Transgender - Discussion/Education

"First though, it is necessary to point out that the terms sex and gender are not synonyms. Sex refers to the biological differences between males and females. Gender refers to the continuum of complex psychosocial self-perceptions, attitudes, and expectations people have about members of both sexes. Even the terms male and female, man and woman are not interchangeable. What it means to be male or female originates from physical characteristics derived from sex chromosomes and genes that lead to certain gonads, internal and external genitalia, and physiological hormones. Being a man or a woman holds broader meaning, with cultural concepts of masculinity and femininity coming into play. This issue of Virtual Mentor will not focus so much on why sex and gender should not be used interchangeably, but instead on how sex and gender together and to varying degrees influence today's practice of medicine [1]."

"An argument or claim in which two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. The confusion is often due to one shared characteristic between two or more items of comparison in the argument that is way off in the order of magnitude, oversimplified, or just that important additional factors have been ignored.

Is there anyone here who agrees with me? Or am I the only conservative around here.

Upon the arrival of the third page, we invite a transgender individual to argue in favour of transgenderism.

Then it is you who does not understand me, because I claim that sex is determined by the result of the union of a makle and female gametes, and that gametes have only those designations but by mutation. That is not a function of society, or behavior choice, both of which you define as gender. I understand your distinction, but then you confuse societal choice with what is sex. 

Wrong, again. Sex is not a mater of arbitrary choice. It is two gametes, male and female, or one or both as mutations. Either way, it is pure, genetic combination, not arbitrary choice. It does not help that you confuse sex and gender.

till wrong, again, for the same reason as immediately above. Nothing is assumed by sex, but it is of gender. Your own source, [1] in your post #40 says as much: "...many who identify as transgender do not feel they are exclusively masculine or feminine. [An emotional choice, not bases on sex [cis], but on behavioral preferernce].

A kangaroo is a completely different species,

and as of now, it is impossible to perform that surgery.

Whereas intersex people exist, proving that male and female are NOT the only standards sex is applied too,

A man is a completely different sex to women. 

"Marsupial and placental brain size partial correlations differ in that marsupials lack a partial correlation of BMR with brain size. "

So the only thing stopping me from being a kangaroo is technology?

You cannot use the minority to justify the majority. This is like saying "you shouldn't teach children that people have arms because some people are amputees". In fact, using your logic, there is NO way to define a male, female or even a human being as there are no constant characteristics that every single human being has. So I ask, how do you define a human being?

we can use surgery to change the body from male to female, and as Kbub530 pointed out above, men who show all of the physical features of a male can have xx chromosomes, does that make him a woman? 

Thank you for your opinion. Unfortunately for you, that is all it is. An opinion. 

 I see no reason to believe that a soul exists, and you have provided no evidence for such. 

 This is for psychologists, neurosurgeons, and biologists to study

The entire axiom of your argument has not been justified

 and therefore the rest of it is bunk anyway

 I must ask, would you like them privately addressed in PM, or discussed here in the forum?

Perhaps you don't understand. The claims you make are an important part of the discussion.

Whenever people fundamentally misunderstand an issue, I'd like at least some kind of justification behind a claim.

I don't dismiss what you are saying as bunk out of hasty work, but out of an unproven and unjustified axiom. Why should I care what a spirit has to do with it if I don't believe in spirits? 

I mean no disrespect towards you or your beliefs, but before one can extrapolate these beliefs justifiably, one must have some reason that is justified validly that they believe in 

I apologize, they weren't aimed at you specifically, but in general. People are drastically misinformed. And yes, I understand the process of learning, however, I am not open to things that are not justified or at all demonstrated. Every tested claim had a basis or hypothesis that proceeded it. 

What's yours?

Regardless I assure you I am working on a detailed response, if you would just be patient with me I will have it posted here soon. I apologize for the delay.

• This is going to be somewhat unorthodox and I'm sure some might find this very strange but I don't really mind that, I'm just warning you before I say anything lol.
  

•  Unfortunately your profile says you are an atheist so I can't really ask if you are into spiritual stuff. But TBH if you were open to it, it could help you understand much of the controversy surrounding the topic.
  

