Trans people still "disordered" according to latest DSM

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Trans people still "disordered" according to latest DSM (http://juliaserano.blogspot.com/2012/12/trans-people-still-disordered-according.html)

Trans people? We're still stuck where gays and lesbians were four decades ago, pathologized by psychiatry, which has a long history of being used as a form of social control.

We live in a society where anyone with the money to do so can have extensive plastic surgery done, without being pathologized or needing the approval of psychiatry. Trans people, however, challenge some very basic assumptions of our cultural ideology.

[hetz]

Trans people, however, challenge some very basic assumptions of our cultural ideology.
For example?
Do homosexual persons also challenge some very basic assumptions of that cultural ideology?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Do homosexual persons also challenge some very basic assumptions of that cultural ideology?
In western bourgeois society at least, one can see that it has become very much less so outside of completely reactionary circles.

[hetz]

In western bourgeois society at least, one can see that it has become very much less so outside of completely reactionary circles.
Indeed. But, again, what are these basic assumptions of Western cultural ideology?
Is it perhaps bourgeois democracy, "freedom", private property?

[Questionable]

Is there anywhere we can read about their decision to keep trans people listed as mentally disordered?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Well, technically they'll no longer classify it as Gender Identity Disorder, now it'll be Gender Dysphoria. It's being spun as removing it as a disorder, but since it'll still be listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders that appears to be semantics.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Indeed. But, again, what are these basic assumptions of Western cultural ideology? Is it perhaps bourgeois democracy, "freedom", private property?
In this context, our societal view of gender as fixed and congruous with one's genitals at birth.

[hetz]

In this context, our societal view of gender as fixed and congruous with one's genitals at birth.
That's true for almost any culture in the whole history though, including the historical socialist countries and societies.
So how can it then be "one of the basic assumptions of (capitalist) cultural ideology"?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

That's true for almost any culture in the whole history though, including the historical socialist countries and societies. So how can it then be "one of the basic assumptions of (capitalist) cultural ideology"?
If it's "true for almost any culture," including the western bourgeois culture, then I'm afraid I don't see what your objection is.

[hetz]

If it's "true for almost any culture," including the western bourgeois culture, then I'm afraid I don't see what your objection is.
Then it can't be "one of the basic assumptions of capitalist cultural ideology" ( your words ). Isn't that obvious?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Then it can't be "one of the basic assumptions of capitalist cultural ideology" ( your words ). Isn't that obvious?
It's a basic cultural assumption in the society we both live in (which is why trans people are marginalized and subject to the social control of the psychiatric pseudo-science). That it was an assumption in many other cultures is irrelevant to the culture I live in and have to survive in each day. You're just being pedantic.

[hetz]

Look, if something is a basic assumption of a certain cultural ideology, then this cultural ideology cannot be without it.

[Prometeo liberado]

Wouldn't this "designation" change once TransPeople become a force in the consumer economy. Much like AfricanAmericans of the civil rights era?

[zoot_allures]

That's true for almost any culture in the whole history though, including the historical socialist countries and societies.
No it isn't. There's a vast anthropological literature on gender, and you can find plenty of societies that have radically different understandings of the concept. There are societies that view gender as changeable (so a man can become a woman), societies in which there are more than two genders, societies that view gender as a spectrum rather than as separable into discrete boxes, etc etc.

Our view of gender is one view among many. Whether we can credit it to capitalism is very questionable indeed, but certainly, it's far from universal.

[Sea]

Our view of gender is one view among many. Whether we can credit it to capitalism is very questionable indeed, but certainly, it's far from universal.I have no doubt that our view on gender as society -- male strong, female weak, and a clear distinction between the two -- has largely to do with the development of bourgeois gender rolls. Granted, this isn't necessarily inherent to the accumulation of surplus value, but it serves a purpose in capitalist society.

[zoot_allures]

I have no doubt that our view on gender as society -- male strong, female weak, and a clear distinction between the two -- has largely to do with the development of bourgeois gender rolls. Granted, this isn't necessarily inherent to the accumulation of surplus value, but it serves a purpose in capitalist society.
Yes, it definitely serves a purpose. It's just that there are non-capitalist societies with very similar views on gender, so I don't think capitalism can take all the blame! How would capitalism have developed under a different view of gender (would it have developed at all)? Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with any literature on the role of gender in the development of capitalism, but I'm sure it's an interesting question.

[hetz]

There's a vast anthropological literature on gender, and you can find plenty of societies that have radically different understandings of the concept.I'm actually aware of that, hence the "almost".



I have no doubt that our view on gender as society -- male strong, female weak, and a clear distinction between the two -- has largely to do with the development of bourgeois gender rolls. On the contrary, it was capitalism that started "dissolving" such rigid gender roles.
Today women make up some 50% of all the workforce, and that is a historical step towards equality.

[zoot_allures]

I'm actually aware of that, hence the "almost".
It's more than just a few, though - hence the "plenty". I don't think our view of gender is nearly as universal as your post suggested.

