Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Hajile

Members
  • Posts

    498
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Posts posted by Hajile

  1. Conveniently missing the part that says 'IN SOME CONTEXTS', compared to mine that says 'GENERALLY'. Good try, though.

    ----

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/gender-identity-disorder (referring to it as GID, as they did before the uproar about transgender hurt feelings)

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-johns-hopkins-head-psychiatrist-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solutio (former head shrink of John Hopkins Hospital talking about it)

    http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm (the DSM is the standard for classification of mental disorders and lists 'gender dysphoria', which is just the new name for gender identity disorder)

    Ooh, nice attempt at handwaving there. Good try though.

    My sources are internationally renowned as authorities in the fields of medicine and psychology. Your "sources" are bunk:

    Psychology Today is not a scientific journal. Their standards are notoriously poor in the field and have been frequently known to publish questionable material, so referencing them is meaningless. They are a pop science magazine and their material is often inaccurate or out of date.

    That particular head shrink of John Hopkins is named Paul McHugh, whose research has repeatedly been labelled problematic and his conclusions deemed highly questionable by his peers. He has been pretty extensively discredited in many areas including post-traumatic stress disorder, sexual abuse, transvestism, homosexuality and dissociative identity disorder. He also happens to be a member of several right-wing conservative think tanks, and has known and acknowledged biases in that direction.

    The American Psychiatric Association's latest document is the DSM-5, which is already almost three years out of date, having been approved in December 2012. It has also been highly controversial in recent years, which has led to it becoming the subject of at least two congressional investigations regarding a number of conflicts of interest detected, especially in the fields of gender and autism related syndromes. It has also faced repeated criticism on an international level for ignoring major studies done in countries outside North America.

    That being said, even the APA does not agree with your belief that the best treatment for sufferers of Gender Dysphoria is behaviour modification, and no accredited source exists that supports your assertions that it is healthier to refuse to "pander to their delusions" than to engage and accept them. Not a single one. In fact the APA itself supports the opposite - engagement and acceptance, specifically determining that using the gender pronouns that the patient prefers is the healthy option and aids recovery and treatment.

    So, then - your beliefs are based on discredited bunk and obsolete science and nobody agrees with your assertions regarding treatment. Your implication that ridicule, belittlement and deliberately using incorrect gender pronouns is somehow in the sufferer's best interests is quite literally nonsense. It is nothing more than an attempt to (rather badly) disguise your prejudice and bullying as kindness, to make you feel better about the way you treat others.

    • Upvote 2
  2. You're right. It's probably a problem with the pancreas. Or how the knee bends. Definitely not a mental disorder.

    Also, for your own education: A medical condition is a broad term that includes all diseases, lesions and disorders. While the term medical condition generally includes mental illnesses, in some contexts the term is used specifically to denote any illness, injury, or disease except for mental illnesses.

    I've bolded bits for you. You're welcome.

    Erm, I've bolded and underlined where your own quote betrays you and supports what I'm saying. Oops.

    For YOUR educatuion:

    (By the way, I've taken theses definitions directly from the NHS, the Mayo Clinic and other recognized authorities on the subject, so you're running contrary to some solidly authoritative sources if you try to argue against them.)

    Mental illness is about how we think, feel and behave. Mental health problems are more common in certain groups, such as people with poor living conditions, people from persecuted minority groups, homeless people, etc. Mental health problems can develop from difficult life events, such as abuse, stress or bereavement. They typically emerge in adolescence and continue into adulthood. They are situational 'learned' behaviours and have no symptoms beyond the behavioural. Treatment options include counseling, behaviour therapy, psychotherapy. Examples include Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Phobias, Anxiety, Bulimia, Anorexia and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

    Medical Conditions are a wider category than the above and can be defined as anything that affects or impairs the physiological function or development of an organism. It demonstrates symptoms or signs, can have either a genetic or biological cause or can be caused by infection, disease or trauma. They are often communicable, or are innate or congenital, i.e. 'born with' the condition. They generally have an adverse effect on a person's wellbeing and health unless treated, and require physical treatment via medication, surgery, physiotherapy or health care. Examples include Cancer, Chickenpox, Eczema, ADHD, Asthma, Sleep Apnoea, Cleft Palates and Haemophilia.

    Gender Dysphoria is a medical condition, in that it is innate and genetic. Treatment seems unusual to some people because for a while it was considered a mental illness and therefore behavioural, but now we know more about it and it is known to be a genuine medical condition with congenital causes.

