Being transgender is hard

[Lithrael]

This comes across as an attitude of, "Too damn bad. Everybody's got problems. You just have to tough it out and deal with it."

This is also an attitude not uncommon towards people with severe, clinical depression or debilitating anxiety attacks. Common, that is, to people who haven't suffered those problems. They too cannot believe that the person who is suffering has a very real illness, an organic, medical condition quite distinct from the daily travails of life, and insist on comparing the disease to their own experience.

I don't see how that attitude implies they don't think it's a real condition. I think what he's saying is it's a real condition with no solution. Maybe it would come across better if he was comparing it to something like... someone born without legs. They know they ought to have legs. It's totally natural to want to have legs and to experience anguish about it. They can get prosthetic legs and maybe that will make them happier. But there are people out there born with useless legs that have come to terms with that and are happy. Others who never do.

 

[truethat]

I, for one, welcome the days when every issue about internal and psychiatric medicine can be settled by a Youtube video from the Tyra show.

Hardy har har.........the reason I put up the Tyra show is to show the experiences of little children in an easy to understand format since most people who are against the idea of letting small children transition have not even spent a second doing research on the issue. They just think "it's wrong"

 

[Stereolab]

Even a small amount of research on the topic will show you that it is REAL and there's nothing to ACCEPT. Should we also have a discussion on whether or not alzheimers is REAL and ACCEPTABLE because there is no way to really prove people aren't just faking it?

I think one of the hangups here is that it's being called insulting to describe it as a mental condition.

No one would argue Alzheimer's isn't a mental condition.
I doubt many depressed people would argue that depression isn't a mental condition.
There are many people in the world who believe they are wolves or can turn into wolves, and I'm not sure how many people would argue that that isn't a mental condition.
The DSM-IV states that gender identity disorder is a mental condition.

Now, maybe it is and maybe it isn't, but I don't think speculating that it's a mental condition deserves accusations of hate and ignorance and potential violence.

 

[epepke]

Hardy har har.........the reason I put up the Tyra show is to show the experiences of little children in an easy to understand format since most people who are against the idea of letting small children transition have not even spent a second doing research on the issue. They just think "it's wrong"

Well, that isn't what I've said. I have quite a great deal of sympathy for children't experiences, which are often really tough. It does not automatically make a particular protocol appealing.

I've asked for references on the accuracy of diagnoses, to the point where medication of pre-pubescents is obviously warranted. For more information, see my (so far ignored) previous post. I haven't seen any. Instead, I've seen the following:

1) You're a bigot.
2) You're ignorant.
3) You're intolerant.
4) There are thousands of studies, easily found by a casual Google search.

Pretty much everything except

5) OMG, won't someone think of the CHILDREN! (Which, to be fair, has been implied)
6) An answer of some sort.

 

[truethat]

I think one of the hangups here is that it's being called insulting to describe it as a mental condition.

No one would argue Alzheimer's isn't a mental condition.
I doubt many depressed people would argue that depression isn't a mental condition.
There are many people in the world who believe they are wolves or can turn into wolves, and I'm not sure how many people would argue that that isn't a mental condition.
The DSM-IV states that gender identity disorder is a mental condition.

Now, maybe it is and maybe it isn't, but I don't think speculating that it's a mental condition deserves accusations of hate and ignorance and potential violence.

It's diagnosed as a mental condition which is not the same thing as a mental disorder. Of course it's a mental condition, mental state of mind. But we don't really understand gender and the way the brain works so to call it a mental DISORDER makes it sound like there is something wrong with the person perceiving themselves as the opposite gender. And there is nothing wrong with this. It's who they are.


Do you have a "mental disorder" because you identify yourself as the gender your body reflects? Being who you are is not a mental disorder.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

No experience in the world can change physical facts.

It can change your understanding of those facts. It can even add to your store of them.

My experience with and understanding of the things which TG individuals have to deal with and the mechanisms which enable them to cope is different from yours. Do you think this is because your knowledge of the "physical facts" is superior?

Other people, even within the confines of this thread alone, also seem to find differ with your beliefs. Do you think this is because your knowledge of the "physical facts" is superior?

Human cultures throughout history have dealt with gender identification issues, some with more tolerance than others. What has changed are the technological and medical advances which aid our understanding of the phenomenon, and our ability to accommodate it.