[hetz]

It's more than just a few, though - hence the "plenty".
What's the number then? Does it really matter?
These societies are a tiny minority even in their native countries, the population in favellas in Brazil outnumbers all the tribes put together by dozens of times.

[Leftsolidarity]

I think the classification as "dysphoria" is better, though. It's not the best thing ever but it is still some progress.

[doesn't even make sense]

That shit in the post about this Ray Blanchard fellow makes my head spin.

[zoot_allures]

What's the number then? Does it really matter?
These societies are a tiny minority even in their native countries, the population in favellas in Brazil outnumbers all the tribes put together by dozens of times.
I don't know exact numbers. But this point certainly does matter if you're claiming that our view of gender is shared with "almost any culture in the whole history".

For example, Native American "two-spirits" have been documented in over 100 tribes, all over North America. Of course, they're now a "tiny minority" of the population of North America - but this is primarily because the indigenous Americans were almost totally exterminated, while European colonizers grew rapidly in number.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Our view of gender is one view among many. Whether we can credit it to capitalism is very questionable indeed, but certainly, it's far from universal.
No, I wouldn't credit it to capitalism, as this view of gender in western societies pre-dates capitalism, but it continues to exist under the current mode of production. And the current mode of production is the only one we can deal with.

I see hetz still wants to argue about things that really have nothing to do with trans people continuing to be pathologized.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Well, technically they'll no longer classify it as Gender Identity Disorder, now it'll be Gender Dysphoria. It's being spun as removing it as a disorder, but since it'll still be listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders that appears to be semantics.

So you don't agree that people can suffer considerable mental distress as a result of their gender identity not being in a one-to-one match with their bodies and/or their socially-expected lifestyle?

Here's a thought; there's nothing intrinsically wrong with having a disorder, be it physical or mental. To possess an aberration in physical or mental functioning is neither blameworthy nor praiseworthy, it is simply different. It is entirely possible to live a full life while having a disorder, and it is also possible that a disorder could significantly impact quality of life.

Focusing on the exact wording or even the fact that gender dysphoria is in the DSM is to miss the point, which is what is done about such things. My understanding is that when it comes to gender dysphoria, it is that which will improve quality of life for the patient which is key. Whether this includes surgery, lifestyle changes, or whatever will depend on the circumstances of the individual patient.

The paranoid ranting about psychiatric "pseudo-science" seems to ignore the fact that we've been far beyond Freud for a good 50 years now.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

So you don't agree that people can suffer considerable mental distress as a result of their gender identity not being in a one-to-one match with their bodies and/or their socially-expected lifestyle?
You might not be aware of this, but I'm a trans woman, so I have a lot of experience in this matter. Yes, some trans people experience considerable emotional distress, but emotional distress isn't itself a disorder.


Here's a thought; there's nothing intrinsically wrong with having a disorder, be it physical or mental.
Of course not, even if in general society there can be a stigma attached to it.


My understanding is that when it comes to gender dysphoria, it is that which will improve quality of life for the patient which is key. Whether this includes surgery, lifestyle changes, or whatever will depend on the circumstances of the individual patient.
Why do I need to be "disordered" to obtain surgery? Other people can get all the plastic surgery they want, but I have to submit to being pathologized in order to get treatment as a trans woman? It's my body, so I should have control over it.


The paranoid ranting about psychiatric "pseudo-science" seems to ignore the fact that we've been far beyond Freud for a good 50 years now.
It's not paranoid considering some of the people involved are notorious transphobes. You also have to consider the history of the treatment of trans people by psychiatry. Psychiatrists have been set up as gatekeepers, and quite often those gatekeepers merely express the dominant misogynist views of women and use them as a measuring stick for someone being trans.

I had a friend who favored leather jackets, blue jeans, and boots, but she made no progress with her gatekeeper until she took his advice to start wearing dresses and heels. That's outright sexism being forced on a woman.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

You might not be aware of this, but I'm a trans woman, so I have a lot of experience in this matter. Yes, some trans people experience considerable emotional distress, but emotional distress isn't itself a disorder.

You're ignoring the fact that the emotional distress in this instance has a specific source - a fundamental mismatch between social expectations, self-image, and body type and/or behaviour. Addressing the last two falls under the remit of medicine, just like depression is dealt with via medication and/or cognitive behavioural therapy.


Of course not, even if in general society there can be a stigma attached to it.

Surely then the fault lies with society, not medicine?


Why do I need to be "disordered" to obtain surgery? Other people can get all the plastic surgery they want, but I have to submit to being pathologized in order to get treatment as a trans woman? It's my body, so I should have control over it.

Because transitioning is about more than appearances, right? Just like depression isn't just "being a bit sad"?


It's not paranoid considering some of the people involved are notorious transphobes. You also have to consider the history of the treatment of trans people by psychiatry. Psychiatrists have been set up as gatekeepers, and quite often those gatekeepers merely express the dominant misogynist views of women and use them as a measuring stick for someone being trans.

I had a friend who favored leather jackets, blue jeans, and boots, but she made no progress with her gatekeeper until she took his advice to start wearing dresses and heels. That's outright sexism being forced on a woman.

