Gay EqualityBoard

Otis-T, you have expressed this perfectly. Libertyfreedomia, I apologise if you feel personally attacked. Sorry about that.

Pretty Boy wrote:

Otis-T, you have expressed this perfectly. Libertyfreedomia, I apologise if you feel personally attacked. Sorry about that.

So...all's well that ends well ? Please ?
Pretty please ?

Obesity: First: DiscArnate top 46%. Second: Glad top 46%. Third: The leader top 48% … Middle: Avalonde bottom 15% … Last: Midshire bottom 0%

In Short height, fancy dress parties are raided by military police for new recruits.

Office Girls wrote:

So...all's well that ends well ? Please ?
Pretty please ?

That’s the spirit, but let’s keep talking. I will try to be more friendly. 😇

Libertyfreedomia wrote:

My problem with the inclusion of the T is again that it's centred around/ tied to a specific mental disorder with depression and autism as major comorbidities. Meaning different from one's sexuality, meaning capacity for sexual feelings, being trans is a medical issue and should be focused on as such. They would be more at home in advocacy groups relating to and with a focus on such issues.

I think it's not just the conservatives whom I would agree with you seem to have it out for trans people in certain countries like the US (which I don't mean to understate that as an issue in any way, because it is a big problem). It's also the failure of trans advocacy by focusing on self-ID and total acceptance in sex segregated spaces. A focus of trans advocacy should probably be first and foremost fighting for the rights to receive the care they need and which alleviates their gender dysphoria as well as fighting for anti-discrimination protections in healthcare spaces/ institutions.

Your problem is that you think your opinions are terribly important and don’t pause to reflect.

This region was founded by a 14 year old boy from Manchester named Dominic. He suffered from clinical depression and handed the region over to Spanish Africa within a few months in order to keep it going. His personal blog from that time is in “my” Factbook. Having looked at it again this morning reminded me that we should all try to be kind.

Your persistence in labelling being transgender as a “medical issue” is galling. You don’t know this. You have read that some people think it so. That’s all. Being homosexual was labelled a medical issue not so long ago - a psychiatric illness. A little humility for all of us wouldn’t go amiss.

“DSM”? I had to look that one up.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. DSM contains descriptions, symptoms and other criteria for diagnosing mental disorders.

…..

As a result of this scientific research, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973.

In 1973, the American Psychiatic Association (ASA) removed the diagnosis of “homosexuality” from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. (…)

Rigid gender beliefs usually flourish in fundamentalist, religious communities where any information or alternative explanation is unwelcome. (…)

The APA said heterosexuality was the only biological norm. Homosexuality was classified as a “sociopathic personality disturbance”. (…)

The most significant catalyst for diagnostic change was gay activism. Cultural attitudes have changed in many countries.

Libertyfreedomia wrote:

Don't argue in bad faith. I never said that being trans is a mental disorder or illness. Read what I wrote again, I stated "it's centred around/ tied to a specific mental disorder" the disorder being GD, Gender Dysphoria. Nice try though, but I choose my words with care.

“It’s centred around/tied to a specific disorder”. That is “choosing words carefully”?

If you don’t stop, reflect and engage with the conversation in a more positive way, what’s the point of being here? To win an argument on a subject you personally appear to know little about?

I was hoping today that we could go back to some of Rising of the Forgotten’s points and discuss more personal problems with the gay scene. Maybe some day soon.

Libertyfreedomia wrote:

At least I source what I argue for and base it in research and statement of people knowledgeable on the relevant subjects. You have yet to do so. Than this "a subject you personally appear to know little about", I would say the same to you my guy.

My joining the region was on the request of Pretty Boy.

You were asked to come here because you were posting on a regular basis from Union of Christian Nations. If you’re going to discuss it’s better to be in a region. Since you’ve been here we’ve certainly talked. That’s a good thing. But you are being disrespectful and souring the atmosphere. Let’s end this tit for tat NOW, please.

”A place where there isn’t any trouble … Do you suppose there is such a place, Toto? There must be. It’s not a place you can get to by a boat or a train. It’s far, far away, behind the moon, beyond the rain …”
- Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz

Libertyfreedomia wrote:

It's the current medical consensus, if you disagree with it that's fine, but just be honest with it. You can't argue an unknown without any data. Gender dysphoria is a disorder according to the latest version of the DSM as published by the APA the main psychiatrics organisation in the US, with it having 2 major comorbidities those being depression and autism. With some studies having found that around 24% of trans people are also autistic. According to NPR studies have found the rate of autism to be three to six times more prevelant in trans people. Trans women their brains have also been seen to have certain aspects/ similarities with those of women, though further research in this area is needed. Also to relieve trans people from their GD the disorder they suffer from, the only known treatement to work as of this moment is gender reassignment by HRT and surgery. So how is me calling it a medical issue wrong when the problem is a physical and mental one and the solution is also medical intervention?

The trouble with medical consensus in terms of psychology is that it's incredibly dependent upon social norms and acceptance. You can see that trend throughout history. The truth is that psychology is constantly evolving and beyond the understanding of biology itself as a hard science, the behavioral aspect is nearly impossible to quantify effectively. Mental "disorders" fall into that. Science is constantly evolving and tries best to present information off of what we know currently. However that doesn't mean it's correct, just a best understanding and one that is often driven by cultural values. Unfortunately and there is a lot of biased studies with targeted data collection, this is especially true if you look at older studies where the methods are rife with disregard for some variables and an overly targeted look at others. I'm all too familiar with this, I'm a scientist myself and I see bad studies all the time. Any good scientist would tell you the same thing. And yeah autism is real, it's also hard as hell to understand given how extremely variable it is. Even then "treatments" have incredibly inconsistent results, and a lot of people are high functioning and don't need treatment, just patience.

The argument you are making is not new. Believe it if you want, but all those things about medical treatment and mental evaluation are subject to change. I don't think it's good to speak from authority on something like the behavioral side of psychology. Science isn't an end all be all to anything, it's a method for understanding. It's a tool to inform us in decision making. To use it to assert conclusions as hard fact is a gross miss use of it.

I personally think you should spend some time learning how to speak with tact and a little more consideration. It's fairly clear that you're not understanding the response you're getting after the comments that you make. I think you'll find that your conversations are much more productive if you're more careful with your wording and approach.

Anyway, sorry for the book. That's the last thing I'll say about any of this because I'm gonna be busy this week.

I think at this point the conversation should just be killed because it's constantly shifting back into subtle jabs. That's not fun for anyone. I'm not having fun reading it, and it's hardly been productive.

Libertyfreedomia wrote:

Name 1 thing I said that was disrespectful before people started putting words in my mouth.

Your approach to the conversation in the first place could be easily misconstrued as condescending and dismissive. Being that your discussing things in a region called Gay Equality, which often gets trolls and hateful comments, your comments easily could be interpreted as disrespectful. You can be disrespectful without meaning to, intent is not a factor here. You didn't read the room and you dived into a topic with a position of authority without any concern for the setting. You showed a lack of courtesy, that is disrespectful.