 

[Stereolab]

It's diagnosed as a mental condition which is not the same thing as a mental disorder. Of course it's a mental condition, mental state of mind. But we don't really understand gender and the way the brain works so to call it a mental DISORDER makes it sound like there is something wrong with the person perceiving themselves as the opposite gender. And there is nothing wrong with this. It's who they are.


Do you have a "mental disorder" because you identify yourself as the gender your body reflects? Being who you are is not a mental disorder.

By your logic, no one has a mental disorder, even if they enjoy torturing animals, are too autistic to ever learn to speak, or believe they are a wolf. That's just who they are.

If someone has brain/body issues to the point where they're considering suicide and/or self-mutilation, I can't sit here and agree "there's nothing wrong with this." And I am absolutely sure that mistreatment by others is a part of the problem, but I hardly think it's the whole thing.

 

[Stereolab]

It's diagnosed as a mental condition which is not the same thing as a mental disorder.

And, for the record, it's diagnosed as a disorder per the DSM-IV. I was using kinder language.

 

[SumDood]

I don't see how that attitude implies they don't think it's a real condition. I think what he's saying is it's a real condition with no solution. Maybe it would come across better if he was comparing it to something like... someone born without legs. They know they ought to have legs. It's totally natural to want to have legs and to experience anguish about it. They can get prosthetic legs and maybe that will make them happier. But there are people out there born with useless legs that have come to terms with that and are happy. Others who never do.

The opposite also exist. There are people who want to amputate perfectly healthy limbs.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/12/a-new-way-to-be-mad/4671/

Psychotherapy "doesn't make a scrap of difference in these people," the psychiatrist Russell Reid, of Hillingdon Hospital, in London, said in a BBC documentary on the subject, called Complete Obsession, that was broadcast in Britain last winter. "You can talk till the cows come home; it doesn't make any difference. They're still going to want their amputation, and I know that for a fact." Both Smith and Reid pointed out that these people may do themselves unintended harm or even kill themselves trying to amputate their own limbs. As the retired psychiatrist Richard Fox observed in the BBC program, "Let's face it, this is a potentially fatal condition."

 

[truethat]

Well, that isn't what I've said. I have quite a great deal of sympathy for children't experiences, which are often really tough. It does not automatically make a particular protocol appealing.

I've asked for references on the accuracy of diagnoses, to the point where medication of pre-pubescents is obviously warranted. For more information, see my (so far ignored) previous post. I haven't seen any. Instead, I've seen the following:

1) You're a bigot.
2) You're ignorant.
3) You're intolerant.
4) There are thousands of studies, easily found by a casual Google search.

Pretty much everything except

5) OMG, won't someone think of the CHILDREN! (Which, to be fair, has been implied)
6) An answer of some sort.

Why is it of any of your concern what protocol is used? Are you someone out there trying to save the gays as well?

If you knew what the protocol was you wouldn't be having this conversation. Basically for a very young child the "transition" is to allow the child to dress as the opposite gender and identify as the opposite gender. My god, what a horrible thing. And this is not done without a diagnosis.


The reason you are being called a bigot is that you are worried about a protocol you haven't even bothered to research. You sound like someone who is asking for PROOF that evolution is true, in one post on a message board and then debating ad nauseum the accuracy of the claims being made. If you don't understand something educate yourself. Or did you forget the title of the forum.

 

[L.Y.S.]

What situation? What the heck are you talking about. What "better half of society." This is not a social issue, it's a personal issue and the only reason it's being made a social issue is because of bigotry. Society needs to accept it and frankly it is beginning to accept it by trusting the source and recognizing the large number of people who are becoming more and more open about their gender issues.

The questions do not "need to be answered" the only ones who don't understand what we are talking about here are people who haven't even bothered to do any research and just don't accept it because it seems weird to them.

Even a small amount of research on the topic will show you that it is REAL and there's nothing to ACCEPT. Should we also have a discussion on whether or not alzheimers is REAL and ACCEPTABLE because there is no way to really prove people aren't just faking it?

If you see a world wide condition that is bolstered by science and research and you also see the end result of people much much happier then it's a done situation.

Only a personal conviction would cause someone to reject it. Give me a break.