That's deplorable, but has everything to do with sexist social expectations of women in general and nothing to do with treating gender dysphoria as a medical concern.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Between this, drapetomania, it's stances on homosexuality, the DSM can, ever so kindly, fuck off. Bunch of unscientific, guess work anyway.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

You're ignoring the fact that the emotional distress in this instance has a specific source - a fundamental mismatch between social expectations, self-image, and body type and/or behaviour. Addressing the last two falls under the remit of medicine, just like depression is dealt with via medication and/or cognitive behavioural therapy.
As someone diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia, they strike me as quite different than being trans.

Now certainly hormone therapy and surgery require medical intervention, but what I'm objecting to is psychiatry viewing being trans as fundamentally a mental disorder just as they once viewed being gay or lesbian in the same way.


Because transitioning is about more than appearances, right?
That's rather complex, and is different for each person. For some, it's enough to make their outward appearance conform to their gender identity, for others it goes as far as surgery.

Of course, one has to wonder if we lived in a society without a strict gender binary, and without misogyny, whether surgery would be relevant. The dysphoria trans people feel is more about not fitting into the gender binary, which is an ideological construct.


That's deplorable, but has everything to do with sexist social expectations of women in general and nothing to do with treating gender dysphoria as a medical concern.
The misogyny in our society is reflected in how gender variant people are treated, including by the medical and psychiatric establishments.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

As someone diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia, they strike me as quite different than being trans.

Now certainly hormone therapy and surgery require medical intervention, but what I'm objecting to is psychiatry viewing being trans as fundamentally a mental disorder just as they once viewed being gay or lesbian in the same way.

As a person diagnosed with Asperger's, here's my perspective; I don't want to be "cured" of my condition, but at the same time I recognise that for certain people in certain circumstances it can contribute to mental distress due to the social difficulties than can occur between autistic and neurotypical individuals. So I fail to see what would be gained by removing autism as a medical diagnosis if that means other people with autistic conditions fail to get the help they reckon they need.


That's rather complex, and is different for each person. For some, it's enough to make their outward appearance conform to their gender identity, for others it goes as far as surgery.

Of course, one has to wonder if we lived in a society without a strict gender binary, and without misogyny, whether surgery would be relevant. The dysphoria trans people feel is more about not fitting into the gender binary, which is an ideological construct.

So you accept that for at least some cases, it's not enough to adopt the appearances according to one's gender identity, but also that their physiology is not conducive to achieving a healthy mental state? If adopting certain behaviours and clothing styles is good enough for some, then I don't see why a physician has to get involved in those cases. But if the patient feels that transitioning requires surgery, hormones and/or medications, then from a medical point of view it needs to needs to be demonstrated that the interventions involved will not negatively impact upon the long-term well-being of the patient (because the changes involved can have life-long implications). Therefore a diagnosis must be made.


The misogyny in our society is reflected in how gender variant people are treated, including by the medical and psychiatric establishments.

So you agree that the problem is the treatment, not the diagnosis?

Because otherwise, if you think transitioning should not be considered an issue of medical necessity under any circumstances, then you're asking it to be considered on the same level as plastic surgery, which isn't available on many (any?) insurance policies and is not offered by any public health service I'm aware of.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

So you accept that for at least some cases, it's not enough to adopt the appearances according to one's gender identity, but also that their physiology is not conducive to achieving a healthy mental state?
No, I think living in a gender binary system filled with misogyny is not conducive to achieving a healthy mental state, but the distress felt by trans people isn't a mental disorder. It's actually a healthy reaction to a system that says gender is congruent with two physical sexes.


So you agree that the problem is the treatment, not the diagnosis?
The diagnosis is part of the problem.


Because otherwise, if you think transitioning should not be considered an issue of medical necessity under any circumstances, then you're asking it to be considered on the same level as plastic surgery, which isn't available on many (any?) insurance policies and is not offered by any public health service I'm aware of.
That's what's fucked up. If we trans people want treatment, we have to play along with the game and agree that we have a mental disorder, and even then, most insurance (in the US, at least) won't cover surgery.

In a rational society, as long as a trans person is able to give informed consent, then they should be able to receive the treatment they want without being declared mentally disordered.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

No, I think living in a gender binary system filled with misogyny is not conducive to achieving a healthy mental state, but the distress felt by trans people isn't a mental disorder. It's actually a healthy reaction to a system that says gender is congruent with two physical sexes.

And if that "healthy reaction" involves seeking out medical intervention, how do you suppose that should be dealt with in the context of capitalist conditions of artificial scarcity?


The diagnosis is part of the problem.

How? There's nothing morally wrong with having a condition that medicine recognises as causing distress in some instances. You're still confusing the diagnosis with society's reaction to that diagnosis.


That's what's fucked up. If we trans people want treatment, we have to play along with the game and agree that we have a mental disorder, and even then, most insurance (in the US, at least) won't cover surgery.

If transitioning was treated on the same level as plastic surgery as you seem to want, then it would be even harder for trans people of limited financial means to achieve.


