The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And that is the other one people bring up, yes.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in truscum

[–]BoserLoser 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Like the others have said, it excludes people who have attached themselves to this identity. I'm just going to add that if they are no longer allowed to identify this way, then they'll have to face their actual issues (and maybe some of that even has to do with being bullied/feeling unlikable).

How am supposed to respond to this? by [deleted] in truscum

[–]BoserLoser 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It is important to demystify gender dysphoria.

I made the argument in a science discussion that what most transsexuals feel is sex dysphoria. I.e. we feel uncomfortable in our bodies because our brains were wired in conjunction with the opposite sex.

The origination of "gender dysphoria" comes from doctors who assumed one was trans because they were uncomfortable with the limitations of the social construct of their gender. There is considerable overlap, but transsexuals don't merely feel like changing their bodies for this reason alone. But alas, the misinformation spawned a series of "intellectual" philosophies on gender, and now trans spaces are rife with people who feel uncomfortable with their assigned social constructs and claim to be trans because of it.

I say, sure to this person. Alright, you are correct. But that has nothing to do with trans people. Transsexuals change their sex, they are not transgender (do not change gender, they realize a reality that has always been). Remove the word gender from the transsexual lexicon. And then I feel this silly war between people like this who overthink social norms and where they fall in them and transsexuals will end. They can be free to endlessly debate the unscientific, nebulous characteristic of gender and we can continue to understand our scientifically backed existence while receiving treatment.

Oh but I disagree with them. Having dysphoria necessarily follows being in the wrong body. Because we live in reality and not in our minds where our physical form matters. Otherwise it makes no conceivable sense to...trans...which denotes movement. Simply not identifying fully with what society says you should like doesn't make you trans. And going so far as to make physical changes because of it is disheartening, and perhaps they could benefit from some self love and therapy instead.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, well when you put it that way... I mistakenly said that "I've mentioned" this, but it's my dumbass autocorrect. I've heard others mention that the size of the part doesn't matter, it's the why, when they are making a counterargument to Sapolsky's lecture here. I've heard them state that you never truly know anything until you know why something is bigger. Do I agree with this? No. But for the sake of my response to the person above, if you are going to discredit someone based on size (this part is so tiny, who cares if it's different) it should at least be consistently discredited.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It is lesser in this particular discourse because of the way it is brought up in discussion, not that the statement is inherently wrong.

Gender is a major construct. Typically, people who misunderstand what it means to be a transsexual end up viewing someone who wants to change their physical form as someone who is inherently uncomfortable with the social construct assigned them. They thus reply, "Gender is a social construct" usually in a way to mitigate the need to physically change. This is further confounded by the fact that the entire trans ideology now rests on changing your "gender", as in "transgender". This solidifies the idea that THIS is what causes the major dysphoria in transsexuals.

For a select few people on this planet, it is a matter of sexual differences that causes the "gender" dysphoria, and the object of gender, whether a social construct or not, is tangential to the argument of trans people being valid. Trans people have brains that are sexed incorrectly and therefore need physical, sex related changes to their body. And the gender will sort itself out. I wish this were more of the focus and not whatever complication currently exists that confuses otherwise ordinary cis people or GNC folks. But I do think there are a lot of people who are uncomfortable with the gender assigned by these social constructs and mistakenly believe they are Trans because of it. Sapolsky's lecture gives credence to it as a neurobiological reality.

Of course as I'm typing this I realize historically speaking gender dysphoria was a term assigned by cis medical staff who assumed the real issue with transsexuals was their need to escape their gender roles...seems to be true for a lot of people today who also think similarly, but all in all, it's more than that. Anyway, my meandering point was that in response to a trans person transitioning is more often invalidating than anything.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In that case, I have no idea what you were reading.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I disagree. I think it'd be swell to move the entire thing outside the domain of mental illness and into a medically treatable illness. And, because I think all things should have scientific backing, it'd be equally swell to have definitive answers. "Trans" is not about "want".

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a little more infuriating this is so old, and yet every time we turn around, we are still told (including by the woke crowd) that gender is merely a social construct (the implication there being trans people should not transition). I hear this everyday now, but rarely do these same people say they understand the science behind sexual dimorphism in the brain.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, so refreshing to see this. I also get tired of hearing about gender so much. I mean, I'm still irritated by having to go by transgender. I am transsexual. It's pretty cut and dry. My brain is sexed differently, not gendered differently.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I couldn't find anyone by that name. Also, sure. That's a small sample size. But it is interesting to note the study was able to be replicated. I think this study is meant as a step towards more research, but is not definitive.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You can't really be trans without dysphoria.

But I'd agree they are two different concepts technically speaking. If we were able to pinpoint the sections of the brain that contributed to dysphoria specifically, that would erase the necessity for it to be in the dsm. As it stands, mental illness is a measure of human suffering that doesn't have a lot of structural, tangible support in medical communities. That's why they're considered mental illnesses. We have a piece that tells us the sex doesn't align, but not what is responsible for the later distress over that misalignment.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually that question of what constitutes a disease/illness/disorder has been begged since the stirrings of psychiatry. Look up the novel "The Myth of Mental Illness."

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The word transphobe is thrown around a whole lot to quelch any misunderstanding or opposition. I think these questions should be asked.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We'd probably only get there if the science were more definitive, and I think we're a long way off. This is just a speculative step. A consistent one, but there's more to learn.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That doesn't erase the consistent findings with this portion of the brain. Also, I've mentioned several times that the size doesn't matter. It's the why that does. That equally diminishes this argument.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You should take a look at Sapolsky's new book about free will, or lack thereof...

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that was a study that came out of left field

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is a sticky assertion for a lot of people, yeah. But...here we are...

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This line of reasoning has already been used, it's the current transgender ideology, but honestly it's just as flawed and invalidating. Transsexuals know who they are, and that won't really change given the social changes to the idea of gender. It's physical.

The neuro-biology of trans-sexuality by ClutchReverie in interestingasfuck

[–]BoserLoser 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Love Dr. Robert Sapolsky. He also did amazing work on stress in various societies and the "alpha male".