the diagnosis of Gender Disphoria

Status
Closed

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,029
SoCal
#11
Gender dysphoria is real but very rare; some can make the 'transition' and adapt very well, in others it results in a lifetime of misery. I knew someone who had an operation to become a woman (or more like a woman), but was desperately unhappy and eventually committed suicide. It worries me that this issue is being played up in a typically American manner as just another identity politcs issue, because it encourages exhibitionists, and encourages people to follow a path that might well prove as disastrous for them as in the case that I mentioned. Much better to take things very slowly and cautiously, and yet one sees that they are encouraging even quite young children to make the transition as though mental confusions and disorders of this kind (which is what it ultimately is) were a simple matter that can easily be resolved; and one even sees the unfortunate children being exhibited, which amounts to a kind of child abuse in my view.
Did this person ever consider de-transitioning before their suicide?
 
Jun 2018
157
New York
#12
Gender dysphoria is real but very rare; some can make the 'transition' and adapt very well, in others it results in a lifetime of misery. I knew someone who had an operation to become a woman (or more like a woman), but was desperately unhappy and eventually committed suicide. It worries me that this issue is being played up in a typically American manner as just another identity politcs issue, because it encourages exhibitionists, and encourages people to follow a path that might well prove as disastrous for them as in the case that I mentioned. Much better to take things very slowly and cautiously, and yet one sees that they are encouraging even quite young children to make the transition as though mental confusions and disorders of this kind (which is what it ultimately is) were a simple matter that can easily be resolved; and one even sees the unfortunate children being exhibited, which amounts to a kind of child abuse in my view.
For me it seems like the whole thing is overblown in the media and is a shot at identity politics. There's plenty of people out there who look at Gender Dysphoria for what it is. Dysphoria. For others however it means that they should transition, they'll be happier that way. But in today's world that is the only answer to which the individual can accept themselves. No one wants to discuss the side effects such a thing can bring to a person. Both mentally and physically.

It's really quite strange and discomforting for me to look at this and see all range of ages being encouraged to 'change' their gender as if it is the end all be all of their problems.

The US is full of crazy in this area, trying to make it the new normal. But how can something be normal if it is such a minuscule percent of the population? I have my own theories on the matter as to why it is being pushed so voraciously.

And it for sure opens the floodgates for other problems. If i remember correctly there was a guy who identified as another ethnicity at least, which boggled my mind. I need to find that story again.

Edit: The man identified as a Filipino.
 
Likes: Menshevik

Menshevik

Ad Honorem
Dec 2012
9,262
here
#13
For me it seems like the whole thing is overblown in the media and is a shot at identity politics. There's plenty of people out there who look at Gender Dysphoria for what it is. Dysphoria. For others however it means that they should transition, they'll be happier that way. But in today's world that is the only answer to which the individual can accept themselves. No one wants to discuss the side effects such a thing can bring to a person. Both mentally and physically.

It's really quite strange and discomforting for me to look at this and see all range of ages being encouraged to 'change' their gender as if it is the end all be all of their problems.

The US is full of crazy in this area, trying to make it the new normal. But how can something be normal if it is such a minuscule percent of the population? I have my own theories on the matter as to why it is being pushed so voraciously.

And it for sure opens the floodgates for other problems. If i remember correctly there was a guy who identified as another ethnicity at least, which boggled my mind. I need to find that story again.

Edit: The man identified as a Filipino.
I think I agree for the most part. But, actually, I think the Rachel Dolezals of the world have just as much, if not more, legitimacy than do the Bruce Jenners of the world.
 
Oct 2009
3,605
San Diego
#14
I think the high suicide rate for trans people is refective of the fact that they clearly suffer some kind of mental health issues regarding self.
People who are mentally healthy simply do not spend that much mental energy thinking about themselves.

Gender identity- racial identity- these are all nothing but NARRATIVES we choose to believe in. Once adopted, a narrative of identity become a filter thru which all other experiences are colored and distorted to fit the world view of self we have decided to define reality for us.

But its JUST a narrative. A story. A yarn.
And, of course we can choose a Different story whenever we want to.

People with issues of self growing up may witness other people's lives and identities and decide to become fixated on the belief that those folks have it better than they do for some nebulous reason... and so want to defect and join the ranks of some other group's ready made and defined identity.
A white person might decide its "cooler" to be black and want to be cool enough to adopt that identity.
A male person might decide that women get lots of attention and get to behave in ways that are not accessible to men and so want to jump ship and adopt that persona- without any real conception of how well that will play out long term.
A female person might see men's lives as being far less pressured over appearance and privileged in ways they find appealing and so defect to the male identity.

But it is essentially the exact same human behavior you see in bumper to bumper traffic where one lane starts to move faster than the others - and so a bunch of drivers defect to the faster moving lane- and thereby clog that lane right back up so it stops moving faster.- that is, the individual sees a potential personal gain in changing lanes and does not think ahead to realize that lane defectors eliminate the very advantage they perceive by their defection.

