Gay\transgender -- not by genetics, not by upbringing, not by choice

Sure.Here's the deal: neither the brain nor the body are ill. They're simply mismatched. To resolve the mismatch, the patient can choose to have one of the two altered. The decision of ich is fairly arbitrary if we don't take into account any other concerns - we have a square and a triangle, and we can either change the square into a triangle or change the triangle into a square.Currently we can only change the body, and we're getting pretty good at it.But if some new miraculous treatment were available that would alter the brain structure instead, with lower or equal risks to the patient than standard gender reassignment, then I would support the patient's ability to choose either method to resolve the disparity.If brain treatment were significantly safer and more effective, then I would view it as potentially the preferable form of treatment.The important fact that seems to be the crux of the issue however is that neither body nor mind are ill. There is no "problem" that resides in either one. Both are healthy. The only problem is in the mismatch. The mismatch could hypothetically be resolved either way. Currently the decision is moot simply because only gender reassignment is at all effective. That may change some day.

Welcome to EvC. One of the things we stress here is that if you claim a cause-and-effect relationship, you have to propose a mechanism by which the supposed cause produces the effect. Otherwise, all you have is a correlation. Until you can show how those features of brain physiology cause transgenderism, you can't legitimately conclude a physiological cause and you can't legitimately hand-wave away the comparisons with similar situations.So, stop special pleading for transgenderism and approach the topic honestly. What's the difference between a man who wants a healthy leg amputated and a man who wants a healthy penis amputated? What's the difference between a man who "feels" like a woman and a man who "feels" Chinese? Clearly you're not following my argument. My argument is that your logic points to brain surgery.

Nobody loves transsexuals more than I do.

That's why I objected to the term "corrective" surgery. False dichotomy.

So do you accept that there is a mind body mismatch or not?How would you answer the hypothetical I put forward in Message 220

So basically you are just denying that brain structure is a cause of transgenderism? You really need to read the link I keep referring you to. Link

quote:

---

In the first of its kind, Zhou et al. (1995) found that in a region of the brain called the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region known for sex and anxiety responses, MTF transsexuals have a female-normal size while FTM transsexuals have a male-normal size. While the transsexuals studied had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including non-transsexual male and female controls which, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still retained sizes typical for their gender. No relationship to sexual orientation was found.

​

In a followup study, Kruijver et al. (2000) looked at the number of neurons in BSTc instead of volumes. They found the same results as Zhou et al. (1995), but with even more dramatic differences. One MTF subject who had never gone on hormones was also included, and who matched up with the female neuron counts nonetheless.

​

In 2002, a followup study by Chung, De Vries, and Swaab found that significant sexual dimorphism (variation between sexes) in BSTc did not become established until adulthood. Chung et al. theorized that either changes in fetal hormone levels produce changes in BSTc synaptic density, neuronal activity, or neurochemical content which later lead to size and neuron count changes in BSTc, or that the size of BSTc is affected by the failure to generate a gender identity consistent with one's anatomic sex.

​

In a review of the evidence in 2006, Gooren confirms the earlier research as supporting the concept that transsexualism is a sexual differentiation disorder of the sex dimorphic brain.[23] Swaab (2004) concurs.

---

So do you have comparable evidence of there being Westerners brain characteristics in Oriental bodies or whatever other bizarre comparison it is you want to make?No. I didn't think so. Ideally I'd give transsexuals the sort of option I detailed in Message 220Given that you sidestepped considering that hypothetical I am not really sure what your point is here or what solution you would support beyond everyone loving themselves and everyone else for who they are. Which is lovely in a 'world peace' kinda way but probably not gonna happen any time soon....

What does "mismatch" mean? What criteria do you use to distnguish a match from a mismatch?

I can summarise in my own words if you would prefer but you might want to look up 'gender dysphoria' Link

quote:

---

Many transgender people and researchers support the declassification of GID as a mental disorder for several reasons. Recent medical research on the brain structures of transgender individuals have shown that some transgender individuals have the physical brain structures that resemble their desired sex even before hormone treatment. In addition, recent studies are indicating more possible causes for gender dysphoria, stemming from genetic reasons and prenatal exposure to hormones, as well as other psychological and behavioral reasons.

