Do You Believe In Transsexualism?

I know I spent a good amount of time referencing all of the Science detailing the difference between the male and female brain back a few pages and it was most likely completely ignored (seeing as the only person who responded to it accused me of attacking them personally and provided no evidence to counter the data) BUT I figured what the heck, might as well reference some more useless stupid Science.

Since a few posters have recently brought the debate of homosexuality being a choice into the picture I am wanting to bring attention to the experiments performed on mice by the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (INB4 PETA attacks me) dealing with genetically altered female mice that were attracted to and attempted to reproduce with other female mice.

www.biomedcentral.com...

-Mice displayed an abnormal sexual receptivity

-Mutant females exhibited a masculine behavior, such as mounting to a normal female partner as well as showing a preference to female urine (mice have an ability to detect pheromones in urine).

-Mutant females showed a reduction in tyrosine hydoxylase positive neurons compared to that of a normal female.

This is a stepping stone towards understanding what causes things like attraction to the same sex or both sexes (or neither sex as is the case with Asexual Humans).

Now moving away from same sex attraction

Could Transsexualism be partially Society driven? Yes
Could Transsexualism be partially Genetically Driven? Yes

It is important to be aware that Both causes could be a factor in a human coming to the conclusion that they are the wrong sex and wish to change that. Or a combination of both.

Telling people that they are just doing it because it is what society tells them or it is a fetish when in fact it could be a difference in the Brain Chemistry from birth is DEVASTATING!

Picture it like this fellow ATS'ers. How would you cope with someone putting you through therapy to become the opposite sex? How much would you resist something like that? Having a psychiatrist tell you that you that you are not a man/woman and you need to have surgery to alter your body?

You KNOW from birth that you are a man/woman. You KNOW that you would never get a surgery to change your sex. Some of these people KNOW from birth that they are not the right sex. They KNOW it. They know they are the wrong sex in the same way that you know you are the right one.

I will admit there are probably some people who are on the fence or might be driven by psychological environmental factors rather than genetic birth factors.

In the end does it affect you if someone wants to have a sex change? probably not. Are people going to try and find a way to argue against something they do not understand? I would bet on it.

Me personally I am Asexual and I look at the rest of you as some weird strange life forms. 99% of everything that you do seems to revolve around your sex organs. Who you can show them to, how much of them you can show and where, what time you can show them, what type of materials you use to cover your sex organs up with. You have built an entire social structure based on fabric patterns covering up sex organs. Not to mention the majority of your television programs deal with mating rituals and fornication. BUT the fact that humans are still primitive is another argument entirely.

Threads like these are interesting. I guess it's the reason words that used to have several meanings now have 10.

A victory...for the Publishing industry at least.

[edit on 4/9/2010 by Dark Ghost]

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps


Your post is excellent.

I just don't usually respond if no discussion or debate is needed.

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps


Good, quality post.

But it still doesn't change the fact that you CANNOT change your sex.

reply to post by Death_Kron


Not YET!

If the only difference between a male and a female is the ability to produce sperm or an egg, just give Science a little bit of time. Science is one mean mofo. This contrivance will in fact happen.

(Did I use the word contrivance correctly? Either way it sounds wicked doesn't it? Just let it roll off your tongue...Contrivance...Contrivance...)

Originally posted by idonotcollectstamps
Not YET!

If the only difference between a male and a female is the ability to produce sperm or an egg, just give Science a little bit of time. Science is one mean mofo. This contrivance will in fact happen.

(Did I use the word contrivance correctly? Either way it sounds wicked doesn't it? Just let it roll off your tongue...Contrivance...Contrivance...)

At what point do you think DNA engineering might go too far? Could it be said that our progression in DNA manipulation is heading in a dangerous direction? When will the line be drawn that separates the natural from the unnatural?

[edit on 4/9/2010 by Dark Ghost]

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Death_Kron

 

Good Question.

