I don't understand the perceived threat of transgender

[Spectrum]

Spectrum wrote:

Belindi,
as I had stated personally I do not have a problem with transgenders at present [given the current state of knowledge and technology] they can do whatever they want within the provisions of the law.

Here is a question regarding the future [say 100, 200 years or later],

1. Do you want transgenders, say male-to-female to keep injecting themselves daily with loads of female hormones for life till death, plus doing a sex change to be a female so be in line with their female psychological impulses, e.g. like Caitlin Jenner.

2. By 100, 200 years or later in the future, we have the knowledge and technology to allow those transgenders [male] to voluntarily opt [rewire] or correct the neural connectivity permanently to be a 100% male psychologically instead of ending up with female psychological tendencies. This option will enable the transgenders [male] to avoid injecting daily doses of female hormones and having to do a sex change operation.

What is your preference on the above views?

As I have been proposing I will recommend option 2.

1. No. I don't like any surgical interventions that aren't necessary either to save life, or to relieve suffering. There is mental suffering which arises from having a sexuality which is denied or disowned. I may be wrong, but I think that transgender people who try to alter their bodies are overwhelmed by popular belief that sex=gender. I need to know more about this before I can comment.

What about " people injecting themselves daily with loads of hormones for life till death to match their physical features to their psychological thoughts. Do you agree with this?

If you don't like surgical interventions that are not necessary, then you should agree with me that 'prevention' is better than cure.
By 'prevention' I meant rewiring neurally or using certain fool proof ways [in the future not now] to ensure a person with a penis do not abhor/hate that appendage and want to get rid of it by surgery and replace it with an artificial vagina. It will also prevent a person from breast enlargement by hormonal treatments or surgery. There will no related psychological sufferings and necessary psychiatric testings and counselling.

2.In 100 years time I would hope that male and female genders are not differentiated. I hope that by now, Spectrum, you understand that sexual activity and sexual physiology is not the same as gender. Gender is a social attribution of power and other behaviours such as differentiation of roles. Obviously the roles of pregnancy and lactation are attached to female physiology. Nurturing, making, and evaluating can pertain to any physiological sex. In the absence of power imbalance there will be no need for any surgical or chemical intervention to change physiological sex. Contraceptive intervention I will concede.

If male and female genders are not differentiated in the future, it is merely semantics.

If 'male' and 'females' are not used semantically to represent certain people, then we have to use long narratives. e.g. what we used to label as male would be described as a group of human who has penis, testicles, certain DNA arrangements, and whatever qualities that are differentiated from another group that was described as female. This is rather a stupid idea which is cumbersome and inefficient.
This is going against of human nature of recognizing patterns of common features to facilitate communications and progress.

It is not a matter of power. Differentiation of roles can be easily resolved and that is not the critical issue.
It is obvious there will be a percentile of humans who are not happy with their existing physical features they are born with and wanting to change them to suit their mental thinking. If we can prevent such mismatch from the start, why not?

I suspect that ideas about the sex act which seemingly inevitably includes a receptacle and a penetrator are used to justify power to penises and quiescence to vaginas. We also have deeply ingrained symbols like the rose or moonlight(quiescent, feminine), and the invading insect or the sun(active, masculine). Symbolism is very prominent in Chinese Taoism, and flourishes elsewhere, like in Europe, from time to time. Those symbols are reflections of power relations and perpetuate them. Sex is not gender relations. Physiology is not culture . We should change the symbols not the human bodies.

-- Updated August 11th, 2017, 5:04 am to add the following --
I should have said that the symbolic system in Taoism is balanced as yin and yang. This is not the case with western symbols which reflect, not balance, but imbalance of power between the sexes.

Attitudes, power and symbols related to penises and vaginas are superficial issues which can be changed and adapted without prejudice to any person.

The main issue with transgender is SOME people wanting to change their physical feature to match their psychological, mental and sexual impulses and behaviors.
My proposal [for the future] is to prevent this mismatch at the source so to avoid hormonal treatment [for whole life], surgery and all the related psychological issues.