Its just the gender or race defectors have this trait in a far more severe form affecting their core sense of self.

The sad truth is that trans people do not end up any happier with their different gender.
The solution to issues of self can never be found in sharper focus on the self.
The solution is always to forget your self.

The less a person thinks about themselves, the happier they are.
 
Last edited:

Shtajerc

Ad Honorem
Jul 2014
6,743
Lower Styria, Slovenia
#15
Can someone point out to me when and why the modern craze for this "gender" thing started?
I am quite baffled by the whole thing really... seems to me it's another American whim orchestrated by American crackpots, being exported to the whole world to impose an American view of the world to everyone.
The very root of it is probably the emergence of postmodernism in the 60s. Poststructuralists argued that the binary opposition structures (I hope that's the way it is said in English) don't apply and started questioning traditional dichotomies. They say there is no black and white, night and day, happy and sad, but countless shades in between and that basically everything is a social construct and some thigs are accepted only because power structures (mostly the evil patriarchy) force it on everyone. Ergo there aren't just two genders (male and female) but a multitude of them. I am not sure if gender theory and the transgender thing have an even earlier origin, because I don't concern myself with their delusions more than necesarry for my existance, but it seems a lot of their theorists support pedophilia. I don't buy into the gender theory. You don't see that with animals and they claim sex and gender are not related to any degree. People suffering from gender disphoria have an abnormally high suicide rate which remains the same after sex changing procedures. You often hear about scams in connection with their loud activists, which makes me think the whole thing is fishy at least. 60 something genders don't seem the most plausible to me ... But of course, I am a white cis male, I need to be silenced because I am an opressor. :)
 
Oct 2009
3,605
San Diego
#17
The very root of it is probably the emergence of postmodernism in the 60s. Poststructuralists argued that the binary opposition structures (I hope that's the way it is said in English) don't apply and started questioning traditional dichotomies. They say there is no black and white, night and day, happy and sad, but countless shades in between and that basically everything is a social construct and some thigs are accepted only because power structures (mostly the evil patriarchy) force it on everyone. Ergo there aren't just two genders (male and female) but a multitude of them. I am not sure if gender theory and the transgender thing have an even earlier origin, because I don't concern myself with their delusions more than necesarry for my existance, but it seems a lot of their theorists support pedophilia. I don't buy into the gender theory. You don't see that with animals and they claim sex and gender are not related to any degree. People suffering from gender disphoria have an abnormally high suicide rate which remains the same after sex changing procedures. You often hear about scams in connection with their loud activists, which makes me think the whole thing is fishy at least. 60 something genders don't seem the most plausible to me ... But of course, I am a white cis male, I need to be silenced because I am an opressor. :)

I don't think the academic philosophical take on emerging trends in ideological terms has anything to do with anything.

The tenor of the times is NOT the result of the hoi polloi sitting about cogitating on the large brush strokes of political ideology.

In a world where your access to information was highly curated by just a handful of those similarly educated and acculturated it was far easier to imagine that your fellows internal lives was pretty much the same as your own... in 1800 if someone in the next town over was murdered you were unlikely to even hear about it except as a rumor.

But with the advent of television, it became possible for larger numbers of people to see a wider array of events with their own eyes.
Racial bigotry which had been discussed abstractly is suddenly visible as police turn dogs and water cannons on peaceful protesters. And suddenly the injustice of it is real and people react pretty uniformly.
As a result the world trended towards a general feeling that MORE people should enjoy the same rights as the privileged classes.

But this initial influx of more information from a wider world was still curated. Just a few competing channels.

But as the internet has grown- suddenly the Curation has devolved from what a specific class of educated journalists and station owners think the consensus view should be, to the infinitely divisible emergent properties of a mindless algorithm crafted to maximize what people will click on, in a medium where any moron, or evil actor, has potentially equal access to the means to broadcast their fringe views.

The stupidest possible means of disseminating reliable information.

As a result, the internet has balkanized the people of western cultures into ever more divisible factions of ever more divisive agendas.
The algorithm serves up to each individual a Unique and entirely separate worldview compiled from that individual's semi-random surfing.

Your internet feed is unlike anyone else's- and therefore the information you see and the order in which it is presented results in your worldview diverging from any identifiable mean.

The slightest inclination to an extreme view is exacerbated as the algorithm steadily guesses that you would click on more extreme versions of that expressed interest.
If you are gender confused- your internet feed morphs into a picture of a world FILLED with gender confused people and diatribes about the oppression of gender conformity as a cause you ought to rail against.

Identity politics is the direct result of the internet fueled fragmentation of cultural cohesion.

