New Study - Transgender myth exposed - a mental disorder.

originally posted by: SaturnFX
What the hell is wrong with you

You are comparing someone with a severe birth defect that could end up being fatal in extreme cases and trying to correct that to...effing brain patterns you don't like

Thats some dirtball thinking right there.

your views are laughably outragous.

What the hell is wrong with you?

Why are you trying to downplay gender dysphoria as if it's just a harmless trait like being left handed or having blue eyes?

a reply to: Bone75

Left-handedness was harmful back then due to society frowning on it.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

So this dude made test claims before neuroscience.
And half of studies in psychology peer reviewed have been found to be false. So yeah psychology in general is experimental science with very little in the way of curing anything at all.

There is a difference between transgender by choice and a clinical diagnosis of the extremely rare mental condition of gender dysphoria.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I've been talking about this forever.

It follows from these more general laws of nature:

A) All matter is dynamical i.e. transforming and creating different symmetries, and breaking symmetries, as a function of the geometry, energy and information of local fields.

B) The Physical Body is an evolving non-linear self-organizing system. B includes A.

C) The nervous system is inherently plastic. This has been shown at the genetic level - with nearly 70% of a neurons genome being made up of "jumping genes" - or retro transposons which move in and out of chromosomes within the nucleus as a part of the regulation of RNA and protein coding genes.

D) This genetic finding about the neuron correlates quite nicely with the large scale restructuring of the brain that has been experimentally verified in animals with in vitro and autopsy studies, and in Human beings with fMRI analyses of blood volume and gray matter changes in the brain.

Based on all these findings FROM THE SCIENCES, the left obsession with transgenderism has more to do, from my perspective, with a gnostic-eque fantasy of transcending differences, than with anything in reality. It is, in other words, a complete delusion.

Additionally,

E) Evidence from Traumatology, Psychoanalysis, and Sociology, indicate that trans-gendering is an emergent property of a traumatized Human mind. The more basic condition - or the condition which causally precedes trangenderism, is a state of dissociation, derealisation and depersonalization, whereby the person feels uncomfortably related to their bodies. This discomfort with the body is a GENERAL LEVEL PHENOMENON, which means that it is a feeling of discomfort, insecurity, and shame - without any particular relation to sexuality or identity. This inchoate state results from psychological stress that hits a threshold for the brain - wherein genetic regulation (A,B,C,D) shifts consciousness by dialing down blood flow to the forebrain, and thus leaving the body feeling "removed" vis-à-vis people who aren't psyvhologically traumatized.

We will never understand ourselves until we recognize that our brain is built by references: and for Human beings, the references which matter are other people. And for a traumatized person, who cannot properly access affects (feelings), this means they cannot properly socialize, which means they cannot feel the emotions/affects that build up a persons sense of identity. They cannot experience the "mimesis" which is socializing and the feelings and zest-for-living which comes reflexively for people who aren't traumatized.

Humans are suffocating in their ignorance about how they work and operate. Transgenderism is nothing more than a concept - AN IDEA - which suggests a perspective for the vulnerable i.e. traumatized mind, which "fits" their experience i.e. retroactively assimilates past experiences as if they were always expressions of its true nature.

The whole transgender phenomenon is a function of individualism and its delusional metaphysical belief that the Human being and its motives/feelins/actions come from ones "essence", as opposed to ones exposure to and interaction with other Humans, who, like us, feel the same need to be liked. It's because we fail to take this idea seriously - that we construct ourselves moment by moment on the basis of social-expectations, and so if someone tells me "do you feel like your a guy - maybe you're a girl"? it will be the SOCIAL CONNECTION ITSELF that catalyzes the transformation in the person (i.e. having your existential experience recognized) and not "hearing the truth spoken". This is, again, the idolatry, static, noun-like sense of reality, and not the real-world verb, dynamically transforming structure that inclines to coherence by having other people know them in kind and affirming ways.

a reply to: SBMcG

Pretty odd that some people believe that it's a choice. I mean who really want to be a woman? Seriously think about it. That's like believing that straight guys can choose to be gay.

a reply to: SBMcG

Not true. You're choice is an illusion. What you really crave/want/need is recognition and belonging.

Its just unfortunate that the mind-#ing about your gender is a part of the deal.

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: SBMcG

Not true. You're choice is an illusion. What you really crave/want/need is recognition and belonging.

Its just unfortunate that the mind-#ing about your gender is a part of the deal.

Genders mental though. SEX is what the OP actually should be talking about Since so many get confused about Sex when referring to the body itself. And i see y a have just enough Psych school to be dangerous eh?

a reply to: Astrocyte

Lots of impressive word salad there. Unfortunately, it just doesn't mesh with what scientists and the medical community have found with years of actual research on gender dysphoria.

What studies have you completed? Peer reviewed? How many years have you been researching gender dysphoria?

a reply to: kaylaluv

Oh. So what I wrote is "word salad". But what you write is not?

Do you know what a logical argument should look like? I did that with what I wrote. I began from a general understanding of what the sciences know (physics) to biology, to neurology, to psychoanalysis, traumatology, etc.

