Caitlyn... Check Yourself!

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

well lets see, she sat down with Barbara Walters, had a bunch of interviews and has a reality show etc.

That was not even an attempt at being private..

It is none of our business..

Like I said I dont care if people want sex changes, but being vain about it, is kinda sick.. Like I said thou I don't care, and I be damned if I am going to debate transgenders on ats.

originally posted by: Bicent76
well lets see, she sat down with Barbara Walters, had a bunch of interviews and has a reality show etc.

That was not even an attempt at being private..

Why should she be private? Because YOU think she should? She should shout it from the rooftops if that's what she wants to do. There's no way she could keep this private and if she tried, she'd be accused of everything in the book.

It is none of our business..

Then move along.

a reply to: Darth_Prime

I feel neither good nor bad.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Mortality from suicide was strikingly high among sex-reassigned persons, also after adjustment for prior psychiatric morbidity. In line with this, sex-reassigned persons were at increased risk for suicide attempts. Previous reports [6], [8], [10], [11] suggest that transsexualism is a strong risk factor for suicide, also after sex reassignment, and our long-term findings support the need for continued psychiatric follow-up for persons at risk to prevent this.

These people are so busy concentrating on their sex and wanting to change it,that they aren't getting to the real issues that they do need to change. If they aren't quite a 'he' or a 'she',then I call them an 'it'. Just because you are being fed hormones to MAKE you a certain sex,does not mean you are that sex.

a reply to: Dimithae

You don't seem to understand the actual facts about Trans People, they are not 'Between' sexes, in Caitlyn's case she is a She she was born a she and she always will be a She

Just because you are assigned a Sex at birth does not mean that is your true Gender-Identity

Calling her or anyone an 'It' is ignorant and shows your true colors as a person

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Of course you’d say my gender is a social construct. You believe in such a premise. But simply repeating a premise is not the same as proving a premise. I would say your gender is not a social construct. Now we're right back where we started.

No, I believe expression of gender is innate. The social construct aspect of it is how it is perceived or can be influenced. Are we going around in circles here because I'm getting a little dizzy. I think my life can add can some proof to one side of the argument or the other but I'm not sure which because I'm not quite sure where you're coming from?

I am no different to myself than I've ever been but as a child and into adolescence, my behavior, interests, mannerisms, friendships and even appearance were gender atypical when considering my assigned sex at birth. These are things my parents tried to change and things I was very consciously trying to control to no avail. Socially I was considered feminine and girlish but this was highly problematic on many levels and I had my butt kicked more than a time or two and faced constant bullying for being queer or weird or different. Leading up to it over time, by my last year of high school, what sex I was had become undeterminable but it was my personality that revealed my gender not pseudo affectations or attire. Realizing that only a slight shift in cultural cues was all it took for me to be perceived much more normally as a girl and the fact that I was totally unprepared emotionally to be and had no desire to be a guy, six or seven months after graduating before I even turned nineteen, I had become known as and lived much more naturally and comfortably as the girl/woman I've been for the last 41 years. Science and medicine helped facilitate my life socially and romantically. For what it's worth, this part of my life has always been kept quiet and very private and not something outside of family members and one or two very close friends that people know about me. I have come out here to help raise awareness but it is my desire to remain anonymous in the physical sphere, part of the woodwork and part of "normal" society.

So, at least in our western society, I may have particular insight into the social constructs of gender compared to what just comes naturally.

If gender is a social construct, then gender is unnatural and artificial. I do not see how that is the case. Obviously biology has everything to do with it—we are our biology, not societal constructs—from the genes, to incubation, to the brain structure, to the hormones, all the way through its development. etc. etc. etc. all of which is completely natural and within the realm of biological possibilities—assuming that anything within the realm of biological possibility is natural, and everything outside of them is unnatural.

Biology isn't necessarily destiny and what exactly would be outside of the realm of biological possibility?

Thanks for the link. I’m not sure how a non-scientists blog constitutes science, but hey, like I said, there is not that much science to back up the claims. I won't burn ya. It sounds like a good read.

