need to be diagnosed to transition. No medical diagnosis means no access to medical treatment, which is no different from every other medical treatment that exists. You don't get hormones next to the Tylenol at Walgreens, you don't get over gender identity disorder by deciding not to be sad, and you don't do SRS like trimming your fingernail. Hormones and other medications are prescribed by a doctor and their effects monitored with dosage and frequency varied to best treat the patient. Proper counseling to meet the standards of care is handled by a psychiatrist who assists with the depression, anxiety, and other aspects of transitioning through gender identity. SRS is a fairly invasive surgical procedure and comes only after counseling and pretreatment to allow it to go smoothly.

It's a medical condition with a intense and uncomfortable medical response to achieve the best quality of life for the individual, and your "well I can just think I have it and then decide to live my life that way" line is absolutely disgusting.

Blue Star posted:

...What the hell does this even mean? Are you saying that, yes, trans people with brains typical of cisgendered people of the same sex really are either faking it or delusional?

He's pointing out you are concern trolling to bash trans people, that's what it means.

Blue Star
Feb 18, 2013

by FactsAreUseless

Popular Thug Drink posted:

I'm replacing the words in your post in order to make fun of you for making awkward, unfunny posts. Sorry for explaining the joke but I was hoping you would get it. Sorry.

Do you people seriously think I'm trolling? Holy poo poo.

The reason I'm asking these questions is because I think evoking neuroscience opens up a slippery slope. Now you're saying that transgenderism is caused by having a brain more similar to that of the opposite sex. So is that a prerequisite? You can't be transgendered unless the MRI says you are?

It's not at ALL like saying you have a tumor. A tumor can be verified, yay or nay. You either have a tumor or you don't. But if you say you identify more as a man and you're female, how similar to cis men's brains does your brain need to be? Same goes for if you're male but identify as a woman.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ZorajitZorajit
Sep 15, 2013

No static at all...
Closing this thread. This is no longer developing the conversation about fringe social justice movements that I was seeking a dialogue on. Take the psychobabble somewhere else.

  • Locked thread