What studies have you completed? Peer reviewed? How many years have you been researching gender dysphoria?

Don't you think this is an issue of myopia? Gender dysphoria researchers DONT READ OUTSIDE THEIR FIELDS. If they did, it would be impossible to maintain this belief. Rather, one must assume that they are unconsciously relying upon the contemporary fiction that "genes" control everything, and so are not relating to the post-genocentric era, where genes, proteins, and environment form a continuum. Please look into this. The Third Way of Evolution

I am a researcher in traumatology, but am a general reader into all the sciences. And like other researchers who reflect on the etiology of mental dysfunction (such as Dan Siegel), the emerging consensus is that all psychological conditions (and maybe all physical conditions) are a function of a mismatch between the history of our organism (our evolutionary/molecular history) in interaction with the environment. Remember what I said earlier: point A? All things are symmetry or the breakdown of symmetry. Symmetry in Human relations is the 'golden rule'. A mind which develops around non-caring others will be deprived of what many people take for granted - a coherent sense of Self. Thus, in feeling so 'removed' from others (and they're bodies) people like this are fundamentally vulnerable to claims such as transgenderism (homosexuality follows the same dynamic). In other words, a persons standard for truth lowers when they are in a state of social need i.e. to have their feelings/needs recognized.

On another note, are today's contemporary social environments normal vis a vis the 200,000 years that Human beings - Homo Sapiens - have existed? Absolutely not. There is so much more unpreditability in todays world than in the world we evolved in, which means theres more anxiety/fear/dissociation. The desperate solutions that are emerging - such as transgenderism - simply reflects a society that' has lost all touch with indigenous i.e. body-based, knowledges. The idea that complementarity is at the root of things, for instance, would be hotly contested by many liberals today, yet they would be wrong. Beginning from non-physical premises/references, they will argue a false position because they are working from a metaphysically weaker position i.e. what they already believe. Unlike science - they cannot source real physical dynamics to justify their beliefs.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble and confront you with what you feel the need to denigrate/insult/seek to diminish as "a word salad", but what I write is the truth.

If you don't understand some of my referents - that is because you aren't educated sufficiently to understand the complexity of how something like transgenderism could emerge. To me - and other interdisciplinary researchers, it is obviously a function of the mind "retracting" from the body as a result of interpersonal and/or shock trauma (an established neurological fact) and then the social AFFORDANCE of hearing crazed fanatics (from my perspective) who aver that societies "demonization" of peoples gender confusion (a non-existing confusion for most people BEFORE they hear it; after which, paranoia helps scaffold the eventual acceptance of said issue) is wrong, and that we should be accepting of peoples "beliefs" - which apparently, from the neoliberal perspective, means apparently anything.

Another issue is the history of transgenderism. There is a whole history - typically associated with the decadent elite of a culture - of cross-dressing and being and celebrating "the opposite". Ancient gnostics, perhaps aided by Plato, even mythologized the laws of physical reality as the "imposition" of a creator God they called the "demiurge". Political elites for thousands of years have been cultivating such nonsense in Bacchanalia type festivities, where opposites and being the opposite or doing the opposite is perversely imagined as the 'gateway to truth'. They even went so far as to give a fool the chance to be king for a day - which might be "funny" or quaint to modern ears, without keeping in mind that such "reversing" reality is a general ethos for them, and implies that good is evil, and evil is good.

This is also against Ockham's razor, which says that the simplest assumption is probably the right one. My assumptions thus far are in agreement with the hard sciences - which describes a dynamically changing organism that changes with its environmental interactions. If interactions change, so do the systems genes, because the metabolism of an organism feeds into its genetic regulation of itself. The simplest assumption also entails a correct and accurate phenomenological description of experience, which necessarily relies upon developmental psychology as a springboard: since affective and ecological ways of knowing (age 0 to 2) precedes linguistic forms (age 2) and well before the development of a coherent identity (age 18) people are primarily guided by what they feel (it is an older form). Feelings are 'signs' - or internal referents (for the mind) which, if bad, the minds seeks to 'regulate' through some sort of cognitive/linguistic/narrative-based meaning-structure. Ideally, truth will be the most stabilizing, but anything that establishes social-relations with others will serve as a 'bridge' - and therefore, a flow of energy between Humans. Understanding - even a false one - is better than no understanding. Beliefs are real - they "glue" Humans together the way gluons glue quarks, or glia 'glue' neurons (etymology of glia and gluon come from glue). On the other hand, it is not coincidence that cancer emerges in glia - in the relationsips between neurons, and not the neurons themselves. Dysfunction is always at the interface - not the organism itself. Contemporary sciences have been deluded by reductionism i.e. (seeking explanations in genes) and only emergentism - or understanding how something like a mind with beliefs emerges - can understand the problems of the mind. Only be understand a persons developmental canalization can properly locate the meanings and needed understanding that the self/left brain craves for proper self-regulation.