I think, biologically, it is possible for someone to develop as one sex, and then switch to another sex. Maybe they have latent hormones that cause them to lean more one way than the other, despite their physical characteristics. It is obvious that we have some men born more feminine than others, and we have some women born more masculine than others.

Now, I think you are asking the harder question about whether or not this "should" lead to homosexuality and/or sex change operations. My answer to both of those questions is a resounding NO.

I know we have a lot of homosexual members on ATS, and I hope they don't take it personally, but I don't believe it is biological in nature, and I don't even believe that it is more than a perversion. If a man is homosexual, then the last thing that should be attractive to him is another homosexual man? Hmmm? He should only be attracted to masculine heterosexual men, if the affliction is real? The same goes for women. If a women is homosexual, the last thing in the world that should be attractive to her is a masculine women dressed and acting butch? How does that make any sense?

I am a very straight man, and I have seen other men that were attractive, and in a prison setting, or a very, very, long sea tour, maybe I would start to have thoughts? But, these were very feminine men, that could be mistaken for women. I have never in my life seen a masculine man that was attractive to me. It seems to me the same would be true for a homosexual man. Maybe they see some feminine men or masculine women that they might branch out to during a long dry spell, but in general, their attraction should be the masculine male.

Since, we all see in practice that homosexual men and women are generally paired up with other homosexual men and women, it seems to shoot a hole in the whole biological theory. If they are hardwired to be feminine and be attracted to masculine, then we should not see them with other feminine men, and vice versa for women.

Therefore, in my very unmedical, and probably intolerant and sexist opinion, for which I apologize in advance, but in my opinion, homosexuality is just a fetish or perversion, and not biological in nature.

Yeah of course gay men are attracted to masculine hetero men...if you look at ANY gay dating website you'll see almost every single profile saying "In search of masculine". Some people deviate and like feminine guys but most of them like what's called "straight-acting". Out of all the billions of people in the world, of COURSE there's gonna be some deviation among what attracts people, it's not just black and white. LOL

reply to post by Dark Ghost


I really do not know. I wish I understood it more but there are so many intricate specialties that all come together to encompass that field of Science. You need like 50 different kinds of doctorate degrees to explain even simple functions. I guess that is better left up to the elected politicians who are SUPPOSED to represent every single one of us (and not just their voters).

reply to post by idonotcollectstamps


I think you did use the word correctly sir and I'll agree that it does indeed roll off the tongue very well!

Science maybe brilliant but messing with things like that should not be done in my opinion, it's wrong to mess with nature. If things were supposed to be different then they would have been, using science to correct that sort of stuff is only going to cause problems.

Outside of sexual preference and fetishism (take away the sex drive) and what you have left is someone who (in the absence of societal prejudice) theoretically wouldn't care what gender their significant other was because their relationship is based on love and not copulation.

Gay men are men who have a sexual preference or fetish for the male body
Straight men are men who have a sexual preference or fetish for the female body

Same for Women (vis-versa)

Now, take the body and its physical urges away so you are left with only the spirit, and gender should become irrelevant.

There is more to this that I could write but some won't quite get what I'm saying so I'll keep it short.

reply to post by blackhatchet


I understand what your saying to a dgree but ultimately the main biological basis for a human being (or any other living being for that matter) is generally to reproduce i.e. to mate, have offspring and continue the blood line.

Of course you can be attracted to someone's personality, I've been drawn to people who have lovely personalities but I wouldn't touch with a barge pole because of their looks.

As shallow as that may sound I'm sorry but it's the truth, physical attraction will always play a part in a relationship.

reply to post by Death_Kron


You're right, if a man who's truly a man underwent all of that, he'd be in constant turmoil. But if someone you perceive as a man is on the brink of suicide, waking up each day knowing it's another day of misery, undergoes what you describe and it stops that, it actually makes them happy.. maybe that's a sign they're NOT a man on one level or another.

You say you can't understand it, well, congratulations, it means you're not trans, not that it's not real.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost

At what point do you think DNA engineering might go too far? Could it be said that our progression in DNA manipulation is heading in a dangerous direction? When will the line be drawn that separates the natural from the unnatural?