In a rational society, as long as a trans person is able to give informed consent, then they should be able to receive the treatment they want without being declared mentally disordered.

"Mentally disordered" is not the same as "mentally incapable", you know. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with having a mental condition. What's truly important is how society and medicine deals with a given condition and it's specifics.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I'm not coming down on saying the DSM classification is right, but the idea that a "diagnosis" necessitates a negative moral judgement is interesting, and DND needs to address Nox's core intuition about this. Presumably, to do surgery on a person, there needs to be a justification for that surgery, and that justification is going to be some kind of diagnosis about the condition of the person. Sex change surgery would be no different. There is a person who feels female/male enough to need to have their male/female body altered to feel like themselves, which seems at face value (i.e if we're not operating with significant moral assumptions) like a condition which someone could be "diagnosed" with. If there's no diagnosis, why is there a need for surgical correction? Nor can you draw a parallel between this and cosmetic surgery - cosmetic surgery is (by definition) related to superficial aspects of identity, thus why there is no universal need to access such services. Due to its increased importance to one's identity, a transsexual presumably has much more right to surgery than a person in need of something cosmetic, and we would hope that society, the law and medical institutions would reflect such priorities. For instance, I would fight for the rights of trans people to get insurance money/government funding for their surgery but I could care less whether men with big noses and flat women also get such support for their cosmetic surgery to better fit beauty norms.

I'm not saying the DSM decision was right but it seems that DND is avoiding Nox's main argument, and in the process implicitly making a negative moral judgement of everyone who falls under diagnoses which might seem more "legitimate" like autism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

And if that "healthy reaction" involves seeking out medical intervention, how do you suppose that should be dealt with in the context of capitalist conditions of artificial scarcity?
In most cases in the US at least, the way it's dealt with now is that a trans person foots the bill for surgery but yet they can't make that decision about their body without a gatekeeper (the vast majority of whom are non-trans) giving approval.

As someone who supports a woman's right to choose and the right of the terminally ill to choose euthanasia, I believe that each person should have bodily sovereignty unless they are mentally incompetent to make such decisions.

I'm not saying sexual reassignment surgery is precisely analogous to plastic surgery, just that people obtaining the former are denied the authority over their own bodies that the latter aren't.


How? There's nothing morally wrong with having a condition that medicine recognises as causing distress in some instances.
And distress isn't necessarily a sign of a mental disorder.


You're still confusing the diagnosis with society's reaction to that diagnosis.
No, I'm rejecting the psychiatric diagnosis as needlessly pathologizing something that has existed across various cultures and times, just as gays and lesbians were needlessly pathologized because psychiatry held up heterosexuality as "natural" and homosexuality and bisexuality as "deviant."


If transitioning was treated on the same level as plastic surgery as you seem to want, then it would be even harder for trans people of limited financial means to achieve.
As a trans person of limited financial means, I disagree. Only a tiny number of insurance programs cover surgery, and government programs for low income people like Medicaid generally don't (although there have been exceptions).


"Mentally disordered" is not the same as "mentally incapable", you know. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with having a mental condition. What's truly important is how society and medicine deals with a given condition and it's specifics.
Since I've been open about being diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia, I find it odd that you seem to think I'm saying there's something wrong with having a mental condition.

But you're really missing the point I'm making, which is that trans people aren't mentally disordered, this culture's assumptions about gender are.

And you're essentially telling me just to accept that psychiatry sees being trans as a mental disorder, because I as a mere trans person have no right to reject that.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I'm not saying the DSM decision was right but it seems that DND is avoiding Nox's main argument, and in the process implicitly making a negative moral judgement of everyone who falls under diagnoses which might seem more "legitimate" like autism.
Except for the part where I've been open about being diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia.

[Leftsolidarity]

Also, if you're not trans, don't presume to tell a trans person how they should feel about who they are.

As someone who would be considered gender-non-conforming or genderqueer or whatever you prefer to call it, I'm for the most part in agreement with Noxion actually. Not trying to be-little you or the fact that it's true that LGBTQ people have the final say in regards to our issues, I just felt that I should point out that our community has varying views on this.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

As someone who would be considered gender-non-conforming or genderqueer or whatever you prefer to call it, I'm for the most part in agreement with Noxion actually. Not trying to be-little you or the fact that it's true that LGBTQ people have the final say in regards to our issues, I just felt that I should point out that our community has varying views on this.
Trans people are forced to go along with it if we want appropriate medical treatment. I don't have a problem with trans people doing what we have to in order to survive in the world as it is.

But as a revolutionary, I must challenge the status quo, and how the medical and psychiatric establishments view trans people can't be separated from the ideological construct of a gender binary and a misogynistic society. It's not trans people who are disordered, it's society.

[cynicles]

Wow, I can't tell whether the comments in this thread are just ignorance or transphobia. Knowing most peoples knowledge on the subject I'd say ignorance.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Wow, I can't tell whether the comments in this thread are just ignorance or transphobia. Knowing most peoples knowledge on the subject I'd say ignorance.

