OwlFancier posted:

Ok I should rephrase, I understand mechanically how getting pregnant and it killing you works but I am having difficulty understanding the rational basis for why it is a good thing.

WoodrowSkillson posted:

God said be fruitful and multiply, and that is the greatest thing a woman can do with the gifts God has given her.

Lichy posted:

I multiply fruity smoothies on the reg does that count towards Gods plan?

WoodrowSkillson posted:

Only if an infant pops out at the end.

WoodrowSkillson posted:

God said be fruitful and multiply, and that is the greatest thing a woman can do with the gifts God has given her.

OwlFancier posted:

I feel there is a mathematical issue with the notion of multiplying by dying in childbirth.

OwlFancier posted:

I feel there is a mathematical issue with the notion of multiplying by dying in childbirth.

WoodrowSkillson posted:

Considering the vast majority of trans individuals i have spoken with state they knew something was off very early in their lives, I do not think many would be accepting to any therapy that "corrected" them. Some might, especially if their dysphoria is not as pronounced, health reasons prevent a full transition, etc. But you are dealing with someone's identity they have felt since they were a child, and that's a deeper thing than depression.

To me, the real goal is researching the hormonal and other aspects of gender dysphoria is being able to identify it early and allow treatments for transition far earlier in the person's life, when it is far less painful and grueling. If we know how it actually works, we can objectively tell a parent "your child is trans, here is the treatment" when the kid is like 3 or something and does not even personally understand gender yet.

To the thread's point, there is probably some aspect of the hormones that cause you to grow one set of genitals vs another also affecting your gender, and the better we understand it, the faster and easier we can make the process of transitioning.

Blue Star posted:

I'm of the opinion that transgenderism is almost purely a psychological phenomenon that develops over time, rather than an innate biologically congenital one that happens in the womb. Brain studies have indicated a lot of different things and neuroscience is still in its infancy. Some studies have shown that male and female brains are pretty much the same and that any differences are entirely due to nurture. Some studies have shown that trans women's brains are more similar to cis women's, while others have shown the opposite: that trans women are more similar to cis men, neurologically. Other studies have shown that young MTF transitioners are more similar to cis women, while older MTF transitioners are more like cis men. It's all very much up in the air and nothing is conclusive.

So right now I'm kinda sorta leaning towards the idea that transgenderism is more than likely a nurture sort of thing. People do not have innate genders in their brains. The desire to transition arises due to acquired psychological factors that occur during a person's lifetime, not due to innate congenital biology. Trans women are biological males who desire to live their lives as women and be socially recognized as women, while trans men are the opposite. Whether or not that makes them actual women or actual men is an open question. But I do think that gender roles as defined by the West are too rigid so it's good that some people are pushing the boundaries. In 20 years, I think gender noncomformity will be a little more accepted than it is today, although medically there probably won't be any more options for trans people than there are today. No miracle brain cure pills, no significant advancements in surgical tech or body modification tech. The majority of trans women will still be non-passing and obviously male, but hopefully they will be more accepted.

Armani posted:

OwlFancier posted:

prick with tenure posted:

WampaLord posted:

The left button should be "People can be born as the wrong sex" and the comic should have the person slamming their hands down on both buttons.

Basically sex != gender.

WoodrowSkillson posted:

Most won't and its about fulfilling your purpose by creating new life, not mathematically growing the species.

Nevvy Z posted:

Essentially the difference is between "I'm supposed to be male" and "I should be able to do 'man things'."

prick with tenure posted:

I think I lean the other way, that there is definitely something to many trans people's sense that they were simply born in the wrong kind of body, and, apparently like you, I don't see how this could possibly be consistent with the claim that gender is purely a social construct, that there are no fundamental differences between a male a female brain, etc. If these claims aren't really mutually exclusive I'd really like someone to explain that to me.

the trump tutelage posted:

Are there very many trans people who pursue treatment to have their body match their sex but who continue to perform their assigned gender after physically transitioning? If not, then what good is the sex vs gender distinction in any practical sense?

the trump tutelage posted:

Isn't "sex is also a social construct" de rigueur?

the trump tutelage posted:

A social construct may really exist, but drawing a distinction between "sex" and "gender-as-social-construct" implies that there is some objective core or truth to sex that gender is lacking. One is a Law and the other is a tradition. Sex-as-social-construct resolves that at least.

the trump tutelage posted:

Are there very many trans people who pursue treatment to have their body match their sex but who continue to perform their assigned gender after physically transitioning? If not, then what good is the sex vs gender distinction in any practical sense?

Popular Thug Drink posted:

no, sex is a biological construct resulting from sexual dimorphism in humans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system

you can have males, females, genetic females who appear to be biologically male, genetic males who appear to be biologically female, and other wacky genetic combinations


yes, it's genetics. most people learn this in high school biology. chromosomes lead to sexual differentiation. frequently enough this process pops out atypical individuals who aren't fully male or female

quote:

First, the idea that sex is a social construct, for Butler, boils down to the view that our sexed bodies are also performative and, so, they have “no ontological status apart from the various acts which constitute [their] reality” (1999, 173). Prima facie, this implausibly implies that female and male bodies do not have independent existence and that if gendering activities ceased, so would physical bodies. This is not Butler's claim; rather, her position is that bodies viewed as the material foundations on which gender is constructed, are themselves constructed as if they provide such material foundations (Butler 1993). Cultural conceptions about gender figure in “the very apparatus of production whereby sexes themselves are established” (Butler 1999, 11).