​

One contemporary treatment for GID consists primarily of physical modifications to bring the body into harmony with one's perception of mental (psychological, emotional) gender identity, rather than vice versa.

---

Basically it means one's gender identity doesn't match one's physical sex.

I heard on the radio that the percentage of gays in America are actually about two to three per cent. So this nonsence of political correctness, etc has allowed this tiny percentage of citizens to set a lot of agenda in just about every sector of life from business to educational institutions to government.The problem may be that they tend to be more concentrated in high profile radical sectors where they get a lot of media attention. They also cause enough havoc with children to get a lot of attention. They tend to demonstrate so as to get aired on the media etc.I think some of it is due to the femaie hormones in so much product like food and lotions etc.

This thread isn't about homosexuality.

I'm asking the same of you that we ask of creationists when they bring up things like vapour canopies: What's the mechanism?Your quote says that, "... significant sexual dimorphism (variation between sexes) in BSTc did not become established until adulthood," whereas the example in the OP showed "symptoms" at age 4, so I'm not seeing the connection.

I asked you for criteria. How do you tell if a person matches or doesn't?

Sexual orientation is completely and totally separate from gender identity.Sexual orientation concerns the gender(s) you are sexually and romantically attracted to.Gender identity concerns who you are. A gay man does not identify as female. A lesbian is not a man trapped in a woman's body.Transgendered individuals run the full gamut of sexual orientations. There are transwomen (biologically male with a female identity) that are heterosexual (attracted to men), homosexual (attracted to women) and bisexual.The two are entirely indepenent of one another. GLBT individuals have not affected a single sector of life beyond the simple demand to be held equally with every other subset of the population. It is illegal and morally wrong to discriminate based upon religion or race when hiring for a job (for example), and homosexuals have only desired that they should enjoy the same protection, as they are a historically persecuted minority. It's illegal to refuse to hire Christians simply for being Christian, and likewise it is (and should be) illegal to refuse to hire homosexuals simply for being homosexual.Imagine, Buz, that Christians were actually persecuted the way that homosexuals have been. It's been an awful long time since a Christian in America was beaten to death for the great sin of being Christian. Never in American history that I'm aware of have Christian meeting places been invaded by the police and everyone arrested for being Christian. These things have happened to homosexuals, and often. If Christians were treated in that way, would you not want the law to recognize the Christian right to marry, to practice their religion, to meet and congregate without fear of being arrested, to have equal opportunities for employment?That's the entirety of the "homosexual agenda," right there. That's it. They only want the exact same rights that you have enjoyed every day of your life.Whether you view their "lifestyle" as "sinful" or not (for surely there are belief systems that would count your own beliefs as "sinful" as well), is it wrong for them to seek true equal treatment under the law? In what way, exactly? Are you talking about the myth that homosexuality is somehow "contagious" and that children will become homosexual simply because they see a gay man on TV? Or are you referring to the even more offensive and false myth that homosexuals tend to also be child molesters (most pedophiles are, of course, heterosexual, even after correcting for representation in the population)?The GLBT community is getting no more (less, in fact) press than the race-based civil rights movement received a few decades ago. Homo/bisexuals and transgenders are simply the latest in a long line of traditionally suppressed and persecuted minorities standing up to demand equal treatment under the law. That doesn't make sense, in large part because one would not expect "female hormones" to have an effect on lesbians. Or bisexuals. Or transmen (female-to-male transsexuals). "Homosexuals" are not at all exclusively gay men, remember.

The current discussion is not, but the thread title does include the word "gay."

You could have placards made saying: "We are the 97%". 'Cos no minority should have disproportionate influence over "a lot of agenda" except the rich. I think that's something we can all agree on.But could you give us a little more information about this "lot of agenda" that they're setting? Do they determine fiscal policy? Decide who we go to war with? Are they responsible for our god-awful healthcare system? Do they decide what tax rate I should pay? What of other "sectors of life"? You mention business: do they decide what products Microsoft makes? Did they force GM to paint one in every ten cars pink? Do they set the price that McDonald's charges for a quarter-pounder?Do they, in fact, do anything that would affect my life in any way whatsoever? Edited by AdminPD, : Warrning