• . And not that this is particularly relevant but it also could help shed light on why individuals have homosexual tendencies.
  

• Due to the nature of this phenomenon the physicality of it are too overly emphasized which is why there seems to be no clear cut answers. Because in reality the immediate physicality is somewhat irrelevant so it doesn't really get to the core of what people experience.
  

• I'll say/ask this first, did you know the actual soul of an individual is non-gender? and only when a soul enters a physical body it takes on a male or female role?
  

• Did you know the soul can have several experiences within creation once the soul leaves its Creator? I know in this culture the idea of reincarnation and past lives is shunned but follow me here. Not getting caught up in any particular fundamentalist ideas of religion, you should give this some thought.
  

• Believe this or not, but a soul can gravitate towards either or, a combination of, or a specific role or "gender" type despite the physical body it was given. Most of the time a souls perceptions are subjugated or influenced by the upbringing role it took on at birth but not always
  

•  You might assume that a created soul was created male or female but that's actually not true because it is not possible, because the soul has no gender, male or female parts that is only relevant to physical embodiments when the soul enters creation to any given location. This is also true of the Creator as well, believe it or not God has no male or female parts and because of that no particular gender....those are only created things as God saw it useful for whatever means. Mainly for reproduction.
  

• But as you left the Creator as a soul you too had no physical parts, and as the soul becomes intertwined within the physical body it inhabits it begins to identify primarily to that gender psychologically but not truly inwardly. Meaning the reality that the soul is genderless never dissipates, the soul just begins to think and act according to its perceptions of that body (most of the time)
  

• As a matter of spiritual fact you could have had several other experiences before this one as either male or female "roles", and even though you are inhabiting a certain physical body you may not feel connected to that role or relate to that role, but more towards another or even a mixture of both as in not really accepting either or.
  

• This is true for homosexuals as well, a "man" may possess a male physique but feel attracted to males instead of women or maybe both. A person could have lived a previous life as a male or female role, then was killed in an accident and sent back into another body of a different gender and begin to feel as if it relates more to that previous role for whatever reason, or more attracted to a certain gender despite its own gender. Or as I said, may not fully embrace either or.
  

• This is surprisingly simplistic, since the soul itself is non-gender it doesn't have to conform to any particular role, but at the same time can gravitate to whatever role it is attracted to. Attributes of the soul is what usually pushes a soul to accept what it becomes.
  

• This is true of the Creator as well, God has attributes but not gender, no physical parts that make God either-or. Generally, it is accepted or asserted that God is male, but that's primarily because God is depicted as a provider, leader role or of strong disposition. So most revere God as a "He", ironically God has all aspects/expressions of Itself not just only a male or female expression. Again those are only roles and qualities that are derived from created forms in terms of reducing oneself to one or the other.
  

• You may ask then what is God if not a male or a female? well God is not a who, rather God is simply consciousness or conscious awareness. Consciousness (soul) of itself has no gender or male/female roles. God is basically a conscious Being with no embodiment, no location within creation rather all of creation is within God. 
  

• God can incarnate, as to take on a particular role/embodiment but the Creator Itself is pure awareness, you can say intelligence without a physical body. Of course, a physical body would exempt God from being what God is and how God is defined.
  

• Anyways before I write anything else I'll see if you are interested in any of that. I know atheists generally scoff at spiritual concepts and Theistic propositions lol, so I hope this is not confusing or offensive to you.
  

Even a valid and sound syllogism would work, and while fascinating your points are all claimed. They do not actually prove anything regarding the matter.

Interesting, both the concept that me being an atheist is unfortunate and that if I were open to it I would understand things. To clarify - being an atheist does not inherently mean that you don’t believe in spirits, it means you don’t believe in god(s). Full stop.

I understand the concept perfectly well, people are misinformed and don’t understand transgender people. People react to things they don’t understand very differently, some are afraid, some lash out at it, some deny it in some hopes of it going away as long as they don’t acknowledge it, whatever.

Not really, but I’ll try not to dismiss it. “Homosexual tendencies” I find that phrase a bit more insulting than any claim you make of spirits. It might just be me, but it just gives me a feeling of the whole, “It’s just a phase!” thing ya know? I could answer why people are homosexual. Because some people like the same gender that they are romantically and/or sexually.