Kay Brown is a trans activist but if you do spend the time studying her blog, you will see how her writings are totally dependent on science. The overall picture can't be fully appreciated without considerable reading. FYI, although in an unrelated field, she is a scientist in real life and holds over 90 patents. I don't expect you will burn me, most people will pick and choose and use the data presented negatively against transgender people and most transgender people will think the author is Satan incarnate and the references and scientists quoted, minions. That's why I was reluctant to post the link. I, on the other hand, agree with most of the science she presents and tries to interpret.

a reply to: Darth_Prime

She is only a She,until the drugs stop.Then they revert back to their original sex.

As far as my true colors goes, I really don't care if others agree with me or not,if you have to take a drug to be a certain sex.....your not that sex. I am open about gays and I don't even care if they marry,none of that bothers me. Going through surgery to change what you are,is just beyond reasonable. Its not even a guarantee you will be finally happy with yourself,because you have to learn to except yourself for who you are as a person. There is no surgery that will do that.

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Hefficide

no you are getting angered here because like most progressive liberals, you just want people to do whatever the left tells them to and to not think for themselves. The nerve of him/her/it to not kowtow to every leftist ideology when the leftists all defended him/her/it.

Jaden

And I could easily ( and accurately ) make the same statement about conservatives and those on the right. Actually it would be more appropriate as the group that tends to use "low information voters" as an insult actually has the least informed viewers, the real "low information" demographic.

Only, at this point, such divisiveness really does neither side of the argument any favors. There are much bigger issues facing the Western world, now, than partisan sniping.

I will simply say that striving to be respectful of others is not a leftist or progressive trait - it's a Christian trait. At least when Christian values are applied correctly. As far as I was aware, decorum had no partisan political preference, aside from most politicians severely lacking in both.

To blindly infer that a person does not think for themselves is dismissive and, frankly, ignorant. What's more it is a straw man.

I do not suppose it's worth stating that my decision to be polite towards the person in question has nothing to do with politics and more to do with the fact that they are a member of my family. But I fear such reasoned debate might be lost in this particular conversation.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Bicent76
well lets see, she sat down with Barbara Walters, had a bunch of interviews and has a reality show etc.

That was not even an attempt at being private..

Why should she be private? Because YOU think she should? She should shout it from the rooftops if that's what she wants to do. There's no way she could keep this private and if she tried, she'd be accused of everything in the book.

It is none of our business..

Then move along.

oh bullcrap...

I think we should all be minding our own business... This guy is being so vain about his sex change, you literally have no ample foundation to stand on about itl.. Your opinon is their is no way he could have kept it private, my perspective is he did not even try...

I respect someone more when they try to do something without people having to tell them to do so...


If you want to try and protect lame people so be it..

I am not going to gobble up the bull crap your trying to feed me this guy had no choice..


In any case I still respect you, if you want the last word so be it..

Yet in any case I am not going to drink the kool aid..

As I said I kind of look at this as a money grab, and an attention grabber... Who gives a hell about this guy...

I mean really...

If you want to try and make sense of it and make it political so be it...

That seems to the gullible course of action..

Yet rest assured this guy does not care about you... At all.. Choke in front of him if you like...

Why does anyone care? Why do LGBT & supporters want someone from the kardashian family to be the current face of transgender?

I watched one of their shows recently and was bored out of my mind. It shows a rich family doing mundane things and having mundane conversations, and o yea, their Dad is a transgender.

Bruce/Caitylynn came out during a time when the LGBT community has been at one of its highest acceptance periods, if not the highest. Hero my ass. What is he risking? His family accepts him, the media adores him (accept maybe fox news), and he gets his own reality show to increase his wealth/fame.

Yea.. I know. I'm giving attention to something that I think people give too much attention towards. But, it's just annoying to me about how many people care about this stupid shiat.
Where were all you LGTB supporters back in the 90s before it was a hip thing? You guys just follow the bread crumbs that the media feeds you, it's pathetic.

a reply to: blueman12

That's a lot of assumption. And sort of ironic. You validly point out that Caitlyn is riding a social trend on television and then totally miss the implied answer to your own query.

Treating others with respect did not begin with some reality TV show. It was there all along, only not televised.

a reply to: EKron

Thank you for sharing your experiences and your point of view. Although the subject is very fascinating to me, my mild interest is no comparison to your living of it. And yes, as you probably know more than others, society has expectations of what it is used to, not just in gender but in a wide variety of areas. Any non-conformity to social norms is a signal fire and the nails that stick up are often hammered down, institutionally and socially.