Americans USED to think of conservative and liberal as being two different flavors of the same thing. Being an American.
Today they think of liberal and conservative as two warring tribes- each firmly believing the other is the antithesis of being American.

That is what is actually happening. No one making it happen is even aware of such constructs as Post modernism.
There is No agenda- other than the super rich buying up the media and tweaking the algorithms to happily encourage the diversification of individual world views to the point where the electorates of every democratic nation are incapable of coherent consensus to act in regulating the avarice of wealth.

The only identifiable agenda is that the big players in media on all sides of the political spectrum actively suppress investigative journalism of the excesses of wealth.
Other than that- they let the click counting algorithms that maximize ad revenue do most of the heavy lifting in dividing the hoi polloi into tiny sub-reddits of incompatible outrages and selfish demands of individual identity.
 
Feb 2019
804
Serbia
#18
Can someone point out to me when and why the modern craze for this "gender" thing started?
I am quite baffled by the whole thing really... seems to me it's another American whim orchestrated by American crackpots, being exported to the whole world to impose an American view of the world to everyone.
From what I've read gender dysphoria has a long history and there were some cases even pre-indrustrial era.

In the industrial era there were several cases of first transition surgeries in the 20th century. Notables include: Alan Hart in 1917 (Female to Male.) Dora Richter in 1931 (Male to Female.) Harold Gillies, a British plastic surgeon who was a pioneer in the field and started his career in WWI also pioneered the ''modern'' way of transgender surgery post WWII, performing the first ''modern'' surgery on Michael Dillon. (Female to Male.)

Over the decades techniques for surgery advanced but these were some of the first modern ones.

Then there is the 60s post-modernism that @Shtajerc was talking about.

The one that actually put forward the modern gender theory was apparently John Money, a psychologist and sexologist that had a theory that any child can be raised as the oppossite of their birth assigned gender and that gender is a construct. His form of a test subject for ths theory was David Reimer, a Canadian boy who was taken to Money after his genitals were severly damaged after a circumsinion attempt.

Money and his team performed surgery on Reimer who was given the name Brenda. Reimer and his brother went to see Money several times over the course of their pre-puberty life with Money reporting the experiment as a success. This was not actually the case and Reimer was in depression by the time he was 13 and threatened that he would kill himself if his parents took him to see Money again, later on Reimer transitioned back to male but his childhood had lasting consequences on his mental health. In 2002 his brother Brian died and David was in financial difficulties, in 2004 David's wife told him that she wanted to separate and about 2 days later David commited suicide at the age of 38.

Money was actually well respected as a psychologist and had several awards and degrees, thus he was seen as qualified and profesisonal. He reported that the experiment was a success, which, as we've seen wasn't true. But because of this report this view of gender theory allegedly became the ''mainstream'' that is still used today.

I have a pretty amateurish knowledge on this and my main source on Money's experiment is a BBC documentary and some archives form BBC articles, so take this with some skepticism, nevertheless I have added my 2 cents on the topic and I hope it helps.

From this we can gather that the modern theory was built on a misrepresented failed experiment made by someone with nominal authority and a radical theory. I might make a separate post on why this happens today.
 
Likes: Shtajerc

Shtajerc

Ad Honorem
Jul 2014
6,743
Lower Styria, Slovenia
#19
I don't think the academic philosophical take on emerging trends in ideological terms has anything to do with anything.

The tenor of the times is NOT the result of the hoi polloi sitting about cogitating on the large brush strokes of political ideology.

In a world where your access to information was highly curated by just a handful of those similarly educated and acculturated it was far easier to imagine that your fellows internal lives was pretty much the same as your own... in 1800 if someone in the next town over was murdered you were unlikely to even hear about it except as a rumor.

But with the advent of television, it became possible for larger numbers of people to see a wider array of events with their own eyes.
Racial bigotry which had been discussed abstractly is suddenly visible as police turn dogs and water cannons on peaceful protesters. And suddenly the injustice of it is real and people react pretty uniformly.
As a result the world trended towards a general feeling that MORE people should enjoy the same rights as the privileged classes.

But this initial influx of more information from a wider world was still curated. Just a few competing channels.

But as the internet has grown- suddenly the Curation has devolved from what a specific class of educated journalists and station owners think the consensus view should be, to the infinitely divisible emergent properties of a mindless algorithm crafted to maximize what people will click on, in a medium where any moron, or evil actor, has potentially equal access to the means to broadcast their fringe views.

The stupidest possible means of disseminating reliable information.

As a result, the internet has balkanized the people of western cultures into ever more divisible factions of ever more divisive agendas.
The algorithm serves up to each individual a Unique and entirely separate worldview compiled from that individual's semi-random surfing.

Your internet feed is unlike anyone else's- and therefore the information you see and the order in which it is presented results in your worldview diverging from any identifiable mean.