Boom done, no souls required.

Definitely an interesting take; however, there is no other realm but the physical.

Your mind is simply a connection of high-speed transmission of nerves and the like. I don’t see another realm to particulate someone’s experience in. I think there is a clear-cut answer. If someone’s gender identity is that of a female and their sex expressed phenotype is male, that person is a female.

Pursuing that spirits exist, I would assume so. It also depends on what type of soul you are talking about. This seems like an obvious extrapolation from most beliefs of reincarnation and the like. I would also argue that there are clearly individuals who do not have a clear gender or even sex, what happened to the soul there? I am genuinely curious about your opinion regarding the matter.

Like I said, an interesting take, not one I buy, but I’ll grant for the sake of discussion. This is practically where I went in my last response. To elaborate on my own response. Gender is not binary, regardless of how one attains it, it is clearly a complex scale of spectrums that determine gender.  How does the reincarnated soul interact with this?

As for gravitating towards one or the other, could I ask why? Why does the soul do this specifically? You have some kind of principals behind whatever souls you are using, so I’m curious about a lot.

I wouldn’t assume that no.

Gender is societally constructed,

therefore any base layer or model would not have one. I agree. I agree, if there were a god, they would recognize the need to reproduce, and therefore create us with organs in order to accomplish that My question, if the creator is not bound by normal rules, why not make us capable of sexual pleasure and able to reproduce asexually? It would be less hassle in the long run.

So in other words, the foundation of the human is never truly changed, parts and other things are simply added as they gain physical being? A truly fascinating take, however, I would pose a different interpretation. I would say that if reincarnation is how the soul moves after their original body is gone, that they would collect kind of like an echo of all of their past lives, and slowly build up towards some maximum or unstable state, similar to atoms or molecules.

So in other words, perhaps my theory wasn’t as far off as according to you?

That past lives might be the reason that trans individuals exist? That might explain it,

but again, perhaps a different perspective? I would think that the relation between a soul and their gender is in psychological terms

so would the soul that is more separate from its host be one that is more fluid regarding the identities of its physical body? If that makes any sense, it was more of a note.

This kind of goes back to what I was saying before, with the echoes and all. Even with souls, I do feel the simpler answer is that the body has different preferences according to a host of genetic, psychological, and other factors. Of course, I may also just go back to what I was talking about in my last response, More separate and therefore the identities that one has is not as rigidly instructed by the body.

So a soul does build up some kind of attributes, as it goes through bodies, it is no longer the blank canvas it started out as? I’m curious, could a serial killer be reincarnated as a good person? Or vice versa? Or would the attributes, the taint, so to speak, prevent something like that from happening?

In all honesty, I would not care for any god regardless if there were any souls. This god does not seem to care about any of us, and I will do them a favor and revere them as much as they revere me.

To say- not at all. It is a tad bit patriarchal that a god was depicted as such. I think we both agree that typically god is seen as a parent or parental, and isn’t it true that women are seen as more parently? Even if that isn’t the case? If it’s often portrayed, why isn’t god seen as female then? It would only make sense for a god to not have any sex, a gender perhaps if it were conscious, but not sex.

Hmm, not much to note on this, I guess if the god we are defining is by definition having no embodiment then they wouldn’t have a gender? Eh, I suppose so, basic thought was that that god would still be aware and even interact with the same concepts that inform human identity, so I would assume it would be possible for any god to develop one.

I suppose it really depends on how you define god in that case.

Could a god simply not control its mas of powers and consciousness in a physical body? Seems like an arbitrary limit to me. Why is this the case? Could you elaborate?

Not necessarily scoff, I at least, consider it with less weight due to the inherent assumption it forces the wearer to presume, but it at least seems like a new perspective, so I’d be interested in having the conversation.

Please note: No I do not believe a soul exists, this is simply granting a proposition for the sake of discussion. Thank you.

Even a valid and sound syllogism would work, and while fascinating your points are all claimed. They do not actually prove anything regarding the matter.