    For conditions related to Gender Identity the treatment sometimes involves noticeable outward changes which illicit quite hostile reactions from others, which is unfortunate because part of their recovery process depends upon at least some measure of acceptance from others. It's quite unique in that regard.

  3. Yup, 3 links that say what I've already said, that gender dysphoria is something that's diagnosed and just the word used to replace disorder. Feel free to read them yourself.

    Exactly. It's a mental disorder. It's a problem in the brain where it's wired incorrectly. It isn't ordered. Hence, disorder.

    Er, no they don't. In these links it is determined to be a biological and medical condition. They use those exact words. The NHS page specifically goes out of its way to repeatedly say it's a medical condition and NOT a mental illness or disorder. I'm baffled how you could read it and conclude that it was saying the opposite.

    You've now convinced me that you're just being deliberately obtuse in order to hang on to your prejudices. Thanks for clearing that up.

  4. Just more talking out of your arse, really. It's still diagnosed the same way and it's still in a book about mental disorders. They just changed the name so people weren't upset about the word 'disorder', but the disorder itself didn't change. Many mental disorders begin before birth and have biological causes. Not everyone who suffers from the disorder suffer in the same way or from the same causes, so not all of them are born that way either. And you're using illness and disorder interchangeably, when they aren't the same thing.

    Want to try again?

    http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Gender-dysphoria/Pages/Causes.aspx

    http://www.news-medical.net/health/Causes-of-Gender-Dysphoria.aspx

    http://www.gires.org.uk/assets/gdev/gender-dysphoria.pdf

    That took literally 30 seconds on Google and were the first three links I found. It is not exactly rocket science to take on board new information. But then if you bothered to do any homework at all you would probably find those precious preconceptions of yours challenged more often than would make you comfortable.

    It's not a mental illness. It's a biological condition that is recognized in UK and EU law, protecting those who have the condition. This conclusion is supported by science and law, and as research continues, we are only finding more evidence that it's biological.

    But feel free to continue making obsolete claims based exclusively on out-of-date science and your own prejudices. Because each time you're only serving to make yourself look even more foolish.

    • Upvote 1
  5. Supposedly, that changed when Gender Identity Disorder was renamed Gender Dysphoria, because they decided the word 'disorder' was too stigmatizing. Yeah, you read that right. They took away the word disorder not because it isn't a disorder (it is, and any honest authority on the subject acknowledges this), but because it hurt people's feelings. But it's still diagnosed and it's still listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders by the American Psychiatric Association.

    See, reality changes because of the emotional reactions from the masses. Silly we didn't realise, really.

    Again, wrong.

    It was previously thought to be purely a mental disorder, true. But that conclusion is out of date and is now considered incorrect and misleading. It was renamed Gender Dysphoria because we learned more about it and now understand it better than we used to. Studies were found to show that it has a biological cause that originates before birth, and is not a mental illness as was previously thought.

    Essentially, any hormonal problems that influence the development of the foetus may result in a divergence of gender identity and physical sex. The hormones that determine the development of physical sex may not work on the developing brain in the same way.

    It's proven science that people are born this way.

  6. people can choose to visit Dr. Mengele's Feel Good Clinic if they wish... but the delusional foundation remains immutable and intact regardless. Yes the current "in thing" is to accept this delusion as somehow "legitimate" but that will change.

    Yay! Godwin's Law! :)

    No it doesn't "remain intact." Read some studies written by people with authority on the subject.

  7. Are people who self iidentify as trans-abled/racist/species suffering from a mental illness? Is ableness/race/species binary?

    Ask a doctor or a psychologist. I have no idea, and I haven't read any studies on any of those things. I would assume that in cases where they have been explored it has been as separate matters in their own right. I'm not 100% sure why you keep bringing them up when we're talking about something else, beyond raising them as 'what next' logical fallacies.

    I have read studies on gender identity, written by actual doctors and psychologists, and they don't side with you I'm afraid.

  8. Doro has it right. I could care less about the name someone chooses... but... In this case name change is used in order to reinforce their delusion and I refuse to give tacit approval to those decisions.

    Except there is no delusion to reinforce, because it's not a mental illness. So your approval - tacit or otherwise - is irrelevant. Gender is no longer binary. It is a legitimate gender identity and is not unhealthy or destructive.

    • Upvote 1
  9. That's what I've been claiming this whole time. And you've got the cheek to call others dense? But let me clear this up, because I think I've been pretty civil so far despite you being a cunt.

    What you've called 'bigotry' is just an opinion you disagree with. Me believing that transgenderism is a delusion (which I'd say it is, considering you claim you are something you aren't), isn't me being intolerant to them. I'm not intolerant to other mental disorders, either. I just happen to think the treatment required is different. You think pandering to the delusion works. I don't. But, of course, you think that your opinion is superior so you can act like a bigot (intolerance to other opinions, which you're doing), and not see any irony in it.