For Butler, sexed bodies never exist outside social meanings and how we understand gender shapes how we understand sex (1999, 139). Sexed bodies are not empty matter on which gender is constructed and sex categories are not picked out on the basis of objective features of the world. Instead, our sexed bodies are themselves discursively constructed: they are the way they are, at least to a substantial extent, because of what is attributed to sexed bodies and how they are classified (for discursive construction, see Haslanger 1995, 99). Sex assignment (calling someone female or male) is normative (Butler 1993, 1).[6] When the doctor calls a newly born infant a girl or a boy, s/he is not making a descriptive claim, but a normative one. In fact, the doctor is performing an illocutionary speech act (see the entry on Speech Acts). In effect, the doctor's utterance makes infants into girls or boys. We, then, engage in activities that make it seem as if sexes naturally come in two and that being female or male is an objective feature of the world, rather than being a consequence of certain constitutive acts (that is, rather than being performative). And this is what Butler means in saying that physical bodies never exist outside cultural and social meanings, and that sex is as socially constructed as gender. She does not deny that physical bodies exist. But, she takes our understanding of this existence to be a product of social conditioning: social conditioning makes the existence of physical bodies intelligible to us by discursively constructing sexed bodies through certain constitutive acts. (For a helpful introduction to Butler's views, see Salih 2002.)

the trump tutelage posted:

Okay, but

SedanChair posted:

I'm not sure why Judith Butler gets to weigh in on any of this...

SedanChair posted:

I'm not sure why Judith Butler gets to weigh in on any of this...

Nevvy Z posted:

Do you agree with this or are you just posting it because it seems to vaguely disagree with PTD? Because asking people to argue with random articles you don't even support seems kind of pointless.

Edit-

This too. I mean she's right, but she's right in a way that's kind of meaningless. Everything is a social construct, sort of.

the trump tutelage posted:

Oh, is she out of fashion now?

the trump tutelage posted:

I do agree with her, yes.

Guavanaut posted:

Wouldn't tubal ligation be the female anatomy version of vasectomy though?

It's still harder for someone to get a tubal ligation than a vasectomy for a variety of reasons, from the ease of reversibility, to one being largely external, to social attitudes about women and babies, but the male equivalent of a hysterectomy would be more like an orchidectomy, which is similarly hard to get just by asking around.

McAlister posted:

Would still leave me with really bad cramps and blood so not my first choice. They wouldn't do that either. You see I just thought I didn't want kids but hormones would have their way and any minute now I would surely discover that education and independence and money weren't what I wanted at all and I'd go baby crazy.

Any minute now.

Men are rational beings making reasoned decisions. Women are animals controlled by instincts/hormones. So I was told over and over and over a thousand different ways growing up.

Like lessons. As a child I was sent without consultation to piano, ballet, skiing, gymnastics, riding, and sewing lessons. I wanted to take karate. This was forbidden on the grounds that I was too fragile. I found out the YMCA was offering karate lessons for $7 a month and enrolled myself, then walked down to the Y to take them as a tween. When this was discovered I was ordered to stop. Having been doing the lessons just fine for months I knew I wasn't to fragile. And speaking of danger do you even watch my gymnastics class? The uneven bars are more dangerous than anything I'm doing in karate!

Ah! But the uneven bars don't make me think I can defend myself. Karate is dangerous for me because the false sense of confidence it would give me can endanger me. And I'm a girl. I need to understand how soft and helpless I am ( ballet dancers kick like mules by the way ).

Then they turned to my brother and tried to get him interested in it cause $7 a month is an awesome price. He wasn't. They made him go to a few classes to try it out then let him stop.

He got to stop lessons if he didn't like them. Boys have agency and can decide what they like. Girls don't know what they like and will appreciate it later.

I wanted to be a boy soooo much. I dressed as a boy, cut my hair short, refused to wear make up or jewelry. I wanted respect, control, agency, opportunity, and my drat female body was denying me all of it.

Then puberty hit and it got so much worse.

WoodrowSkillson posted:

Considering the vast majority of trans individuals i have spoken with state they knew something was off very early in their lives, I do not think many would be accepting to any therapy that "corrected" them. Some might, especially if their dysphoria is not as pronounced, health reasons prevent a full transition, etc. But you are dealing with someone's identity they have felt since they were a child, and that's a deeper thing than depression.

To me, the real goal is researching the hormonal and other aspects of gender dysphoria is being able to identify it early and allow treatments for transition far earlier in the person's life, when it is far less painful and grueling. If we know how it actually works, we can objectively tell a parent "your child is trans, here is the treatment" when the kid is like 3 or something and does not even personally understand gender yet.

