|
OwlFancier posted:What you are asking me to do is akin to saying "no, ignore the societal implications of eugenics for a moment, I'm just really interested in the theory, honest." You're an idiot, frankly, if that's how you feel about a potentially better understanding of human behavior and tendencies. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 06:36 |
|
|
Trans gendered individuals demonstrate the innate nature of gender. LGBT rights in general are legitimized by recognizing the innate nature of sexual orientation and gender. The idea that studying human behavior at lower levels must only reinforce social norms or whatever is absurd.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:LGBT rights in general are legitimized by not being pricks to LGBT people. 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.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
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 Which is exactly why it matters that gender is fundamental and innate. No one gives a crap about people that want magnets in their fingers and the medical community generally tells them to go away when they make that request to modify their bodies. But society takes issues of gender and sexuality [more] seriously because they're important aspects of our nature as human individuals.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
Lichy posted:Brain structure has much more variability than genetic structure. Considering there are only about 30 thousand genes in the genome compared to 87 billion neurones in the brain, it is likely that, apart from possible special cases, gender identification stems more from the connectome than the genome. And genes control brain structure so I don't know what you think this means. When people self identify as a gender they haven't been socialized for they're clearly tapping into something innate (genetic). The identification may be hormonal (evidence says its not socialized) but the gender is innate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:This is why everyone who gives a crap makes it clear that it doesn't matter what the source of transgendered-ness is. The fact is we exist, our identities are legitimate, and the treatments have been well-identified by the medical community. Anybody who tries to use any sort of sciency-sounding argument to claim trans people are just men in dresses/women in flannel is at odds with the consensus of the psychiatric and medical communities. We don't even understand why people have favorite colors, much less the complex workings of gender and identity in the brain. Trying to bring any arguments about that sort of thing in is just going down a dead end. Except that practically speaking it does matter because. For example people who think homosexuality or gender identification is a choice are significantly less likely to support LGBT rights. This has gone hand in hand with improvements in LBGT rights: 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:I didn't say it was a choice. I just said that it doesn't matter whether its a genetic thing, a conditioning thing determined in the early years of life, a hormonal thing, etc. trying to argue about sources of it to prove a point just derails into a game of points scoring by nitpicking each others' arguments. What matters is that being trans is (in some way) an innate part of a person that they have no control over, full stop. What matters it that it isn't a choice, not the reason that it isn't a choice. Well I agree except for the 'early years of life part'. Some people show signs of being transgendered at an early age and suggesting that their gender identification is still subject to influence isn't supported by evidence and may be damaging if that's the attitude pursued. That's why I don't see any point in tiptoeing around this which is what some people seem to be doing: gender is innate to the individual and human nature in general at a biological level. It's not a choice. It can't be changed. There is no point agreeing with the last two while trying to downplay the biology part. Especially when the 'not a choice' part matters in a practical, political and moral sense. Ytlaya posted:I think you might be misunderstanding the role genes have in influencing complex traits. It's not just genes that are important; it's also environment and the gene by environment interaction. Two individuals with the exact same genetic input could have completely different outcomes depending upon, for example, conditions in the womb. So while it's true that the state of the brain is ultimately affected by an individual's genes, genes themselves are not necessarily sufficient to determine a complex trait like gender. I'm not and I don't think you're understanding what I said seeing how I referenced the fact that hormones may be responsible for selecting which gender someone identifies as. There are obviously both innate and cultural aspects to gender (the cultural ones dominate in many ways though we don't know exactly where the dividing lines are). But there are innate parts, and they're genetic.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 06:36 |
|
|
Blue Star posted:You guys sure like to accuse people of not being really trans when they say things you don't like, huh? I'm not going to doxx myself just to make you happy. I identify as trans because I've felt my body is "wrong" and I'm happier when people use female pronouns for me. But where do these come from? It'd be convenient to think that this is something innate, like some sort of true gender identity that is rooted in the brain or in our genes, because that might make it more "real". But if it's something that develops over time, that would point to a more psychological origin. Maybe it's different for early transitioners versus late transitioners. It's possible that there are variations among people that eventually identify as trans but the children who identify early, the feelings people like LeftistMuslimObama describe and the evidence on the subject all point to gender being something that is innate to an important degree. Wikipedia Gender Identiy posted:A well-known example in the nature verses nurture debate is the case of David Reimer, otherwise known as "John/Joan". As a baby, Reimer went through a faulty circumcision, losing his male genitalia. Psychologist John Money convinced Reimer’s parents to raise him as a girl. Reimer grew up as a girl, dressing in girl clothes and surrounded by girl toys, but did not feel like a girl. After he tried to commit suicide at age 13, he was told that he had been born with male genitalia, which he underwent surgery to reconstruct.[24] This went against Money’s hypothesis that biology had nothing to do with gender identity or human sexual orientation.[25] http://kuow.org/post/when-do-kids-know-they-re-transgender-younger-youd-think quote:How can you tell if a child is really transgender? quote:How early might a child express gender identity out loud?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 19:28
|
|