Greta wrote:Spectrum wrote:The issue of 'trangenderism' is not a topic of diversity in the positive sense but rather is a birth defect due to the wrong connections of the physical module with the gender module.
Like autism? Bipolar? Schizophrenia? BPD? Depression and anxiety? Paranoia?
Like I had stated, it more like synaesthesia, color blind, down syndrome, extreme OCD, speech disorders, etc. and those related to case of significant bad wirings, miswired, cross-wirings, etc..
As for diversity, there is possibility hundreds, thousands of human variables that are exposed to be diversified but there is only a problem if it is raised in society and evident as the problem of the transgenders -re raised in this OP. We have a diversity of people having different interests in sports, job, hobbies, etc. which are not a big issue.
I think transgenderism simply makes sense. You have the very most manly men and the very most feminine women, with the rest in between. Right in the middle are the very most androgynous people. Such a scale (Bell curve) can be plotted for physical, mental and emotional characteristics. No doubt, given the rigidity that remains from the patriarchies of the past, androgynous people will at some stage find their gender role terribly uncomfortable, forcing them into having to constantly play-act their lives. In other words, they may not feel safe being themselves.
What make sense is the physical sex gender continuum.
I don't see you accounting for the following features and events;
1. Physical Features
The most physical manly macho men will be at one end of the continuum and the most feminine physical woman at the other extreme. In the middle are the heamophrodites of various degrees with mix physical sexual features. This obviously make sense.
2. Mental and Emotional
Then we have the most mental and emotional continuum, from the most manly mental and emotional on one end to the most feminine on the other end. This also make sense.
The most normal connection will be;
most physical
manly macho men [1] with most
manly mental and emotional [2].
This obvious make sense.
then we have the variations, i.e.
most physical manly macho men [1] with 50% of manly mental and emotional [2]
most physical
manly macho men [1] with 10% of
manly mental and emotional [2]
The latter are those classified as sissy men who may cross-dress but are not transgenders per se.
So these still make sense along the continuum.
The above are on the right track of connectivity,
but there would be a mismatch and bad wirings if we have
the most physical
manly macho men [1] with 10% of the
feminine mental and emotional [2]
the most physical
manly macho men [1] with 99% of the
feminine mental and emotional [2]
Note the combination in the different colors.
One good example of a highly physical man connected with a high degree of feminine-ness is Caitlin Jenner whose athleticism in the Pentathalon exemplify the highest male sport who has transform physically and is expressing herself mentally and emotionally as a woman.
Thus when there is a combination [bad wirings] of
1. Sexual Physical features with
2. Mental, psychological, emotional of the opposite sex,
then there is a bad wiring and "transgenderism" per se.
This bad wirings is a case of birth defect which imo can be prevent or corrected when in the future we have the knowledge and competence [no side effects, fool proof, voluntary] to do so.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.