|
Xandu posted:Is this fundamentally different than a pill to fix gay people? I understand the point that gender dysmorphia is not easily treated (through surgery/hormones), but if it's a part of one's identity, then it can't and shouldn't really be changed. It's fundamentally different because gender dysphoria is a disease and being gay isn't. And as far as identity goes, it's absolutely possible for someone to become a completely different person, personality and identity wise. It can happen after being concussed, for example. We just don't know how it happens or what wires need to be crossed to achieve a certain desired effect. I imagine the ultimate answer to roll-your-own-personality type stuff in the far-future will be surgery (possibly carried out internally via nano robots instead of classic surgery techniques) rather than drugs. The optimist in me comes to the conclusion that the ability to change our brains so precisely that we can determine specific personality traits will likely coincide with the technology to build ourselves a "dream body." Unfortunately, the pessimist in me comes to the conclusion that the brain surgery will be cheaper (and more likely to be covered by insurance), so only the rich will have the second option.
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:57 |
|
|
Sharkie posted:No, gender dysphoria is not a disease. A disease always has a defined etiology and is usually associated with an infectious agent. In fact, in the latest DSM, dysphoria is not even a disorder, much less a disease, and the APA has stated that one of their primary motivations for keeping it in, instead of removing it like homosexuality, is because people need a diagnostic term that will protect their access to resources. Sorry, I did mean to say disorder, not disease. And the ICD-10 does list it as a disorder, so there's at least some disagreement about that. I honestly don't see how gender dysphoria could not be a disorder, since it has a significant negative impact on the lives of those suffering from it. I understand the aversion to saying there's something wrong with the brains of people suffering from it, but it hits all the traditional criteria. Either way, arguing semantics distracts from the argument at hand; namely, is psychiatric treatment (assuming effective) a reasonable solution to gender dysphoria? I see no reason to believe it wouldn't be. It's not like treating other mental anguish with psychoactives is unusual, even in minors. If our knowledge of the brain ever gets to the point where we are comfortable rewiring it, the slow steps that must happen to get us there will necessarily erode the stigma against such practices. It is likely brain-machine interfaces will be commonly available long before we can do anything meaningful to the brain directly. That alone, I think, will greatly change our perception of ourselves. The changing perceptions might even sidestep the issue entirely. KillHour fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Dec 30, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Except that for many people, changing their bodies alleviates the suffering, so it's not necessarily clear that it's "something wrong with the brain." If someone is experiencing distress from gender dysphoria, and a change in the body alleviates it, then it's not the brain that's the problem, it's the body. This is kind of a circular argument. Having a mismatch between the brain and the body doesn't say there's anything wrong with the brain OR the body. The brain may function just fine in a different body, but the body would function just fine with a different brain, too. You can change whichever is convenient. There's nothing special about a brain that makes changing it somehow more abhorrent than changing any other part of you. Sharkie posted:The ICD-10, which is over 20 years old at this point, also lists transvestism, absent any cross-sex identification, or mental distress caused by the transvestism, as a gender identity disorder, so sorry if I consider it out-dated and wrong when it comes to gender identity issues. If you're taking it seriously you'd better be ready to defend claiming that every drag queen ever has a gender identity disorder, because that's what it says. I will concede this point, because I honestly don't know enough about the texts to speak to their veracity, other than both being commonly referenced. The argument over semantics is still tangential to the point. Sharkie posted:How about, "it's been tried and it doesn't work," is that a good enough reason? Also you can't just say, "let's assume this treatment is effective, wouldn't it then be effective," as that's the sloppiest and most unconvincing circular argument. There's a reason any credible doctor will not recommend a course of psychiatric therapy or psychoactive drugs to "cure" gender dysphoria. Psychological treatments for gender dysphoria are about helping the patient to adapt to their desired gender role, not "cure" them and make them associate with their assigned gender. But that assumption is the entire premise of the OP (and the premise was explicitly stated). Of course any argument falls apart if you don't grant the original premise. That's how arguments work.  You're also trying to make the comparison that curing gender dysphoria is like "curing" homosexuality. This is not a valid comparison. Being gay doesn't prevent you from living a normal, happy life. Even if we removed all social stigma from transgendered people, there would still be a disconnect between their brains and their bodies. In fact, sufficiently modifying the body to match the brain so that there is no longer a disconnect is curing it, by definition. Again, there's no reason why one of those things has to be "wrong;" they just disagree. I'm not saying gender dysphoria is a mental disorder (implying something is wrong with the brain), I'm just saying it's a disorder (something is wrong, in general). If, for some reason, the choice is between having an imperfect procedure to modify your body or having a (supposedly) perfect procedure to modify your brain, surely some would choose the latter. You're also supposing that people would no longer have the option of gender reassignment, which nobody is arguing for. KillHour fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Dec 31, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
Then maybe don't post in the thread about magic brain-altering pills?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:No, I guess I can see how I came off that way, but that's not what I meant to imply. I absolutely think dysphoria hurts in and of itself. It's just that I'm kind of skeeved out by the premise of assuming "what if we could use nanobots to make trans people stop being trans," and I wanted to bring things back more towards pointing out that a magic brain re-writer isn't a goal worth paying attention to, and emphasizing the social aspects of dysphoria was part of that attempt. For what it's worth, I'm transgender, so yeah, I absolutely agree that dysphoria sucks, and that's also why I'm probably taking this a little personally, especially since it seems to be coming at it from "why can't we use psychiatry to make people stop being trans," except using nanobots instead of whatever other methods have been tried. You're missing the point of the thread. The OP was pretty clear that they wanted to discuss the ethical issues around modifying someone's perception of self, not whether such a thing was possible. A big flaming stink posted:this threadchat is veering dangerously close to tumblr-style truscum debates. like i half expect someone to start posting about how you dont need to experience gender dysphoria to be trans Someone already did this, like 2 pages ago.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 01:14
|
|