By "anonymous in the physical sphere", do you mean you still conform to the expectations of masculinity, despite your identification with the opposite? Stop me if I'm prodding too much into your personal affairs, but how does that make you feel?

I have read some of her blog and her wit and contrarianism has made me a fan. Anything that ruffles feathers is necessary in my book.

a reply to: Dimithae

That is not true again, first of all Transgender and Gay are completely different, Gay is a Sexual Orientation, Transgender is a Gender-Identity.

Second: the 'Drugs' are not what makes you a 'Woman' or a 'Man', Trans people are Born that way taking Hormones or not taking Hormones doesn't change or alter their Gender-Identity

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

By "anonymous in the physical sphere", do you mean you still conform to the expectations of masculinity, despite your identification with the opposite? Stop me if I'm prodding too much into your personal affairs, but how does that make you feel?

Um, not quite. I was increasingly androgynous during my high school years, started living as a girl at 18 and have done so full time since I was 19, underwent SRS in 1977 at age 22, was married to a great guy for 11 years and by "anonymous in the physical sphere", I meant people do not know of my history. Using the lingo, my life has been "stealth".

Haha! I never conformed to the expectations of masculinity, had zero social skills or never fit in with the guys, never had a job as a guy because I never was one, even though that was supposedly what I was supposed to be. I am 60 years old now and all this was a hella long time ago. If you have other questions, I would be happy to try and answer them.

a reply to: Bicent76

First it's not a 'He' or a 'Guy' it's a 'Her' and a 'Female'

Second, it's about bringing attention Trans Issues and other GLTBQ+ issues to the public, and it means being open and public and Out about it, we can't be shamed or hidden anymore, these issues are serious and we need visibility and to be open. there are so many Untruth about Trans People and GLBTQ+ people that we need to vocal about them.

if it makes people uncomfortable, Sorry, not sorry. this is the only we we can Gain Equality and visibility

Let me ask one question and then be done with this topic, returning myself to desired world of comfortable societal norms... Are we being asked to throw away 110 years worth of scientific and medical knowledge which has clearly identified XX as female and XY as male, except in extraordinarily rare cases of chromosomal abnormality simply because somebody "feels" different?

Why is it that in every other realm of modern society, faith, feelings, and the untestable are rejected in favor of science without much in the way of openly acceptable public resistance, but somehow this is different?

i cant stand transgender people for real.

a reply to: Dimithae

I was in a thread the other day discussing a puppy. The OP hadn't mentioned whether it was a male or female so I had to refer to it as 'it'.

I felt terrible, as if I was somehow denying the puppy a status to which it had a right. Calling anyone 'it' reduces them to the level of a thing.

If there is doubt about a persons gender they can often be correctly referred to as 'they' or, if the person identifies as male or female, it is only polite to refer to them by the proper pronoun for that gender. It costs nothing and causes no friction.

Our opinion as to what constitutes a male or a female makes no difference. We have no right to impose our views on another person to the extent of denying them what they are or what they feel they are.

If someone arbitrarily denied something that we felt was intrinsic to our being, - just because they 'knew better' - how outraged would we be?

a reply to: berenike

I felt terrible, as if I was somehow denying the puppy a status to which it had a right. Calling anyone 'it' reduces them to the level of a thing.

Because you, honeybun, are more sensitive and kind to animals than some people are to other human beings. !

originally posted by: heymang
i cant stand transgender people for real.

Well good for you, and I can't stand bigots. You get a golf clap for your insightful contribution.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Let me ask one question and then be done with this topic, returning myself to desired world of comfortable societal norms... Are we being asked to throw away 110 years worth of scientific and medical knowledge which has clearly identified XX as female and XY as male, except in extraordinarily rare cases of chromosomal abnormality simply because somebody "feels" different?

Why is it that in every other realm of modern society, faith, feelings, and the untestable are rejected in favor of science without much in the way of openly acceptable public resistance, but somehow this is different?

Probaly because a good portion of those within the realm of "faith" and the "untestable" fear science and deny scientific discoveries because they challenge their "belief" in the "untestable" whereas a good portion of those within the realm of science and medical knowledge have little need for or reliance upon "belief" and the "untestable".