Would you mind telling us which comments in particular, or are you just here to display your political superiority to others?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

In most cases in the US at least, the way it's dealt with now is that a trans person foots the bill for surgery but yet they can't make that decision about their body without a gatekeeper (the vast majority of whom are non-trans) giving approval.

As someone who supports a woman's right to choose and the right of the terminally ill to choose euthanasia, I believe that each person should have bodily sovereignty unless they are mentally incompetent to make such decisions.

I'm not saying sexual reassignment surgery is precisely analogous to plastic surgery, just that people obtaining the former are denied the authority over their own bodies that the latter aren't.

Can you work out why? By the way, it has nothing to do with anyone being "gatekeepers", unless you mean the insurance companies.


And distress isn't necessarily a sign of a mental disorder.

It is however, a sign that something is wrong, surely?


No, I'm rejecting the psychiatric diagnosis as needlessly pathologizing something that has existed across various cultures and times, just as gays and lesbians were needlessly pathologized because psychiatry held up heterosexuality as "natural" and homosexuality and bisexuality as "deviant."

I don't think the comparison you are making is a valid one. No health professional I'm aware of thinks the solution is "stop being trans", like the solution used to be "stop being gay".


As a trans person of limited financial means, I disagree. Only a tiny number of insurance programs cover surgery, and government programs for low income people like Medicaid generally don't (although there have been exceptions).

Then maybe the answer is to try and get it covered, rather than try and get it to have the same status as plastic surgery and making it even less likely to be covered by either state or private programs.


Since I've been open about being diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia, I find it odd that you seem to think I'm saying there's something wrong with having a mental condition.

But you're really missing the point I'm making, which is that trans people aren't mentally disordered, this culture's assumptions about gender are.

So no surgery is necessary ever, in any case? I don't think all trans people would agree with that. Same for medicines and hormones. If the solution lies entirely within society, then none of those things are necessary.


And you're essentially telling me just to accept that psychiatry sees being trans as a mental disorder, because I as a mere trans person have no right to reject that.

I thought you said there was nothing intrinsically wrong with having a mental disorder?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I thought you said there was nothing intrinsically wrong with having a mental disorder?
There isn't. If I think something isn't a mental disorder it's not because I think there's something wrong with having one (since I've been diagnosed with two things I agree are disorders). Since I've stated this more than once now, what's your deal?


So no surgery is necessary ever, in any case? I don't think all trans people would agree with that.
Nor am I asking them to. It's their body, only they can decide what they want to do with it. That's my point, which you're determined to ignore.

Also, fuck off. Then fuck off again. What right do you have to tell me how I should feel about being trans?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

There isn't. If I think something isn't a mental disorder it's not because I think there's something wrong with having one (since I've been diagnosed with two things I agree are disorders). Since I've stated this more than once now, what's your deal?

What's yours? If there's nothing wrong with having a mental disorder, then what's the problem?


Nor am I asking them to. It's their body, only they can decide what they want to do with it. That's my point, which you're determined to ignore.

Your solution would give trans people even less control over their bodies, since plastic surgery isn't considered necessary for the well-being of the patient, and trans people just like everyone else are rarely made of money.


Also, fuck off. Then fuck off again. What right do you have to tell me how I should feel about being trans?

Since we're in the business of building strawmen, you're the one who wants to trivialise the desires of trans people. Now you fuck off.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Your solution would give trans people even less control over their bodies, since plastic surgery isn't considered necessary for the well-being of the patient, and trans people just like everyone else are rarely made of money.
Wait, could I have an update on what this argument was originally about? I'm a little lost.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Wait, could I have an update on what this argument was originally about? I'm a little lost.

Danielle seems to think that transitioning should be treated in a similar way to the way plastic surgery is today - you hand over your cash and you get it.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

What's yours? If there's nothing wrong with having a mental disorder, then what's the problem?
Just because there's nothing wrong with having a mental disorder, it doesn't follow that something is a mental disorder. But, hey the great science of psychiatry has spoken, who am I as a mere trans person to challenge it?


Your solution would give trans people even less control over their bodies, since plastic surgery isn't considered necessary for the well-being of the patient, and trans people just like everyone else are rarely made of money.
Isn't it enough that some trans people are distressed because their gender and body aren't congruent? Do we have to make it a mental disorder so they can get treatment?


Since we're in the business of building strawmen, you're the one who wants to trivialise the desires of trans people. Now you fuck off.
You're the only one here telling a trans person how they should feel about being trans.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Danielle seems to think that transitioning should be treated in a similar way to the way plastic surgery is today - you hand over your cash and you get it.
No, I think it should be treated in a similar way only in that people who want to have plastic surgery can make decisions about their bodies that trans people can't.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Just because there's nothing wrong with having a mental disorder, it doesn't follow that something is a mental disorder. But, hey the great science of psychiatry has spoken, who am I as a mere trans person to challenge it?

Things are defined by what they are, not by what you want them to be.


Isn't it enough that some trans people are distressed because their gender and body aren't congruent? Do we have to make it a mental disorder so they can get treatment?