    You've tried (and failed) to compare me to 'Christian nutjobs' as some weird attempt to further discredit me. You've tried to claim I'm 'uninformed' just because I hold an opinion contrary to yours, and then try to act like that's an objective claim. In fact, your entire argument has just been 'you're being mean so now I can be mean because I'm so nice'. It's moronic. Children on a playground would be proud of your attempts.

    No, my stance isn't unmoving. As you say, I used to believe that I'd follow the delusion if I respected the person (from what, 2 years ago? Nice to see you remember). That's since changed. I wouldn't follow the delusion then, either. I don't consider it to be healthy. Look up rates of suicide among pre-ops. Stories of those who still aren't happy with themselves after mutilation. Acting like there's nothing wrong is just burying your head in the sand.

    My 'hostility' (I genuinely laughed when I saw you pull this dick move, considering you've been nothing but hostile and I've been pretty good up until now) to you is deserved. If you want to be a cunt, you get treated like a cunt. You can't cry 'but you're psychologically harming people so it's okay', because it doesn't work that way.

    And, to round this all off, if you want to get into an actual argument about the principles of transwhatever, I'd be happy too. Just drop this smug fucking attitude where you think you've got some moral superiority and I'll oblige. But if you want to keep throwing a tantrum and calling everyone who disagrees with you a bigot, sadistic, nutjob, or whatever else you can muster, then do it quietly in the corner.

    Oh dear. You don't seem to understand what you're arguing any more and are now railing against behaviour you yourself have demonstrated. Now that's ironic.

    More that that, you're flat out wrong. Your belief that transgenderism is a delusion is based on ...what, exactly? It's certainly not based on any objective paper or study on the subject. It is divisive rhetoric based on your own preconceptions and has no foundation in truth. Your 'belief' is ignorant of the facts, and thus you hang the rest of your argument on inaccurate information. And you use it as a means to abuse people you don't like. So yeah, you're a bigot.

    Oh, and claiming your stance isn't unmoving because you've become even more intolerant is nothing to be proud of either.

    Shall we end it there? I've no desire to waste even more of my time typing responses to you, and I have a feeling you think the same about me.

  10. So, what it boils down to is this: you believe you have a moral high-ground, therefore your opinion is acceptable and you can then be a bigot by mislabeling other people's opinions as bigoted. If you want to be a hypocrite, go for it.

    Ah, so now not only are you claiming I'm bigoted, but you're now claiming your own views are not. Your unmoving, unwavering devotion to a principle of discrimination and your hostility towards anyone who calls you on it makes your stance all too clear. Thanks for clearing that up.

  11. fittybolger-

    Ho boy. "Willing to cast a larger net?" That's exactly that - speculation on your part. You've got to question your own stance on a subject where you've got to reference completely made-up shifting goalposts in the argument of another. To clarify, I will only "cast a larger net" if the number of Christians who seek to victimize others and deny them equal rights increases. Christians who don't do that (like, you know, the majority of them) are fine.

    Quoting scripture at me trying to justify your prejudice and equating gay people with drug addicts does little to convince me you are one of the good ones.

    Thequinn -

    As I have pointed out, I do not refer to all Christians when using those words. I refer to a very vocal and abusive subset of them that are few in number but loud in volume. I do not pretend that all Christians are like that. But if a Christian drapes him or herself in jingoism, resorts to hyperbole about their rights as a Christian being eroded because others are given equality, rails against a 'godless' president or starts claiming that they have been 'betrayed' by their country, I'm going to go right ahead and call them and their judgmental, reactionary spiel "nutjobs." Because I can differentiate extremists from moderates. Faith is not 'one in, all in.'

    I'm disappointed that I need to point the same things out, over and over.

  12. Ah... well... that's different.

    You see people often call me a dense nutjob and I misinterpret their genuine lack of hostility, abuse, inequality or hatred... particularly when added to the fact they are not harming anyone and leaving me in peace to pursue my happiness...

    Your arguments are tied up in knots.

    The celebration of Bruce Jenner was "A bridge to far" for the LGBT propaganda machine and there will certainly be fringe groups that will attempt to capitalize on the carefully plotted marketing campaign of the LGBT movement. Perhaps the closest group the Transgender are the Transabled. There will, no doubt, be human rights court cases where the various "Trans_____" groups will claim their legal acceptance... and their arguments will be identical to those of the Transgendered. "I don't feel my arm is a part of my "real" body. I never have. I want an amputation".