On the other hand you seem to want the transgenders to bear with the inconvenience of hormonal treatments [for whole life], surgery, all the related psychological issues and sufferings.

-- Updated Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:06 pm to add the following --

Spectrum -
It would be nice if someone who felt like they were a woman in a mans body and wanted be in a womans body could change their physical gender. I doubt they would want to change their brain.

At present, the mention of anything thing to do with changing the brain seem to attract fears and horrors.

Note all humans has changed their brain in various ways from birth to death without being aware of it. One obvious is changes after puberty. Other examples are changes related to skill developments, etc.

What I had proposed is not doing it now but in the future with fool proofs methods and the change is not very noticeable nor stressful. Note the pros of this gradual change that include no surgery, no injection of hormones for life, no psychological issues.

-- Updated Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:33 pm to add the following --

Spectrum -
It would be nice if someone who felt like they were a woman in a mans body and wanted be in a womans body could change their physical gender. I doubt they would want to change their brain.

Can you or someone please tell me what exactly it means for a man to “feel like a woman”? I presume it doesn’t mean, or just mean, same sex attraction as that is true for homosexual men with no "gender confusion.". I don’t know, but I would think that the typical feminist woman would feel offended to have someone state that women “feel” differently than men. What? Weaker? More inclined to timidity? More afraid of math? What?

Evolutionary wise there is a dichotomy as observed for two main groups of humans identified biologically as 'male' and 'female'.
The dichotomy range from very distinct to not-distinct [overlapping].
What we are concern here are the very distinct differences in terms of physical and mental qualities.
It is very obvious what has been labelled as biologically 'male' is very different from the biologically 'female'. Their physical differences are also supported neurally by psychological and mental differences.
It is obvious the females [basic] will tend to suckle an infant in correspond to their physical breasts but not the males. This tendency is driven by a neural program. There are many neural programs that are very distinct [not grey ones] between males and females - don't think it is necessary for me to list them all.

One interesting program that is embedded in the male is the "trusting" impulse/instinct in relation to the male appendage while the female has a 'open leg' [lordosis] program embedded in the brain to facilitate procreation and preserving the species. This is why there are some males who instinctively thrust their hips for the wrong reasons, at the wrong place and time.

[Burning ghost]

Spectrum -

I have no idea what you are talking about then! haha! I guess if someone wants to change their brain then fair enough. By doing so they change who they are too. It sounds to me like something akin to plastic surgery.

I am a man. Would I want to experience life as a woman? Yes, I would be interested for sure. It is also quite possible I could in another world "feel like" a man and possess a female body and sex organs. It is also possible I may be happy being a "man in a woman's body" and not want to change anything. I think this last point is key. There is societal pressure to conform to what is accepted as "the norm", and humans do want to feel a part of society so we find trends of people/s trying to adjust.

to everyone in general -

I also understand that the mood toward the "liberal" people who want to look out for every group/s. There is the strange irony of revealing an inequality within society and in doing so creating more of a societal divide by doing so in some circumstances. The very terms "homosexual" and "heterosexual" are surprisingly recent terms. Not too long ago people were in some ways more accepting.

To sum up humans are pretty stupid and confused creatures trying to figure out their position in, among and outside of abstract lines of division. The abstract nature of how we process reality is merely the best way with know to cope consolidate distinctions and understand anything. Every conflict is a kind of exploration of understanding and relative positions.

[Spectrum]

Spectrum -

I have no idea what you are talking about then! haha! I guess if someone wants to change their brain then fair enough. By doing so they change who they are too. It sounds to me like something akin to plastic surgery.

I am a man. Would I want to experience life as a woman? Yes, I would be interested for sure. It is also quite possible I could in another world "feel like" a man and possess a female body and sex organs. It is also possible I may be happy being a "man in a woman's body" and not want to change anything. I think this last point is key. There is societal pressure to conform to what is accepted as "the norm", and humans do want to feel a part of society so we find trends of people/s trying to adjust.