A mental condition that causes distress can be legitimately considered a disorder. If not, what else is it, a bicycle?


You're the only one here telling a trans person how they should feel about being trans.

I mentioned nothing about others' feelings, which I have no actual meaningful control over in any case.


No, I think it should be treated in a similar way only in that people who want to have plastic surgery can make decisions about their bodies that trans people can't.

Trans people can't be diagnosed as trans? That's a new one on me.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Things are defined by what they are, not by what you want them to be.
Someone could have said the same thing to gays and lesbians four decades ago on the same basis, that the American Psychiatric Association declared they had a mental disorder.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Someone could have said the same thing to gays and lesbians four decades ago on the same basis, that the American Psychiatric Association declared they had a mental disorder.

With homosexuality the mismatch was only ever between them and society - unlike transitioning, attempts to "cure" homosexuality have been entirely unsuccessful.

Also unlike trans people, in a supportive environment homosexuals don't seek to change any part of themselves.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

With homosexuality the mismatch was only ever between them and society - unlike transitioning, attempts to "cure" homosexuality have been entirely unsuccessful.
An individual choosing to bring their gender identity, social gender, and sometimes even their physical sex into alignment is not a disordered person being cured, but is simply a person expressing who they are.


Also unlike trans people, in a supportive environment homosexuals don't seek to change any part of themselves.
An environment of growing up in a strict gender binary system is one where sex and gender are the same thing, and where there can be no ambiguity. The gender binary is the disorder, not trans people.

But I believe you will never see us anything but mentally disordered, and will try to put us "in our place" when we object. After all, what are the opinions of mere trans people?

[Dog]

Trans people? We're still stuck where gays and lesbians were four decades ago, pathologized by psychiatry, which has a long history of being used as a form of social control.

We live in a society where anyone with the money to do so can have extensive plastic surgery done, without being pathologized or needing the approval of psychiatry. Trans people, however, challenge some very basic assumptions of our cultural ideology.

No, they do not. They reinforce the concept that gender is integral to a person's identity. "Transexuality" is an intellectual reinforcement of inequality and the oppression of women.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

No, they do not. They reinforce the concept that gender is integral to a person's identity. "Transexuality" is an intellectual reinforcement of inequality and the oppression of women.
Trans men and trans women don't "oppress" anyone, let alone cis women, by our mere existence. How do we oppress anyone? What do we take away from someone else? How do we exploit someone else?

[Dog]

Trans men and trans women don't "oppress" anyone, let alone cis women, by our mere existence. How do we oppress anyone? What do we take away from someone else? How do we exploit someone else?

I never said you purposefully oppressed anyone, I'm just saying that the whole concept of transexuality is based on the idea that gender is such an important biological thing - a society that values men and women as equals cannot also believe that gender is so inherently significant that some people with male bodies identify as females.

[Leftsolidarity]

No, they do not. They reinforce the concept that gender is integral to a person's identity. "Transexuality" is an intellectual reinforcement of inequality and the oppression of women.

Fuck you

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I never said you purposefully oppressed anyone
Purposefully or not, you said the existence of trans people oppresses women. That's just a bullshit argument to justify the marginalization of trans people, especially trans women. You know what oppresses women, both cis and trans? Misogyny.


a society that values men and women as equals cannot also believe that gender is so inherently significant that some people with male bodies identify as females.
Why is it your type always singles out trans women and completely ignores the existence of trans men? Probably because trans men blow up your argument that trans people "oppress women."

[Dog]

Purposefully or not, you said the existence of trans people oppresses women. That's just a bullshit argument to justify the marginalization of trans people, especially trans women. You know what oppresses women, both cis and trans? Misogyny.

Which is a natural outgrowth of the idea that gender is integral to a person's identity, WHICH CANNOT be eradicated in a society which buys into the concept of transexuality.


Why is it your type always singles out trans women and completely ignores the existence of trans men? Probably because trans men blow up your argument that trans people "oppress women."

How so? Trans men, trans women, what difference does it make? It's still a reinforcement of institutional sexism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Which is a natural outgrowth of the idea that gender is integral to a person's identity, WHICH CANNOT be eradicated in a society which buys into the concept of transexuality.
Misogyny reflects a social ideology where men have social power and women do not, and where men use their social power to oppress women. Both cis and trans women suffer from misogyny.


How so? Trans men, trans women, what difference does it make? It's still a reinforcement of institutional sexism.
How can the mere existence of trans people reinforce sexism? You keep repeating that, but you have yet to explain it. You're just engaging in philosophical trans bashing.

[Dog]

Misogyny reflects a social ideology where men have social power and women do not, and where men use their social power to oppress women. Both cis and trans women suffer from misogyny.

Thanks to the idea that gender is important.


How can the mere existence of trans people reinforce sexism? You keep repeating that, but you have yet to explain it. You're just engaging in philosophical trans bashing.