    People will wake up to this con game and no amount of tolerance doublespeak will put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

    You see, when I was referring to "right wing Christian nutjobs" I wasn't actually referring to all Christians. Most of them are cool. Those comments were directed very specifically towards those barely literate maniacs you see on Youtube draped in the confederate flag and stroking their assault rifles, ranting and raving about 'the gays' eroding the sanctity of marriage and destroying their religion. We've seen a lot of them since the recent supreme court decision in the US on same sex marriage, all of them getting louder and angrier.

    I certainly wasn't directing those comments towards anyone here on this forum. But wow. Slippery slope fallacy and 'gay conspiracy' comments in one post? Now I'm not so sure...

  13. Indeed.

    I think you made your case quite well.

    You are obviously very tolerant... when someone agrees with you.

    More like I'm very tolerant ...when you agree with the notion that people are worthy of basic respect and human dignity, and provided they are not harming anyone should be left in peace to pursue their own happiness.

    Anyone who starts espousing from any position of hostility, abuse, inequality or hatred will get the crap 'disagreed' out of them.

  14. My point is that you are deciding to label other people's opinions as bigoted and unacceptable simply because you disagree with them, which is exactly what bigoted means. You are being intolerant of somebody else's opinion and then trying to validate it by projecting that intolerance onto them. Hence, irony.

    Then your point is spurious nonsense.

    I'm not labeling your opinions as bigoted and unacceptable "simply because I disagree with them." I am labeling them as bigoted and unacceptable because they are poisonous, spiteful, mean-spirited, exclusionary and ill-informed. So in that way I am very mechanically and objectively pointing out a truth. This is not a case where you can spin the mirror around and go "Ah-hah!" You need the moral high ground to do that, otherwise it's just a feeble attempt at deflection.

    You are especially ill-informed in your suggestion that having a gender identity that differs to your assigned sex is a "delusion," which implies you believe it to be a mental illness. This shows the level of your ignorance about transgenderism, and attitudes like yours perpetrate a huge amount of psychological damage on those to whom they are directed. It's abusive and callous behaviour and should not be accepted because of the harm it inflicts.

    Moreover, your refusal to use the pronouns appropriate to an individual's gender identity on the basis that 'they are a big old meanie poopyhead' betrays an enormous amount of childish vindictiveness and cruelty on your part that I can scarcely believe you are trying to justify. Nobody deserves to be treated that way.

    Yet you don't seem to care. In fact you seem to like doing it, because, I dunno, the internet or something. So at best you're an ignorant internet blowhard, and at worst you're a sadist and a bully. Take your pick, because either way it's bigotry.

    • Upvote 1
  15. Not at all. If you're saying it's bigoted to consider 'transgenderism' an abnormality, then you're being bigoted by not tolerating other people's positions. Works both ways, see?

    Indeed I do see, and no, it doesn't work both ways. "You are the intolerant one for not tolerating my intolerance" is about the stupidest logical fallacy it is possible to encounter.

    It is also the same logical fallacy that those right wing Christian nutjobs in America trot out when they want to do horrible things like deny gay or Muslim people service in their shops, ostensibly on religious grounds, in order to try to make themselves the victim in the situation.

    And so I choose to believe that you are using it jokingly and are not that dense. Call me mega-polite, giving you the benefit of the doubt this way :)

    • Upvote 1
  16. Bigotry is unacceptable, whether you think you are 'in the right' or that they 'deserve it' or they 'haven't earned the right to be treated with respect' or any of the other bullshit excuses people came out with the last time we had this discussion here.

    It's never ok, people, and the only one it ever reflects badly on is yourself. Grow up.

    • Upvote 2
  17. Personally if there was any new group content coming with the new expansion, I would have expected them to have released those details along with everything else.  Particularly given they did release the details of upscaling the old content.

    Then you have the head honcho coming out and specifically stating that their focus is on story for the rest of the year (along with a throw away line of not forgetting about raiders and pvp).

    But maybe their just really sucky at communicating or are scrambling to work out what they can release with the expansion.....

    ​It appears that they have already said that there WILL be new group, PVP and raid content in the new expansion, but they will talk about it later because right now they're concentrating on talking about the story content. If there's still no mention of it two months from now I'd say people should get concerned, but people are acting like a developer providing a steady drip-feed of info in order to maintain interest over an extended period isn't a thing that happens. There's a lot of "OMG they haven't mentioned it immediately, that means they're not doing it at all" sort of thinking going on.

×
×
  • Create New...