But you just said a sound syllogism would work, so here that's what I will do as opposed to "proving" something for you. Again I can't prove to you there is a soul all I can do is point to you the implications, and in that alone everything should make sense, be perfectly clear to you. Reading over your post I'm not sure if you fully absorbed the simplicity of my propositions as being clear answers for this topic. Having said that, I think there are clear forms of evidence for considering the existence of the soul.

Interesting, both the concept that me being an atheist is unfortunate and that if I were open to it I would understand things. To clarify - being an atheist does not inherently mean that you don’t believe in spirits, it means you don’t believe in god(s). Full stop.

I only meant unfortunate in terms of you dismissing my posts, which at first seemed like the way you were going. I'm glad you decided to keep this flexible :) just don't assume at any point I'm being insulting because that's not my intentions.

I would argue though, spirits or souls existing without God involved makes for an illogical premise. Because now you have multiple layers of reality that somehow began to exist, I don't think it's worth arguing but maybe later I could elaborate on that. For now, lets just assume if the soul exists, it's more than likely it is because God exists. No need to make things more complicated.

I understand the concept perfectly well, people are misinformed and don’t understand transgender people. People react to things they don’t understand very differently, some are afraid, some lash out at it, some deny it in some hopes of it going away as long as they don’t acknowledge it, whatever.

Hopefully you don't see me as being any of that. I'm not reacting to it really more than just showing you the implications of an existing soul how it is in reality and how it effects our experience. And many religious types would never even go this far with you, TBH. Most would probably just call it an abomination or some rebellion to God's will. Perhaps a sin or some perversion. I've gathered a lot of information believe it or not to articulate this simplistically.

Not really, but I’ll try not to dismiss it. “Homosexual tendencies” I find that phrase a bit more insulting than any claim you make of spirits. It might just be me, but it just gives me a feeling of the whole, “It’s just a phase!” thing ya know? I could answer why people are homosexual. Because some people like the same gender that they are romantically and/or sexually.

If what I'm saying is true, would it not be plausible? all I'm really saying is to put less emphasis on the physical side of our existence, whether we have a male or female body, that should resonate with you so I wonder why you didn't really ponder about it more. I certainly wasn't using the term "tendencies" to be insulting, what would you rather me say? I just mean an attraction to a certain gender....

Boom done, no souls required.

The conclusion to you might be that simple, and I would agree if we were to assume no soul exists. But, in a world where we have to face a variety of worldviews we can't afford to just assume things. I am trying to show you it's just as simple though, even if we have a soul. Basically I'm trying to get the point across that there is a compatibility here, between a soul and what transgenders and homosexuals experience. Most religious sources would never offer a compatible platform, they would mostly just reject any thought of being either. And mainly I'm referring to religious people.

Definitely an interesting take; however, there is no other realm but the physical.

This is something you've assumed and really for no good reason. It definitely does not explain the full scope of human experience or account for it. I don't think it is a good practice to simply ignore testimonial evidence, especially when it is so widely recorded and so well established, at the very least one should consider a transcendent reality as being possible. This would obviously account for such a wide date base of religious and spiritual experience. Not even getting into NDE's or OBE's, but certainly those are included.

NDE's would be a very clear point of reference supporting the claim that the soul exists independent of the physical body, no other clear reason should this phenomenon happen at all. At face value, it's a perfect match for this premise.

Your mind is simply a connection of high-speed transmission of nerves and the like. I don’t see another realm to particulate someone’s experience in. I think there is a clear-cut answer. If someone’s gender identity is that of a female and their sex expressed phenotype is male, that person is a female.

I don't believe that is more clear cut at all. If the soul is non-gender (which it is) then that is a much more direct answer. That would explain why in some instances, a person does not really identify with their born gender role because at the center of their being nothing of the sort exists. Basically then, gender and preferences are just a superficial occurrence at one level.

BTW, I'm not using another realm of existence to articulate what one experiences in their mind per say rather what one experiences in their immediate conscious experience. The physical body and or the brain is just a conduit, a component that confines a souls experience to this world. The conscious awareness of a person is always connected to the soul, where the soul goes there the conscious experience follows. The mind is only a piece of machinery, the soul uses the mind to navigate creation but the conscious soul is the one observing the mind. The mind is really more of a storage compartment for memory and information, it is inanimate.