On my banning

[Floyce White]

I post this here because I was banned from Member's Forum. Clearly, I am no longer a member. I leave it to the officials to play silly word games about how banning isn't banning if it's called by some other word.

It appears that I was banned for saying that so-called "transexuality" is a mental illness. Well, why wasn't moderator The Anarchist Tension banned for saying the same thing:

"It's clearly a medical problem, and has been given the medical name of gender identity disorder. Whether it's genetic I don't know, I'm not a geneticist and neither are you. As with many medical problems surgery is one option to rectify it, but it's far more complex than simply a surgical procedure, which is a single part of the whole problem."

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1656647&postcount=646

He and other posters argued that gender is a mere belief, an opinion, a state of mind, that can be changed, made to disappear, and made to reappear at a whim. I disagreed with this idealist analysis, and I counterposed a materialist analysis that gender has its material basis in biological sex. I will not abandon materialist analysis of social phenomena at this time--or at any other time. If I am being banned for refusing to go along with an idealist concept, that's a lame excuse for a banning.

Even if I agreed that "transexuality" is a mere opinion, I would still strongly disagree that cutting off one's reproductive organs is the right way to go about changing one's mind. The solution is not appropriate to the problem. If I am being banned for opposing the inappropriate and self-interested solutions of the medical community, that's a lame excuse for a banning.

No one cared to ask, but I do agree that society makes unrealistic gender-based expectations. The solution to that is communist revolution--not disfiguring oneself.

Changing one's appearance to look like the opposite sex is falsification. It will always be falsification. I stressed this point by using the words "con game," "counterfeit," and "Halloween." If I am being banned for mere word choice, that's a lame excuse for a banning.

Personally, it's fun to catch the moderators being so biased. They can't beat my arguments, so they ban me for saying them. They'll never find a post where I advocated threats or violence against the mentally ill. So it's anybody's guess why they assert that everyone who opposes their viewpoints must do so out of hate and fear ("phobia"). (Ahem...POLITICAL CORRECTNESS...cough...cough...LIBERAL ORIENTATION...ahem.)

[StalinFanboy]

bye lol

[Bud Struggle]

Go here:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/unfair-restrictions-iv-t121779/index8.html

[Ele'ill]

In before close.

Haven't done that in a while. :)

[Havet]

You make good points. I pity your hopefulness.

[Dr Mindbender]

You make good points. I pity your hopefulness.

thats fortunate for him, because no one else will.



It appears that I was banned for saying that so-called "transexuality" is a mental illness. Well, why wasn't moderator The Anarchist Tension banned for saying the same thing:
Because, dipshit, saying its a medical problem and saying its a mental problem are 2 entirely different kettlefish.

Of course its a medical problem if someone is born without the correct genitals, that is blatantly obvious otherwise they wouldnt need massive reconstructive surgery. To say it's a mental problem is to equate transexualism with illnesses such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder which usually leads to the social ostracisation of the patient on the grounds they are dangerous to themselves or to others. Transexuals are not dangerous to others because of their sexual psychology, and dont need a padded cell thanks to the narrow minded outlook of bigots who sustain that view.

Enjoy your stay in OI, you richly deserve it.

[JazzRemington]

lol

Also, again, you weren't banned. You were restricted. Please learn to read.

[Lord Testicles]

http://killer12137.bulletpain.com/images/BAWWW.jpg

[Bud Struggle]

You make good points. I pity your hopefulness.

Actually it is a good post--worth discussing.

[Havet]

Actually it is a good post--worth discussing.

Yup, although I fear the majority will dismiss the opportunity to engage in discussion.

[Dr Mindbender]

Yup, although I fear the majority will dismiss the opportunity to engage in discussion.

If you read my edit I think i've successfully debunked his shite anyway.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

This isn't a worthwhile discussion, in my view. It's quite evident that some individuals are born with the "incorrect genitalia" for their person. Nobody is giving up a materialist analysis. "Gender Identity Disorder" is a misnomer. It should be called "Biological Sex Identity Disorder" or something. And even if gender "did" have some genetic aspects, it doesn't pose any problems for materialist views on social phenomenon. Why would it?

If you asked me to explain a scientific theory, I would be willing to help. But when you come into a discussion without knowing sufficient information about the topic, it's really just ridiculous.

Person is born with penis. They don't want a one. You can remove it. Theoretically, it "MIGHT" be possible to get them to psychologically accept that. However, that's a lot of therapy for a "might" and isn't in the best interests of the patient. The surgeries aren't the end of the world.

It's really a simple matter of the scientific evidence on the matter completely supporting an obvious conclusions. Right-wing people might disagree, but their opinion is irrelevant when it comes to rational debate. And you're somehow trying to "discredit" the science because you think it is inconsistent with your already held beliefs in "materialism." There isn't an inconstancy. Furthermore, trying to skew facts to fit subjective ideological beliefs is an inadvisable practice, one primarily undertaken by religious fundamentalists.

You smell funny.

[Havet]

If you read my edit I think i've successfully debunked his shite anyway.

Ah, indeed so it seems.

After a careful analysis of what The Anarchist Tension said (gender identity disorder), and after a quick search on the matter, we find that:

"Some transgender people and researchers have criticized the classification of GID as a mental disorder for several reasons, including evidence from recent studies about the brains of transsexual people." [1]

Source:

[1] http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034

[Bud Struggle]

He and other posters argued that gender is a mere belief, an opinion, a state of mind, that can be changed, made to disappear, and made to reappear at a whim. I disagreed with this idealist analysis, and I counterposed a materialist analysis that gender has its material basis in biological sex. I will not abandon materialist analysis of social phenomena at this time--or at any other time. If I am being banned for refusing to go along with an idealist concept, that's a lame excuse for a banning.


That is a bullseye hit.

[RedAnarchist]

Floyce, consider yourself verbally warned. Another thread like this, and you'll get an infraction for spamming.

Thread closed.