Sorry it needs to be studied. Nothing you can say can alter that opinion. Frankly there is much left to be desired from several of these studies, including the one mentioning brain patterns. It is a societal issue, and society will in the end have to be the ones who make the laws pertaining to this situation. It may seem like bigotry to you, but there is much work to be done in this area, like it or not society plays a crucial role in deciding whether or not this situation goes further. Making bad comparisons to Alzheimer’s isn't going to change this. Furthermore, they are trying to "cure" Alzheimer’s. You made a horrendous argument on your part. Are you inferring that we “cure” this issue as well? Oh I’m sure this will elicit an uproar indeed.

Many of the studies have left questions that are still to be answered and there is much room for improvement. And until those questions are answered I personally cannot make an informed decision on this topic. It's as simple as that. There are so many questions I have about the topic, even from the aforementioned studies posted. The results are indeed questionable. And to be frank I would like there to be deeper investigation into the brain signatures of dysmorphia patients before the conclusion is dismissed by the other side of the fence.

 

[truethat]

And, for the record, it's diagnosed as a disorder per the DSM-IV. I was using kinder language.

You are playing with a double edged sword here.


The reason that it's in the DSM is that it has been proven to be a real disorder but the disorder doesn't mean that the person is crazy. Autism is a mental disorder, it doesn't mean the person is crazy. It's in the DSM because it is a real condition.

If it is a real condition then it will be recognized as something that can be treated. Just because you guys think it is freakish or mutilation to change the body doesn't mean it is.

It isn't. It's not any more a mutilation than it is to have a breast reduction. Women have those all the time, and they get implants put in too, is that freakish mutilation?


I love how you compare being a transgender to someone who wants to murder animals and then wonder why your comments are considered idiotic and bigoted.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

I came across a paper the other day which looked at what factors predicted whether a transgender person would regret a sex change or not. IIRC family and social network support were the biggest predictors of whether the change would be successful. I'll see if I can find it later.

 

[truethat]

Sorry it needs to be studied. Nothing you can say can alter that opinion. Frankly there is much left to be desired from several of these studies, including the one mentioning brain patterns. It is a societal issue, and society will in the end have to be the ones who make the laws pertaining to this situation. It may seem like bigotry to you, but there is much work to be done in this area, like it or not society plays a crucial role in deciding whether or not this situation goes further. Making bad comparisons to Alzheimer’s isn't going to change this. Furthermore, they are trying to "cure" Alzheimer’s. You made a horrendous argument on your part. Are you inferring that we “cure” this issue as well? Oh I’m sure this will elicit an uproar indeed.

Many of the studies have left questions that are still to be answered and there is much room for improvement. And until those questions are answered I personally cannot make an informed decision on this topic. It's as simple as that. There are so many questions I have about the topic, even from the aforementioned studies posted. The results are indeed questionable. And to be frank I would like there to be deeper investigation into the brain signatures of dysmorphia patients before the conclusion is dismissed by the other side of the fence.

I did not make a horrendous argument. Also your comments that IT needs to be studied, shows you don't realize it has been studied for YEARS just because you aren't interested in looking at the research that has been done doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Frankly your "questions" that you have on the topic, the "so many" show that you haven't DONE any research so you are dismissing the statements that others who HAVE done research are telling you.

The information is out there. Gender and sexuality and complicated issues that have tons of research done on them. Trying to compare this to dysmorphia is ridiculous. You have no idea what you are talking about.


LOL

 

[L.Y.S.]

Why is it of any of your concern what protocol is used? Are you someone out there trying to save the gays as well?

If you knew what the protocol was you wouldn't be having this conversation. Basically for a very young child the "transition" is to allow the child to dress as the opposite gender and identify as the opposite gender. My god, what a horrible thing. And this is not done without a diagnosis.


The reason you are being called a bigot is that you are worried about a protocol you haven't even bothered to research. You sound like someone who is asking for PROOF that evolution is true, in one post on a message board and then debating ad nauseum the accuracy of the claims being made. If you don't understand something educate yourself. Or did you forget the title of the forum.

Unfortunately for the transgendered community there are mounds of scientific research and evidence that supports homosexuality and even animals playing the roles of the other sex. Nearly all mammals experience the desire for homosexual relations and most of the more socially complex mammals have stratified ranking systems where members of the other sex play a different role depending on their sexual rank. However, there is almost no understanding of the nature of trangenderism in nature. As far as I know, a male chimp hasn't tried to rip off his male member because he felt it wasn't supposed to be there. And a female chimp hasn't tried to pull out her even playing field in desire to have a male member. There has been role reversal and role playing of the opposite gender witness, but nothing to indicate that a male chimp has any more desire to be transsexual than Perez Hilton. Sorry, the jury is still out on this one.