You are changing the subject.
Who is asking you [ as a man] to change to have female qualities [physical and mental] and burden yourself having to inject female hormones and other chemicals every day in your whole life with the possibility you could be seduced for a sex change.

The issue here is there is a certain natural percentile of humans who are born with a psychological set of gender that do not match to their physical gender due to wrong connections in the brain/mind. In such cases, the male is hating his penis and want to get rid of it.
For these transgender people what I propose is in the future [not now] it would be easier to prevent or correct the wrong connection in the brain at soon as possible, e.g. it will stop the transgender from hating his own penis and grow up like any other people with a penis.

[Burning ghost]

Not all hate their penises. I am not changing the subject at all. I find those that you are talking about are not representative of ALL trangender people. Some may crave to be in a female/male body while others will not. I am unsure whether this is due to society dictating norms or a genuine displeasure. Either way it would be preferential if people had the choice to change as they saw fit, but also there is also the question of whether it is for vanity? It is a really tricky subject.

Note people like Eddie Izzard. He doesn't seem concerned about having a penis and he is attracted to women. There is a whole spectrum and some may be confused and others may simply be more confused because the modern world is becoming more and more about labels and brands, about borders and divides.

[Belindi]

Alias wrote:

It's not for me to judge what anyone should or should not do with/for/on/to their own person, or whether their motivation is or is not valid.
I figure, if somebody elects to bear the consequences, they probably have their own compelling reasons.

I completely agree with all of your accompanying post, Alias.

I take issue with this last bit because you are being a different narrator in this last bit that I copied. In the foregoing text you are objective . In this last bit you are in the position of practical moralist and legislator. As such I agree with you here as well. We will mark our voting papers similarly.

-- Updated August 12th, 2017, 5:38 am to add the following --

Spectrum wrote:

By 'prevention' I meant rewiring neurally or using certain fool proof ways [in the future not now] to ensure a person with a penis do not abhor/hate that appendage and want to get rid of it by surgery and replace it with an artificial vagina. It will also prevent a person from breast enlargement by hormonal treatments or surgery. There will no related psychological sufferings and necessary psychiatric testings and counselling.

As I understand you, you want transgender people to conform to societal norms. I take the opposite view that I want societal norms to include transgender people.

If societal norms include transgender people those people at least won't have the extra burden of society disapproving of who they feel they are.
In the case of society's not disapproving of who people are some cause, at least, of dysmorphia will be no more.

-- Updated August 12th, 2017, 5:39 am to add the following --

It is a basic wrong that any person be persuaded by others that there is something wrong with their healthy body and healthy mind.

[Don Schneider]

Spectrum -
It would be nice if someone who felt like they were a woman in a mans body and wanted be in a womans body could change their physical gender. I doubt they would want to change their brain.

Can you or someone please tell me what exactly it means for a man to “feel like a woman”? I presume it doesn’t mean, or just mean, same sex attraction as that is true for homosexual men with no "gender confusion.". I don’t know, but I would think that the typical feminist woman would feel offended to have someone state that women “feel” differently than men. What? Weaker? More inclined to timidity? More afraid of math? What?

Spectrum replied:

Evolutionary wise there is a dichotomy as observed for two main groups of humans identified biologically as 'male' and 'female'.
The dichotomy range from very distinct to not-distinct [overlapping].
What we are concern here are the very distinct differences in terms of physical and mental qualities.
It is very obvious what has been labelled as biologically 'male' is very different from the biologically 'female'. Their physical differences are also supported neurally by psychological and mental differences.
It is obvious the females [basic] will tend to suckle an infant in correspond to their physical breasts but not the males. This tendency is driven by a neural program. There are many neural programs that are very distinct [not grey ones] between males and females - don't think it is necessary for me to list them all.

One interesting program that is embedded in the male is the "trusting" impulse/instinct in relation to the male appendage while the female has a 'open leg' [lordosis] program embedded in the brain to facilitate procreation and preserving the species. This is why there are some males who instinctively thrust their hips for the wrong reasons, at the wrong place and time.