I think that you'd find that science is working more to prevent tumultuous issues such as this from ever happening rather than manipulating DNA as part of some agenda.

Over the course of the last few weeks I've noticed you've used the term "natural" vs. "unnatural." My opinion on this and other issues is that it's ALL natural, regardless of whether we understand and/or agree with the outcome. These people are born the way they are. that, in my opinion, makes it a NATURAL phenomenon. Not understanding something doesn't automatically make something "wrong." Wrong is denying all evidence simply to fit an individuals biased or conditioned belief system.

Originally posted by stephanies-chase
reply to post by spaznational

 

I'm guessing you feel the same way about homosexuality?...I'm also gonna go out on a limb and say you are most likely a very religious person...am I right? What are you, catholic...christian...doesn't matter, I think you need therapy.

No, I don't feel the same way about homosexuality. Homosexuality and transgenderism are very different phenomena. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you didn't follow the logic of my post.

And you're limb just broke, sorry, no religion for me thanks. Your response is very telling of your own biases. And you felt personally attacked by my post, which is interesting. My post was not attacking anyone, not even transgendered people. I wouldn't attack people with anorexia either....

Transgenderism, in my opinion, is a form of body dysmorphic disorder or something similar. The individual's self image and feelings don't match the physical body. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you feel we should humor people with serious mental disorders rather than help them learn to manage the disorder.

Originally posted by ~Vixen~

Originally posted by spaznational

It's the XX or XY chromosomes that make a gender.

Actually, approximately 3% of all human beings have abnormal chromosomal mosaics that do not conform to your rigid XX/XY only scenario. (XXX, XXY, XYY, X0, etc.) How do you propose they be "classified?"

I'd propose that rather than marginalize those who are different from you, you should, instead leave them alone to live their lives as they see fit.

Wow! Please don't jump to conclusions! I am VERY MUCH INTO leaving people alone to live their lives and have not suggested otherwise! Like the last poster, your response to my post shows your own biases with your emotion-based attack on me.

Chromosomal mosaicism is not uncommon, yet these individuals have chromosome-based gender selection just like XX and XY....

XXX = female
XXY = male
XYY = male
XO = female
YO = dead

Essentially, the default is female. Add a Y and you have male regardless of the abnormalities. I'm not "proposing" anything, this is how it is.

reply to post by Death_Kron

I believe in quartersexualism! Which is, someone who will do anything to anyone for a quarter. People should be free. I mind my own business about anothers sexuality...unless she is a nubile woman, then she may tell me all about it. I can be a great listener.

How is this tied into zionism and 911? sheesh you would think Trans or Hom0 was an important topic.... let them fend for themselves... why should they have any more rights than a hetero? if they need rights against our way of being we should then have rights against theirs.... its a two way street baby... lol I dont have gay friends..... your point is?

Originally posted by spaznational

Wow! Please don't jump to conclusions! I am VERY MUCH INTO leaving people alone to live their lives and have not suggested otherwise! Like the last poster, your response to my post shows your own biases with your emotion-based attack on me.

Chromosomal mosaicism is not uncommon, yet these individuals have chromosome-based gender selection just like XX and XY....

XXX = female
XXY = male
XYY = male
XO = female
YO = dead

Essentially, the default is female. Add a Y and you have male regardless of the abnormalities. I'm not "proposing" anything, this is how it is.

My point is, and always has been, that sex, gender, gender identity, etc, are the sum of a complex combination of factors that transcend simple "A or B" type answers. It's not our right to label others simply so that they may conform to "societal norms." If a person, classified as female at birth, self identifies as male, and takes steps to appear and function socially as a man, I respect HIS right to self determination regardless of chromosomes and reproductive organs. My sincere wish is that someday people will learn to respect others for who they are rather than for what they are.

If my reply to your earlier post seemed like it was emotionally biased, I apologize. As a pediatric surgeon this is one of the many emotionally charged subjects that I deal with on a fairly regular basis, and personal bias can sometimes be hard to put aside. I've seen too many childrens lives literally ruined by well meaning but overzealous doctors and/or parents try to "classify" children for all the wrong reasons.