By claiming that they were "born this way", trans people imply that men and women are so incredibly different in thinking and in identity. Explain why I'm wrong.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

By claiming that they were "born this way", trans people imply that men and women are so incredibly different in thinking and in identity. Explain why I'm wrong.
You're confusing the statements of some trans people with the existence of trans people, a group of people with a broad range of views on gender and sex. Some trans people do argue an essentialist concept of gender identity, but so do some cis people. Some trans people reject essentializing gender identity, but so do some cis people.

Transfeminist activist Emi Koyama wrote that "Essentializing our gender identity can be just as dangerous as resorting to biological essentialism. We construct our own gender identities based on what feels genuine, comfortable and sincere to us as we live and relate to others within given social and cultural constraint. This holds true for those whose gender identity is in congruence with their birth sex, as well as for trans people...Instead of justifying our existence through the reverse essentialism, transfeminism dismantles the essentialist assumption of the normativity of the sex/gender congruence."

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Danielle seems to think that transitioning should be treated in a similar way to the way plastic surgery is today - you hand over your cash and you get it.

Ah, alright. I'm not familiar with the science of it all, so I'll keep my mouth shut.
No, they do not. They reinforce the concept that gender is integral to a person's identity. "Transexuality" is an intellectual reinforcement of inequality and the oppression of women.

The ignorance is strong with this one. First exploited capitalists, and now 'transgender people' making sexist caricatures! What next!?

[MEGAMANTROTSKY]

A mental condition that causes distress can be legitimately considered a disorder. If not, what else is it, a bicycle?
But just because transgenderism appears to carry all the characteristics of mental illness, does not mean it is actually a mental illness.

The question is whether the gender identity of trans people by itself causes "distress"; I think that would be a stretch. It would make far more sense that the major problem for these people is access to affordable (medical or psychological) resources and social support necessary for them to freely express their gender identity, not merely that they experience gender incongruence. In my opinion the obstacles that they face stem from societal factors, which could then take a very serious toll on their mental health. And taking into account the immense prejudice they still face (at least in the US and Sweden), I think their "distress" can be far better understood in this context.


No, they do not. They reinforce the concept that gender is integral to a person's identity. "Transexuality" is an intellectual reinforcement of inequality and the oppression of women.
um, what

@Danielle: What is your position on essentialism here? I'm confused on why some take a stand against it, if only because it was a crucial method that allowed me to understand why transgenderism is not a mental illness in, well...essence.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

An individual choosing to bring their gender identity, social gender, and sometimes even their physical sex into alignment is not a disordered person being cured, but is simply a person expressing who they are.

Not all medical treatment involves "cures". You seem to have a rather archaic view of medicine and mental health.


An environment of growing up in a strict gender binary system is one where sex and gender are the same thing, and where there can be no ambiguity. The gender binary is the disorder, not trans people.

If that was truly the case, then trans people would never seek surgery, only social redress. Yet some of them do seek out surgery. How is that not a medical issue?


But I believe you will never see us anything but mentally disordered, and will try to put us "in our place" when we object.

You say that there's nothing wrong with being mentally disordered, and yet the way you harp on about it makes me think that deep down you really do think there is something wrong with being neurologically divergent.

And no, debating you is not "putting you in your place". If I was really doing such a thing then I wouldn't even bother trying to explain anything to you. Please desist in this irritating habit of accusing me of trying to shut down the debate when by participating in it I am in fact doing the exact opposite.


After all, what are the opinions of mere trans people?

Your opinions are not the same as that of all trans persons, so I think it is highly presumptuous of you to adopt that kind of tone. Unless of course you are claiming to speak for all trans persons?


But just because transgenderism appears to carry all the characteristics of mental illness, does not mean it is actually a mental illness.

The question is whether the gender identity of trans people by itself causes "distress"; I think that would be a stretch. It would make far more sense that the major problem for these people is access to affordable (medical or psychological) resources and social support necessary for them to freely express their gender identity, not merely that they experience gender incongruence. In my opinion the obstacles that they face stem from societal factors, which could then take a very serious toll on their mental health. And taking into account the immense prejudice they still face (at least in the US and Sweden), I think their "distress" can be far better understood in this context.

And since we don't live in a post-capitalist egalitarian post-scarcity society, medical care has to be rationed in some manner. I'm thinking that rationing more on the basis of need would be a better solution than rationing on the basis of money, which is what Danielle seems to want.

[Dog]

Ah, alright. I'm not familiar with the science of it all, so I'll keep my mouth shut.

The ignorance is strong with this one. First exploited capitalists, and now 'transgender people' making sexist caricatures! What next!?

i don't liek ur bigoted dismissal of my individual expression

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Danielle: What is your position on essentialism here? I'm confused on why some take a stand against it, if only because it was a crucial method that allowed me to understand why transgenderism is not a mental illness in, well...essence.
I think gender is a complex mix of things, some ideological, some biological or genetic. So I take a stance in-between gender essentialists and those who say gender is entirely a social construct.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

If that was truly the case, then trans people would never seek surgery, only social redress. Yet some of them do seek out surgery. How is that not a medical issue?
It's a medical issue, just not necessarily a psychiatric issue. Also, within a strict gender binary where gender and sex are supposed to be congruent, it's hard to only seek social redress without being further marginalized.