_________________________________________________________

Oh, gees, Spectrum, I’d advise you not to apply for a job with Google. For all the world, you sound just like the software engineer who was just fired after he wrote a memo trying to explain why women are not as well suited for high-tech jobs as men are for just such biological and gender psychological reasons. How politically incorrect you be!

[Sy Borg]

It's a bit sad when the standard of chat on a philosophy forum is more naive than on business and management forums. It has been shown over and over again that, as regards mental capacities, there is more difference within the genders than between them. The overlap is significant.

Thus, a statement that "women are not as well suited for high-tech jobs as men" has a semantic that conveys the erroneous message that "all men are better suited to high tech jobs than women", even if it's just subconscious signalling. That more men are more technically inclined than women is obvious, but to gloss over the overlaps is lightweight.

It's all rather funny when I think of my numerous male colleagues over the decades who needed my help with their programs or databases (and IT wasn't my job, which was just HR reporting & stat analysis).

[Don Schneider]

It's a bit sad when the standard of chat on a philosophy forum is more naive than on business and management forums. It has been shown over and over again that, as regards mental capacities, there is more difference within the genders than between them. The overlap is significant.

Thus, a statement that "women are not as well suited for high-tech jobs as men" has a semantic that conveys the erroneous message that "all men are better suited to high tech jobs than women", even if it's just subconscious signalling. That more men are more technically inclined than women is obvious, but to gloss over the overlaps is lightweight.

It's all rather funny when I think of my numerous male colleagues over the decades who needed my help with their programs or databases (and IT wasn't my job, which was just HR reporting & stat analysis).

Fine, Greta, at least we seem to agree here. So what exactly does a "transgender" man “feeling like a woman” mean? What does it feel like to be a woman? Again, please discount being physically and romantically attracted to men (in the case of most women) as the same is true of homosexual men who are not “transgender”. Thank you.

[Sy Borg]

Fine, Greta, at least we seem to agree here. So what exactly does a "transgender" man “feeling like a woman” mean? What does it feel like to be a woman? Again, please discount being physically and romantically attracted to men (in the case of most women) as the same is true of homosexual men who are not “transgender”. Thank you.

Given that I don't know what it feels like to be a man, I'm not sure I can say much about what it feels like to be a boy who feels like a girl and becomes a man who feels like a woman. Remember, these things don't start in adulthood but are lifelong ... feeling? Sensations? Impressions? Sensibilities?

I accept that others can be different to me, with different needs. What is good for me may be harmful to others and vice versa. As far as I can tell stigma, violence, hate murders, rapes, public humiliation, electroshock therapy, behavioural or cognitive therapy, or religious conversion facilities changes the way these people feel. In lieu of a solution, I think it appropriate to stop the suffering and my understanding is that post-operative regret when the operations are successful is very low. So why stop them? Why does it matter to you? Do you yourself feel like you should be a woman but you resisted that inclination, thus judging those who like you who could not fight it?

Otherwise, how can we judge people who mean not harm if we have no idea how they feel?

[-1-]

Fine, Greta, at least we seem to agree here. So what exactly does a "transgender" man “feeling like a woman” mean? What does it feel like to be a woman? Again, please discount being physically and romantically attracted to men (in the case of most women) as the same is true of homosexual men who are not “transgender”. Thank you.

What does it feel like to be a woman? Esp. when you are a male. And not counting sexual attraction.

- feel like men opening the door for you
- feel like turning always the wrong way when getting out of an elevator on the upper floors.
- feel like nurturing a scorpion who has lost a leg, because scorpions are real people too. (I don't mean "Scorpios", the astrological sign.)
- feel not leaving any tip beyond full payment for the service if the waiter looks down into your cleavage or makes a snide remark about Justin Bieber.
- feel like teaching a dog to sit down on the curb before crossing a street at the corner (honestly, on my mother's grave, that's one of the stupidest move in dog training... I have yet to see a dog who does that without heavy prompting at first. It's not the idea I diss, it's the futility of it.)
- feel like saying that Benny Hill and Monty Python were imbeciles, with no sense of humour, and that Monopoly is the stupidest board game
- feel like watching movies with no action or dialogue, other than two people staring at each other, repeating the whole 2 hours and forty minutes of the movie, "I love you."
- feel like having a bit of a penis envy is healthy for anyone feminine

[Sy Borg]

What it is like to be a bat?