NathanScottPhillips posted:

This is a very, very interesting set of posts to appear. The first claims that "an obsession for physical basis for such bahaviors and feelings" is a immoral pursuit. The second flippantly mentions suicide in the same breath as a sex change procedure as if they are on the same spectrum.

....

Personally, I feel that in 20 years, maybe sooner, when neuroscience has progressed to the point where it can pinpoint the reasons why people need sex changes

McAlister posted:

Would still leave me with really bad cramps and blood so not my first choice. They wouldn't do that either. You see I just thought I didn't want kids but hormones would have their way and any minute now I would surely discover that education and independence and money weren't what I wanted at all and I'd go baby crazy.

Any minute now.

Men are rational beings making reasoned decisions. Women are animals controlled by instincts/hormones. So I was told over and over and over a thousand different ways growing up.

Like lessons. As a child I was sent without consultation to piano, ballet, skiing, gymnastics, riding, and sewing lessons. I wanted to take karate. This was forbidden on the grounds that I was too fragile. I found out the YMCA was offering karate lessons for $7 a month and enrolled myself, then walked down to the Y to take them as a tween. When this was discovered I was ordered to stop. Having been doing the lessons just fine for months I knew I wasn't to fragile. And speaking of danger do you even watch my gymnastics class? The uneven bars are more dangerous than anything I'm doing in karate!

Ah! But the uneven bars don't make me think I can defend myself. Karate is dangerous for me because the false sense of confidence it would give me can endanger me. And I'm a girl. I need to understand how soft and helpless I am ( ballet dancers kick like mules by the way ).

Then they turned to my brother and tried to get him interested in it cause $7 a month is an awesome price. He wasn't. They made him go to a few classes to try it out then let him stop.

He got to stop lessons if he didn't like them. Boys have agency and can decide what they like. Girls don't know what they like and will appreciate it later.

I wanted to be a boy soooo much. I dressed as a boy, cut my hair short, refused to wear make up or jewelry. I wanted respect, control, agency, opportunity, and my drat female body was denying me all of it.

Then puberty hit and it got so much worse.

McAlister posted:

You are missing the point. I wanted to be male because the way other people were treating me was causing me tremendous distress and they openly admitted that they wouldn't be treating me like poo poo if I were a boy. I could easily observe boys being praised for things I was chastised for and encouraged to walk through doors that were closed to me on the basis of my genitals.

The problem wasn't in me for not being happy with being treated like poo poo. The problem was with society for treating me like poo poo on the basis of my genitals.

Popular Thug Drink posted:

you seem overly concerned with defining what is trendy or not

quote:

what do you agree with?

WampaLord posted:

The left button should be "People can be born as the wrong sex" and the comic should have the person slamming their hands down on both buttons.

Basically sex != gender.

Nevvy Z posted:

Essentially the difference is between "I'm supposed to be male" and "I should be able to do 'man things'."

the trump tutelage posted:

I'm just trying to stay current with what's trendy in D&D. Citing last season's philosophers is such a faux pas.

the trump tutelage posted:

That sexed bodies have “no ontological status apart from the various acts which constitute [their] reality”.

You can't root gender dysphoria exclusively in the "sex" half of the sex/gender distinction, as is implied by posts like

McAlister posted:

You are missing the point. I wanted to be male because the way other people were treating me was causing me tremendous distress and they openly admitted that they wouldn't be treating me like poo poo if I were a boy. I could easily observe boys being praised for things I was chastised for and encouraged to walk through doors that were closed to me on the basis of my genitals.

The problem wasn't in me for not being happy with being treated like poo poo. The problem was with society for treating me like poo poo on the basis of my genitals.

Having people constantly tell you that your wants and desires are wrong/abberant/weird and that you are wrong is incredibly stressful. Esp for adolescents.

I'm sure neuroscience could come up with a way to inject me with something to make me ok with being treated as lesser and denied agency in my own life but I disagree profoundly that this would be a good thing to do to people. Suggesting this is like arguing that instead of stopping bullies from bullying we should dose the bullied kids with something that will make them not mind being bullied.

Then they won't commit suicide as much either.

the trump tutelage posted:

"there wouldn't even be gender dysphoria if society as a whole didn't give a poo poo about your gender presentation".

Coolwhoami posted:

Research into this has found it to be challenging to differentiate between people of the sort you describe and people who later stop experiencing dysmorphia (in children to teens, that is). There are some differences between the two (e.g. the sort of self-reported feelings they have about it, etc) but they overlap too frequently to be satisfactorily reliable. A current approach known as the Dutch protocol is a response to this problem, but is not perfect (and as I understand it quite controversial for some). In effect, we have a problem where puberty is a strong force for determining the concreteness of gender identity, but undergoing puberty makes transitioning substantially more difficult.

Arguably this problem is due to gender terms being a matter of language, not of empirical reality. Thier high degree of flexibility and breadth makes for categories that are insufficient for making judgements about their being concrete.

PT6A posted:

The problem was that they treated you like poo poo based on your gender, not necessarily your genitals (although with regards with people who aren't trans, this is a distinction without a difference). There are trans women who get treated even worse (because people treat them like poo poo because they're women, but also because they're trans in many cases) and yet still feel transition is the best path forward for them for whatever reason.