The slightest inclination to an extreme view is exacerbated as the algorithm steadily guesses that you would click on more extreme versions of that expressed interest.
If you are gender confused- your internet feed morphs into a picture of a world FILLED with gender confused people and diatribes about the oppression of gender conformity as a cause you ought to rail against.

Identity politics is the direct result of the internet fueled fragmentation of cultural cohesion.

Americans USED to think of conservative and liberal as being two different flavors of the same thing. Being an American.
Today they think of liberal and conservative as two warring tribes- each firmly believing the other is the antithesis of being American.

That is what is actually happening. No one making it happen is even aware of such constructs as Post modernism.
There is No agenda- other than the super rich buying up the media and tweaking the algorithms to happily encourage the diversification of individual world views to the point where the electorates of every democratic nation are incapable of coherent consensus to act in regulating the avarice of wealth.

The only identifiable agenda is that the big players in media on all sides of the political spectrum actively suppress investigative journalism of the excesses of wealth.
Other than that- they let the click counting algorithms that maximize ad revenue do most of the heavy lifting in dividing the hoi polloi into tiny sub-reddits of incompatible outrages and selfish demands of individual identity.
What you have described is for me a part of the whole picture. I only disagree with you about that there is no agenda. There certainly is an agenda in most of western academia and it's trickling down to the masses. Go and try to speak on a university campus in America or Canada about things that seemed common sense to everyone 10 or 15 years ago. 3/4ths of the students will get severely "triggered", declare you a fascist, perform all sorts of monkey business to prevent you from speaking (basically sticking theirfingers in their ears while screaming "lalalala I can't hear you"), demand security to throw you off campus and forbid you to come back. A lot of the professors will either aplaud this or participate.
 
Oct 2009
3,605
San Diego
#20
What you have described is for me a part of the whole picture. I only disagree with you about that there is no agenda. There certainly is an agenda in most of western academia and it's trickling down to the masses. Go and try to speak on a university campus in America or Canada about things that seemed common sense to everyone 10 or 15 years ago. 3/4ths of the students will get severely "triggered", declare you a fascist, perform all sorts of monkey business to prevent you from speaking (basically sticking theirfingers in their ears while screaming "lalalala I can't hear you"), demand security to throw you off campus and forbid you to come back. A lot of the professors will either aplaud this or participate.

There isn't an agenda.
I've spoken to academics- they are running scared because of the essential hooliganism of their own students, whose sense of personal identity has been perverted thru social media and internet algorithms.

They do not know what they are doing. they are simply demanding that THEIR personal world views be accepted as valid- because online they don't SEE any other worldviews.

When your access to information is massaged to reflect only those things you already believe or tend to believe- without brake- without counter - without a consensus of your peers telling you that you are way out on the rim... then suddenly being thrust into an academic world where ideas coutner to your own might be presented- you have developed zero tolerance for alternate opinions or perspectives.

The only consensus possible among a generation raised this disconnected from their own culture is to begrudgingly demand that EVERY possible worldview and identity be treated as equally valid... because None of them can nor will accept that Their worldview is ill informed or wrong.

You see this in the petulant fits thrown by 'fans' of every different franchise whenever that franchise fails to meet the expectations they have built up thru their own fevered discourse with fellow fans... and no matter what the creators of the show do- there WILL be some clique of discontented fans who honestly believe that THEIR interpretation of what should have been done was the Only correct view.

This is not an agenda- its actually the total LACK of any agenda whatsoever-

and, of course- that serves the aims of the super rich just fine- as long as the electorate is pissing all over each other, squabbling over the 100 million individualized outrages created by internet news feeds and social media there is No way any electoral majority of them could possibly all agree that the current economic system is stripping all wealth from the working class.

Trans people living on the street are still more concerned about Pronoun usage, than they are about the fact that housing has become impossible for them to afford.
Because their smart phones practically never even mention the income disparity that is the real crisis of the modern age.

None of them can look up from their screens long enough to even witness the suffering of the person sitting next to them... who is sitting there looking at their own screen- telling them to be outraged by something completely different.

The only ideology is that ALL AGENDAS ARE EQUAL.
And of course- that is not only a lie- its simply not an agenda when your only consensus is that competing agendas deserve equal attention.

This ability to divide a people into fragmentary cliques that can not even see their neighbors as their own countrymen is being weaponized by countries like Russia- for the express purpose of rendering their enemies incapable of acting to thwart their aims.


Brexit was a PLOY to divide britons.
Catalan independance was a ploy to divide Spaniards.
Trump and Bernie were ploys to divide Americans.

Media is not pushing an agenda- they are failing to push one. They happily give equal air time to Nazis and Antifa. They trumpet the cause of LGBTQ and in the next segment make it sound like right wing hate groups are 'growing'.

The Rich are happy to give a bullhorn to EVERY identity- and thereby prevent the formation of any unified movement for the People to regain control of their governance and hold kleptocrats in check.
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions