|
JFairfax posted:Women are drawn to child birth which was for most of human history one of the riskiest activities one could ever engage in.
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 09:36 |
|
|
It's interesting what people who have transitioned or are transitioning have said about how hormones affect their psychological state. I know someone who in varying their T levels experimentally said T definitely made them more emotional, but not necessarily more aggressive/risk seeking. Plural of anecdote isn't data and all that, and you're looking at a small subset of the general population, but it's hard to find many people who vary their hormone levels in an outwardly controllable way and talk about it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
That's usually because they're experiencing something akin to the opposite of phantom limb syndrome. There was a large ethics debate in the surgical community about actually performing the operations, because many thought that it was anything from an extreme stylistic choice to a psychosis, and that they'd keep coming back for more and more body parts to be removed, but it turned out that once the offending body part was removed there was no further desire for surgery. Proprioception is weird isn't greatly understood though afaik.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:When you take a testosterone pill, do you immediately develop a deep craving for power tools, riced-out sports cars, and extreme skydiving into the driver's seat of a convertible parked on top of a yacht?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
McAlister posted:Note: I did know that hysterectomies existed in the 90's but was unable to find a doctor willing to perform one on me as a healthy childless twenty something woman. I know men of that age who were able to get vasectomies at that time. They got a moderate amount of pushback and couldn't get the first doc they called to do it. But in the end their control of their fertility was respected in a way mine wasn't. 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.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
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. If they're that interested in genes and sexuality perhaps they should go look for a pedophile gene or a rapist gene or something that might provide useful information for improving society. Maybe some of the researchers really are just interested in sexuality being possibly genetic, but that doesn't happen in an ethical vacuum, and when your sponsors are holding a literal vacuum and waiting for the transvaginal gaydar then you should perhaps question your ethical duties beyond mere knowledge. quote:I think this is very interesting; if you do not want to address the physical basis for mental health problems, then you are basically telling people who have suicidal thoughts "go ahead, do it. That's what you feel is best, right. I support your decision, you are brave." Is this seriously where the argument is going? quote: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 it will be treatable with medication or therapy, just like depression is now. This period of surgery and hormone supplements will be looked back on in the same light we look back on lobotomies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
LGBT rights in general are legitimized by not being pricks to LGBT people. The idea that finding a 'gay gene' would suddenly legitimize LGBT issues is absurd. Let's say we find one. Cool, now let's say we develop a test you can pee on or put a blood sample on. Then let's give a few hundred thousand free to Uganda or Saudi Arabia or Faithful Word Baptist Church. What good exactly do you see coming from that? The pursuit of knowledge at all levels can be a great thing in and of itself (not just at lower levels, because that just lends itself to reductionism) but it can't create or legitimize social or civil rights issues on its own.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:The answer to ignorance is not to be ignorant yourself. You're basically saying that it's ok to hold back human progress and the search for absolute truth because some people might do something bad. It's like the difference between a chemist who is looking for novel new organophosphates because they really enjoy phosphate chemistry and a chemist who is looking for novel new organophosphates that can be made in an airplane bathroom from a binary solution and is sponsored by someone who is cool with nerve gas attacks. One might say there are some ethical issues outweighing the loss of potential organophosphate knowledge in the latter case. Surely there's better things for them to be getting on with. asdf32 posted:Most people have already decided that being gay isn't a choice which is a shift that's accompanied many rights. For obvious reasons. Society doesn't support every whim and preference of every individual. The fundamental and innate nature of sexual preference is why society has and should write laws to support gay marriage and LGBT issues in general. You can use choice arguments to be an ally or a dick. You can also use innateness arguments to be an ally or a dick too, although they always come off a bit patronizing in the "aww, they can't help it" sense even in the best case. I support the same rights to partnership for same sex couples as for different sex couples, I don't think there needs to be a blood test for it or anything, just ask the two people if they want to be married.. I support the rights of mixed race couples to register a partnership too. I don't believe there's a gene or an innate factor that causes a person to be attracted to black or Asian or white people or whatever, I believe that people fall in love for a whole lot of difference complex reasons. And I believe that if scientists were looking for 'the gene' that made you attracted to different races, and the person fronting the project was unsubtly saying "well of course it's the parents' right to know if their unborn child is carrying this gene, they might not want colored grandkids" then they can gently caress off too.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
Armani posted:"Why would you do such a selfish thing to the men in your life?"  It says a lot about people if they think that the absolute best thing that they can offer the world is a chemical that they produce without any conscious effort, they should just go be a plant or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
It's also implying that 'social construct' is the same as 'doesn't really exist' or 'something you can just change yourself'. Money (or rather the value-barter system that money represents) is a social construct. That doesn't help someone who is broke, and it doesn't mean that financial inequality doesn't exist.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:no, that's pretty much it. people should be encouraged to modify their bodies to fit their self-image of their body so long as what they want to do isn't injurious to health or quality of life. there's a spectrum of bodily modification, the least extreme being personal decoration like tattoos and the most extreme being, i dont know, those idiots who want to be cyborgs and put like magnets in their fingertips. transgender folks fall on the less extreme part of that spectrum, because you don't really need your sex organs if you don't want them and the payoff in terms of peace of mind is worth it. there are also reasons for non-transpersons to remove or modify their sex organs, such as predisposition to cancer or bringing large breasts down a couple sizes to prevent spinal problems
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I know an artist who gave himself a tattoo. That's hardly insane, assuming you know what you're doing and have access to the proper equipment. Like Ddraig said though, plenty of reputable body mod places will do biocompatible magnets, there's a place less than 5 miles from where I'm sat that offers it as a walk-in and considers it low risk, similar to a piercing and safer than some of the weirder dermal implants. Sticking random non-medical pieces of metal in your hands at home without training is a bad idea. I guess the closest SR equivalent would be self medicating with hormones off the internet, but there are wider communities built up around that and some people live in places where doctors are viewed as heavily gatekeeping, which leaves few alternatives. That's something that can lead to bad situations too though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
People who want magnets in their fingers do so because it allows you to sense magnetic fields and ferrous metals, which is not something that therapy can do as far as I'm aware. There are a lot of body mods that do stem more from an aesthetic perspective though, a desire to look or outwardly self-identify as something or other different to what they currently are, whether that's getting a tattoo or dental implants. I'm not sure where you draw the line though. Should therapy to learn to love their existing teeth or lack thereof be preferred to dental implants? Should implants only be considered where ability to chew is affected and in cosmetic cases take a back seat to psychiatric dental self image adjustment?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I'm not sure, but I can say that suicide rates for people with BDD are sky high. If someone would rather kill themselves than have to go through life with the teeth they have, then implants would obviously seem preferable, but I'm not sure. If you provide hormone treatment and surgery to a man who identifies as a woman, then her body now matches her brain, and she can proceed with life. If you fix the teeth of someone who has BDD, did you solve their problem? Or is it just going to manifest itself some other way, meaning surgery is just a bandaid and not actual treatment? It's tough for me to say. I guess the line that we're treading here is the difference between a disorder and a reasonable cosmetic surgery request, which itself is a construct of the society it is working in.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:It's not due to social roles, since everyone agrees those are restrictive and artificial. So what is it? What makes some a man or a woman? It's like money, or laws, or contracts. Everyone knows that those only exist because everyone else believes they exist. Everyone knows that even though they're thoroughly social creations they manage to cause actual real poo poo for people sometimes. Everyone knows that if everyone overnight stopped believing in the value of a certain banknote then it would stop having any value, or if they had a war and nobody showed up then we could all have a big drum circle or whatever, and yet we also know that that's not something likely to happen, because social constructs hold a lot of power in a social species.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 11:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 09:36 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:TERFs have a bit of a problem because some of them don't like the notion that their theory of womanliness doesn't apply to all women
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 09:50
|
|