 

[Stereolab]

You are playing with a double edged sword here.


The reason that it's in the DSM is that it has been proven to be a real disorder but the disorder doesn't mean that the person is crazy. Autism is a mental disorder, it doesn't mean the person is crazy. It's in the DSM because it is a real condition.

If it is a real condition then it will be recognized as something that can be treated. Just because you guys think it is freakish or mutilation to change the body doesn't mean it is.

It isn't. It's not any more a mutilation than it is to have a breast reduction. Women have those all the time, and they get implants put in too, is that freakish mutilation?


I love how you compare being a transgender to someone who wants to murder animals and then wonder why your comments are considered idiotic and bigoted.

You are really claiming that persons with the condition have not mutilated themselves?

And glad you love it; you're looking for reasons to be offended so I'm sure it's right up your alley.

 

[truethat]

Unfortunately for the transgendered community there are mounds of scientific research and evidence that supports homosexuality and even animals playing the roles of the other sex. Nearly all mammals experience the desire for homosexual relations and most of the more socially complex mammals have stratified ranking systems where members of the other sex play a different role depending on their sexual rank. However, there is almost no understanding of the nature of trangenderism in nature. As far as I know, a male chimp hasn't tried to rip off his male member because he felt it wasn't supposed to be there. And a female chimp hasn't tried to pull out her even playing field in desire to have a male member. There has been role reversal and role playing of the opposite gender witness, but nothing to indicate that a male chimp has any more desire to be transsexual than Perez Hilton. Sorry, the jury is still out on this one.

Excuse me, this has nothing to do with transgendered issues. I find this offensive that you continually are comparing transgenders to animals. Stop it. Go to the research before you post again. Your statements are vile and disrespectful to the other posters

 

[epepke]

Why is it of any of your concern what protocol is used?

Call me civic-minded. Call me a humanitarian. Call me a skeptic. Call me someone who is interested in how people react to the OP.

Are you someone out there trying to save the gays as well?

Yes, frankly. I am quite interested in seeing gay people live long, productive, happy lives without molestation.

If you knew what the protocol was you wouldn't be having this conversation. Basically for a very young child the "transition" is to allow the child to dress as the opposite gender and identify as the opposite gender. My god, what a horrible thing. And this is not done without a diagnosis.

If you had bothered to read what I had written, I stated clearly that I have no problem with that.

I shall spell it out for you, if you can pay attention long enough, which I frankly doubt.

The OP mentioned an endocrinologist for a 10-year old. Endocrinologists are not generally required for fashion sense. They specialize in other things, such as administering hormones.

People have reacted to that statement.

I want to know the details of such cases.

Now, you can continue to make stuff up, or you can learn to read. If you choose the former, then don't complain when people don't take what you say seriously.

 

[Stereolab]

I find this offensive that you continually are comparing transgenders to animals.

Because it never makes sense to use animals to learn things about humans.

 

[Alt+F4]

I'm going to jump in here. I won't speak for anybody else, as I'm not as extreme as some. Here is what I'm skeptical of:

That diagnoses of pre-pubescent or barely pubescent children, either by the DSM or GID, are accurate enough to warrant the administration of hormones to prevent (not merely delay) puberty as provided by, for example, the WPATH (Harry Benjamin) standards.

That's really it. There's a lot that I'm not skeptical about, including hormone treatments on adults (adults can legally consent), hormone treatments on infants born with ambiguous genitalia or the victim of circumcision accidents, and wearing different clothes with a different haircut, or the existence of the transgendered in general.

What I'd like to see evidence for is what I consider ridiculously extreme confidence in the accuracy of psychological diagnostic methods on children, to the extent that it is self-evident to many that the correct thing to do is give them hormones that will at least threaten and probably destroy their ability ever to have children for the rest of their lives. Not only that, but self-evident to the point that it is perverse and an indication of bigotry to withhold automatic assent.

According to WPATH/Harry Benjamin Standards the first criteria for hormone treatment is that the person be at least 18 years olf