[Spectrum]

Not all hate their penises. I am not changing the subject at all. I find those that you are talking about are not representative of ALL trangender people. Some may crave to be in a female/male body while others will not. I am unsure whether this is due to society dictating norms or a genuine displeasure. Either way it would be preferential if people had the choice to change as they saw fit, but also there is also the question of whether it is for vanity? It is a really tricky subject.

Note people like Eddie Izzard. He doesn't seem concerned about having a penis and he is attracted to women. There is a whole spectrum and some may be confused and others may simply be more confused because the modern world is becoming more and more about labels and brands, about borders and divides.

I know.. I have been talking of degrees [low to high] along a continuum all the time. What I have been referring to are the high degrees cases, not those who are sissy down the scale.
Those [born physical males] at the higher percentile of 'transgenderism' will want to be 100% female.

Either way it would be preferential if people had the choice to change as they saw fit, but also there is also the question of whether it is for vanity? It is a really tricky subject.

Prevention is always better than cure.
In the future [with advance knowledge and technology] if we can prevent and correct the problem at source with fool proof methods, this would be definitely better for the person instead of facing all the hassles of transition to the other gender.

Maxim: Prevention is better than Cure.

-- Updated Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:17 pm to add the following --

As I understand you, you want transgender people to conform to societal norms. I take the opposite view that I want societal norms to include transgender people.

Your moral rule is not effective, do not hold water and cannot be universal.
How about wanting societal norms to include the Hitlers, all psychopaths and sorts of 'deviants', If not, why the discrimination?

What I had proposed [with fool proof methods] follow one golden rule, "prevention is better than cure."

If societal norms include transgender people those people at least won't have the extra burden of society disapproving of who they feel they are.
In the case of society's not disapproving of who people are some cause, at least, of dysmorphia will be no more.

Point is we cannot transform the hardcore anti-transgender with our present competences.
Since you know you cannot change the hardcore anti-transgender, you are throwing them to the wolves forever. That is cruel.
I am suggesting we strive to deal [fool proof methods] with "transgenderism" first towards the future.

It is a basic wrong that any person be persuaded by others that there is something wrong with their healthy body and healthy mind.

I had highlighted 'fool proofing' many times to comfort you there is no forcing nor by any devious methods and it must be voluntary.
If you understand the knowledge of neurons and their workings, you will note in the transgender case, there is a mismatch of neurons between the male and female modules.

For example in the case of Synaesthesia, there are some people who visual neurons are wrongly connected to their audio neurons such that they hear music when seeing certain colors. In the future humanity would be able to cure this problem by reconnecting the right neurons between the modules so that such people see things as they are rather than hearing music. Hope you understand this dilemma.

As with the 'Synaesthist', they male and female neurons of the transgender are wrongly connected in the brain. So the prevention and solution is to ensure the right neurons are connected between the correct modules. Note What I am proposing is for the future [when we have the fool proof methods] not now.

-- Updated Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:35 pm to add the following --

Oh, gees, Spectrum, I’d advise you not to apply for a job with Google. For all the world, you sound just like the software engineer who was just fired after he wrote a memo trying to explain why women are not as well suited for high-tech jobs as men are for just such biological and gender psychological reasons. How politically incorrect you be!

This is a bad association.

I noted how the ex-google software engineer formed his views was based on evidence which is common in the programming world.
All those who employed computer programmers chose their programmers on merit and is profit oriented and that software guy was employed because he achieved very high performance a competition.
The fact there are more males in the programming sector is reflective of their merit [easily measured] and not because of gender biasness.