You say that there's nothing wrong with being mentally disordered, and yet the way you harp on about it makes me think that deep down you really do think there is something wrong with being neurologically divergent.
Yet again, you choose to ignore that I'm open about having two mental disorders (social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia), so clearly I don't have a problem "deep down" with it. I just don't think my gender identity is a mental disorder.


Please desist in this irritating habit of accusing me of trying to shut down the debate when by participating in it I am in fact doing the exact opposite.
Fair enough.


I'm thinking that rationing more on the basis of need would be a better solution than rationing on the basis of money, which is what Danielle seems to want.
My problem, as I've stated at least a dozen times in this thread, is who gets to determine need and how.

[Narcissus]

I personally feel that the way both men and women are portrayed in society is deplorable, and I can't see why anyone would want to be perceived as either. However I am a male, and I FEEL like a human being, that has been conditioned all my life to behave and FEEL like a male, and as such I cannot possibly fathom the pain that would accompany feeling the opposite of what I am perceived to be.

Hopefully one day we will abandon the idea of gender altogether, and it will mean as little as eye colour does today in our new world. But for now I can show only sympathy for those who feel so keenly the effects of the discriminatory society in which we live at the present.

[Leftsolidarity]

How has Dog not gotten in problem for being transphobic?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

How has Dog not gotten in problem for being transphobic?

Loophole? Transphobes aren't banned by policy, there isn't, to my knowledge, a policy where all queerphobes (homophobes, Biphobes, Transphobes, etc) are banned but only homophobes. It is either that or a Global Mod/Admin hasn't been keeping tabs on this conversation.

[Leftsolidarity]

Loophole? Transphobes aren't banned by policy, there isn't, to my knowledge, a policy where all queerphobes (homophobes, Biphobes, Transphobes, etc) are banned but only homophobes. It is either that or a Global Mod/Admin hasn't been keeping tabs on this conversation.

I've reported like 2 or 3 posts. It's ridiculous if that shits allowed.

[blake 3:17]

@Dog -- you're saying some ignorant stuff. Rather than debating the exact meaning/cause/whatever of gender, just listen.


I've reported like 2 or 3 posts. It's ridiculous if that shits allowed.

Then address the person saying what you find offensive and tell them and everyone else why.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I've reported like 2 or 3 posts. It's ridiculous if that shits allowed.

Reporting doesn't mean someone will respond. From my time in the BA there were only a handful of responders who dealt with reported messages.

[Yazman]

MODERATOR ACTION:


i don't liek ur bigoted dismissal of my individual expression

ME DUNZ LIEK UR SHITS-POZTINGS ON WEBBERNETS

U DO IT AGAIN U GETS INFRAKTIONS'D

Make substantial posts that contribute in a meaningful way to the thread when you post or I'm going to ban your ass. You're hanging by a thread here, so make real posts or don't bother.

This post constitutes a warning to Dog.

[Dog]

I am. It's these people who are calling me a bigot and not bothering to refute what I'm saying.

[Yazman]

Well, if anybody posts in here calling somebody a bigot, I'm going to lay the smack down. I don't want to see that and if you're going to make a post in this topic then you'd damn well better be contributing as well.

That goes for everybody. Don't post unless you're contributing in a meaningful way.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I am. It's these people who are calling me a bigot and not bothering to refute what I'm saying.
You keep posting nonsense about trans people "oppressing women," and now you're whining about being called on it. Frankly, I think people have been reasonably polite considering what you've been posting.

[#FF0000]

I never said you purposefully oppressed anyone, I'm just saying that the whole concept of transexuality is based on the idea that gender is such an important biological thing - a society that values men and women as equals cannot also believe that gender is so inherently significant that some people with male bodies identify as females.

This is a really good point tbh and I'd really like to see this addressed without people getting mad because I don't know what to make of this either.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

This is a really good point tbh and I'd really like to see this addressed without people getting mad because I don't know what to make of this either.
Honestly, I don't see how "a society that values men and women as equals" wouldn't also value as equals people whose gender isn't congruent with their physical sex.

[Kenco Smooth]

A practical concern is that if it doesn't appear in the DSM it will not be covered by 90% of insurance providers in the US. If the distress can be considered unique enough to warrant treatment that is different from general CBT then it really does need to be in there realistically. That's not the case with homosexuality hence there being no need for specific recognition there.

I'm not assuming this is the case as I'm not particularly informed on the issue but there are very good potential reasons for recognize the issue in the DSM-V (it's certainly not the biggest issue with the document).

[#FF0000]

Honestly, I don't see how "a society that values men and women as equals" wouldn't also value as equals people whose gender isn't congruent with their physical sex.

Is gender a social construct?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Is gender a social construct?
As I said earlier in this thread: "I think gender is a complex mix of things, some ideological, some biological or genetic. So I take a stance in-between gender essentialists and those who say gender is entirely a social construct."

The gender binary, or the idea that there are two genders and they are congruent with two biological sexes, is certainly a social construct, though.