Originally posted by ~Vixen~

Originally posted by spaznational

Wow! Please don't jump to conclusions! I am VERY MUCH INTO leaving people alone to live their lives and have not suggested otherwise! Like the last poster, your response to my post shows your own biases with your emotion-based attack on me.

Chromosomal mosaicism is not uncommon, yet these individuals have chromosome-based gender selection just like XX and XY....

XXX = female
XXY = male
XYY = male
XO = female
YO = dead

Essentially, the default is female. Add a Y and you have male regardless of the abnormalities. I'm not "proposing" anything, this is how it is.

My point is, and always has been, that sex, gender, gender identity, etc, are the sum of a complex combination of factors that transcend simple "A or B" type answers. It's not our right to label others simply so that they may conform to "societal norms." If a person, classified as female at birth, self identifies as male, and takes steps to appear and function socially as a man, I respect HIS right to self determination regardless of chromosomes and reproductive organs. My sincere wish is that someday people will learn to respect others for who they are rather than for what they are.

If my reply to your earlier post seemed like it was emotionally biased, I apologize. As a pediatric surgeon this is one of the many emotionally charged subjects that I deal with on a fairly regular basis, and personal bias can sometimes be hard to put aside. I've seen too many childrens lives literally ruined by well meaning but overzealous doctors and/or parents try to "classify" children for all the wrong reasons.

I understand what you're saying. I know it isn't ultimately your decision to make, but if you were personally facing this decision as a parent would you decided to forgo surgery and let the child mature before making any permanent surgical alterations? That's what I would have to do... the consequences of deciding the wrong gender then pursuing surgery + hormone therapy would be too grave. The child would need to grow up then decide for him/herself.

Respect for the rights of individuals is paramount in our society. I have never advocated forcing people to conform to societal norms. But freedom of speech cuts both ways and I am allowed to be critical of others just as they are of me. My personal view of the subject makes logical sense to me and I will freely express my personal view here on a discussion forum.... and here it is restated, elaborated!....

Short of physical/congenital issues a person's gender is predetermined. When an individual has a body image that does not match his/her actual body (body dysmorphic disorder) this is considered a mental illness, and a serious one at that. Why are transsexuals exempt from this, unlike anorexics, bulimics, etc? People will go to dangerous extremes to solve cognitive dissonance: starvation, steroids for bodybuilding, binging/purging, and genital reconfiguration for transsexuals. There exists the double-standard; people are horrified of bodybuilders using anabolic steroids but applaud a "brave" post-op transsexual.

The transsexuals and bodybuilders are both free to do this (well, except when the bodybuilder gets busted for drug possession) but is either commendable? Laudable? Deserving of praise? I'd say no, because it is all the extreme symptoms of a mental illness.

Do we praise the guy who hides in his house, wearing a tin-foil hat, hording old furniture? (Ok, maybe on ATS, lol) No, but at the same time I'm not going to stop him. Perhaps his family should stage an intervention. Perhaps the transsexual's family should stage an intervention likewise. But, generally speaking, people are free to be as neurotic as they fancy.

While not actively preventing such behaviors, I will also not enable them. I will point out that our society has a sort of collective cognitive dissonance about which mental illness/disorders are bad and discouraged and which are good and re-defined as normal. Depression is far more common than transsexualism yet depression is the one that gets treated as abnormal, whereas I'd argue that depression is part of the natural spectrum of emotion (when periodic and not continuous or extreme).

In summary:
1) Transsexualism is a specific type of mental disorder
2) Don't enable mental disorders
3) BUT also don't violate people's rights

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by the Gospel of Luke

 

BSCt is irrelevant, just because your born feeling like you should be a woman doesn't change the fact that your a man. It's simple biology...

Again, you've ignored half my post.

If you're so right, why the need to constantly do this?

You've still given no consistant definition of what a man is.

And guess what, your brain structure is a PART of your biology.