If you are in that business [solely computer programming], would you make it a point to hire 50% males and 50% females computer programmers, while all your competitors employed 90% males programmers based on performance and merit. If you are that politically correct you be out of business soon enough.

What I have presented so far is based on evidence and it is objective. What I had proposed is for the future not now. At present you can do what you want with transgenders since we do not have the knowledge nor technology to be conclusive.

I noted your views are due to lack & insufficient knowledge of the issues and is led by very blind empathy thus very irrational.

[Alias]

I take issue with this last bit because you are being a different narrator in this last bit that I copied. In the foregoing text you are objective . In this last bit you are in the position of practical moralist and legislator. As such I agree with you here as well. We will mark our voting papers similarly.

I figured we were as entitled to an opinion as anyone.

[Burning ghost]

Spectrum -

Prevention is always better than cure.
In the future [with advance knowledge and technology] if we can prevent and correct the problem at source with fool proof methods, this would be definitely better for the person instead of facing all the hassles of transition to the other gender.

Maxim: Prevention is better than Cure.

You can probably guess the flaw in this statement yourself. What needs to be "cured"? This is not a disease. If so do we then start saying a few people get this or that disease so we'd be better off removing this or that part of the body? Or revert to an asexual species and be done with males altogether?

If the cases are few and far between in the future then it will be most likely possible to change physical sex. Like I said, if the option was available to everyone in the future and life was extended I would probably change sex myself for a while out of simple curiosity if it was no more difficult than changing an item of clothing or training for a marathon.

I have sympathy for those who feel so bad about being in the "wrong kind of body".

There other cases very much like this that have nothing to do with sexual orientation. There was the guy who felt like his leg was not "part of him" and so he had it amputated. The other option would have been brain surgery to make some clumsy attempt to make him feel like the leg was his. It sounds absolutely crazy until you begin to understand this is not merely some psychological phase but an ever present sense of self.

In extreme cases then extreme procedures seem fitting.

People used to view bi-polar people as "diseased" or "mentally ill" too. Now they've changed the terminology a little. Like I said the vast majority accept the lows that come with the highs and understand perfectly well that they wouldn't want to change themselves. The sense of "self" here is the issue. If I was to say to you I was going to alter your sex tomorrow what would your reaction be?

Generally as long as the choice remains with the individual I have no issue. I am suspicious of people wanting to change people before they develop into adults properly. As you mentioned that girl who wants to be a boy may actually turn into a boy further down the line quite naturally without "corrective" surgery. Brain transplants would be ideal!! haha! We'd just have to find a man who wants to be a woman and a woman who wants to be a man and swap them over

[Count Lucanor]

... I’d advise you not to apply for a job with Google. For all the world, you sound just like the software engineer who was just fired after he wrote a memo trying to explain why women are not as well suited for high-tech jobs as men are for just such biological and gender psychological reasons. How politically incorrect you be!

A few words about the Google memo:

It has been portrayed in the media that the author of this memo depicted women as being absolutely incompetent and intellectually inferior to men. Actually, I think the guy tried as hard as he could to put emphasis on the differences in motivation, in the inner drives, in personality, more than in cognitive abilities. Something might be implicit, though, when he talks about women being more inclined to feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas.

In any case, he got it all WRONG. And the reason is pretty clear (he actually reveals it): the influence of the philosophical doctrines of evolutionary psychology. His generalizations ("all men do that and all women do this") are claimed to be the result of biological scientific research, as if all that can be said about men and women resides in biology. If he's reacting against a radicalized ideology of social constructionism, he goes to the other extreme, to radical naturalism. Maybe (just maybe) it's true that there's a difference in the choices most men and women make regarding jobs, and that as things are right now, to impose rules of equal representation might be counterproductive, however, it must be understood that it is precisely because of social conditioning that these differences arise and stabilize in culture. So, a better call would be to counteract this social conditioning in a way that allows equal opportunities and freedom of choices, instead of imposing PC culture.