You yourself, for instance, only believe this because other people you have historically connected with believe it; and since it is a belief - like all beliefs, you may have an unhealthy degree of identification with it as a way to regulate your self-esteem. In other words, all action is simultaneously self-regulation. Admitting that your views are wrong might make you feel a sense of shame, stupidity, or irriation: a general sense of dissonance. Your brain-mind doesn't want that - and without more knowledge/persuasion/support, you are likely to feel little need to believe.

But its not unbelievable to think trauma is the cause of transgender beliefs. We don't live in a dualistic world. Everything is connected. There are causes. The world and reality is one - not two.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: SBMcG

Not true. You're choice is an illusion. What you really crave/want/need is recognition and belonging.

Its just unfortunate that the mind-#ing about your gender is a part of the deal.

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. For someone to be legitimately suffering from gender dysphoria -- a "mental disorder" according to the DSM, a clinical diagnosis must be made.

I can't just walk out my front door and claim to have ADHD because that's the issue du jour for whatever reason. I'm not qualified to make that diagnosis.

Legitimate cases of GD are extremely rare (and are often misdiagnosed). That's a simple fact.

I'm not "bashing" anyone. I'm just going by the facts as they exist.

a reply to: SBMcG

And how do you know the "facts" as they exist?

The suicide rate is is that high in transgered people because of all the B.S. they have to go though from ignorant people.

a reply to: Astrocyte


So in general, can a person engrossed in a mindset; maybe better a habit of thinking of themselves as another gender, intensely enough and over a long enough period of time, cause the differences in brain structure that some of these transgender researchers are claiming to find in their studies?


And/Or are the structural differences they claim to find even significant?


ETA: Source that gave rise to my curiosity on this point:

It is simplistic to say that a female-to-male transgender person is a female trapped in a male body. It's not because they have a male brain but a transsexual brain.” Of course, behavior and experience shape brain anatomy, so it is impossible to say if these subtle differences are inborn.

Scientific American

originally posted by: kaylaluv

People with gender dysphoria don't think they are not a human - their brain and their body just got the gender mixed up. Male, female - still human.

Wait. If gender is socially constructed--meaning that gender and those roles associated with gender are not biologically determined but rather shaped by society--then how can you blame your biology/anatomy for getting it "mixed up"? The argument you're making is that anatomy and gender are somehow related. The problem with this is that you literally cannot make the argument that gender is fluid if you believe that it is determined by biology.

One of the major issues with going down this road--that gender is determined by, and or related to, anatomy and/or biology--is that all of those arguments about not differentiating between "male" and "female" roles are moot. You were born a "male" (or you feel like a male in a female's body--that applies) therefore you do "male" things and vice versa. You totally undermine Feminism with this idea, and it feels like it's undercutting certain arguments that we use to support the idea of gender identity. You can't choose what gender you identify with if you believe it was determined by your biology.

originally posted by: VelvetSplash
The suicide rate is is that high in transgered people because of all the B.S. they have to go though from ignorant people.

IT is also due to the inadequacy of current systems of surgery at least for those that start at adulthood without hormone therapy during adolescence.

A brain transplant could give you an 18 year old body of the gender of your choice in peak levels of attractiveness and performance. No one could tell the difference, but that technology is decades away.

Right now a feminine man is found attractive by many, but a masculine woman almost always not so.

a reply to: imwilliam

So in general, can a person engrossed in a mindset; maybe better a habit of thinking of themselves as another gender, intensely enough and over a long enough period of time, cause the differences in brain structure that some of these transgender researchers are claiming to find in their studies?

Basically. A male brain that thinks it is female will come to resemble some tiny sections of the female brain that pertain to self-identification. A similar situation exists for a part of the interstitial area of the anterior hypothalamus, where sexual orientation between males and females express a dimorphism. Lesbians come to resemble males, and homosexuals, female. Mind you though - it always "in between" the norms of each sex.

On an even more interesting point, why do people assume that female and male cells aren't fundamentally androgenized or estrogenized? Estrogen and Testosterone are produced at different rates by genetically male and female persons. By the time a person is 18, their entire bodily system has been regulated by genders-specific hormone levels.

Do you really think undergoing chemical therapy is good, when you're body will in effect be forced to recondition itself to a totally different regime of hormonal processes? Don't you think that would imperil the body i.e. generate a high degree of entropy, and thus, ultimately affect a persons life span by negatively affecting energy/storage and dissipation?

It's a carelessly thought through procedure which likely has serious long-term consequences.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: DeathSlayer

Do you understand that a psychologist has absolutely no business making a statement in a professional capacity about biology, don't you?

I mean, psychiatrists and psychologists practice soft science. They are simply not qualified to make such a judgement about biological matters, because most individuals in that field lack knowledge of biology, except as is specifically regards their work. You also understand, I assume, that where matters of identification of sexual or gender issues are concerned, a biologist, a geneticist, would be far better placed than any soft science, roll neck sweater type ever is, to comment from an informed position?

Sex is determined by Your chromosomes at a cellular level and no amount of wishing will ever change that fact.

An interesting way to test this idea is to check the telomere length of people pre and post hormone therapy.

I bet the teleomeres would have bee shaved back many times as the cell "heats up" trying to adapt to a new chemical environment.