Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Is a sex-change a constitutional right?Follow

#152 Aug 28 2013 at 2:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,092 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Okay, so here's the thing. Unlike someone believing they can fly, when a trans person says they are a certain gender, they don't just believe it to be true, it actually is true. Gender is not determined by genitals, or x/y chromosomes. It is determined completely independent of sex.


Since when? Smiley: confused

According to The American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 'gender' refers to one's sex, based on reproductive organs. I mean, that's why trans people get **** changes, right? If our gender wasn't determined by our genitals, they wouldn't be having the whole gender identity crisis in the first place, would they? You could be a woman with a **** or a man with a vagina. Hell, if you're born a hermaphrodite, you could be both!

What you're saying is that gender is a matter of personal perception. If we accept that then we also have to accept that species is a matter of personal perception. A person could truly believe himself to be a peacock. As it just so happens, that's actually a thing. It's called species dysphoria.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#153 Aug 28 2013 at 2:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Part of me suspects if we could make people happy by turning them into peacocks we'd probably do it, science just isn't there yet. Species distinctions can be pretty arbitrary anyway.

Edited, Aug 28th 2013 1:39pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#154 Aug 28 2013 at 3:24 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,968 posts
Idiggory wrote:
Granted, the stuff you've spewed since you made these comments is even more idiotic, but the point is that regardless of whether or not it is a disorder really doesn't matter for the conversation.

These are people who, generally, have a set of sexual organs that do not match the gender identity they possess. Expression of that gender identity, which is almost universally a transition away from the gender identity they were culturally forced to express while growing up, is the ultimate goal.

For a cis person, you are culturally raised to express your gender identity. For a trans person, you are culturally raised to express a different gender identity. The ultimate goal, here, is to aid someone in transitioning their gender expression to match their gender identity. Normally, this process happens over the course of childhood.

Most trans persons, and a significant portion of the psychologist population, opposed the terminology of GID, as it is not a disorder in the classical sense, and its classification as such brings more harm than simply stigma. But as DSM V was just released, with that terminology unchanged, it's going to continue to be called GID for the forseeable future.

Either way, no licensed psychologist (or one interested in keeping their license) is interested in forcing a trans person into a box. They work with them to teach them to express their gender identity as they see fit, which is something they never learned to do growing up. Some trans persons are interested in fully transitioning to a the feminine end of the gender spectrum. Most hover somewhere in the middle. Many have fluid gender identities that change over time at a pace much more rapid than most.

If a client feels like physical changes are necessary for them to properly express their gender identity, or feel comfortable in their own skin, then they can have access to hormone treatments and SRS.

The point being, therapy isn't about shaming them into anything. It's helping them reach the point of "@#%^ off, I am who I am" with their gender expression that most people manage to achieve through their normal development, as their gender expression isn't so constantly policed.



Are you claiming that every transgender has/had a disorder?

Rachel wrote:
The disorder is having a body that doesn't match your gender. Hormones help remove that problem by making the body match the mind.


So, you're saying it's a physical disorder and not a mental disorder?

Aethien wrote:
Got to love the Gbaji/Alma style slippery slope arguments. Are you going to talk about marrying goats and toasters next?


Now you're just making stuff up. Calling every opposing argument a "slippery slope" is a slippery slope in itself. So much so, that I don't even think you even know what it means.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#155 Aug 28 2013 at 3:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Mazra wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Okay, so here's the thing. Unlike someone believing they can fly, when a trans person says they are a certain gender, they don't just believe it to be true, it actually is true. Gender is not determined by genitals, or x/y chromosomes. It is determined completely independent of sex.


Since when? Smiley: confused
Since always.

Quote:
According to The American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 'gender' refers to one's sex, based on reproductive organs. I mean, that's why trans people get **** changes, right? If our gender wasn't determined by our genitals, they wouldn't be having the whole gender identity crisis in the first place, would they? You could be a woman with a **** or a man with a vagina. Hell, if you're born a hermaphrodite, you could be both!
It's unfortunate that one word is used to refer to two completely different things, that are in 99% of people identical. Gender can indeed be synonym for sex, but it also has another meaning. In the context of this discussion, it has nothing to do with sex.

Quote:
What you're saying is that gender is a matter of personal perception. If we accept that then we also have to accept that species is a matter of personal perception.
No we don't. Species is determined by physical characteristics. So is sex. But gender is not.
____________________________
#156 Aug 28 2013 at 3:37 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,968 posts
Mazra wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Okay, so here's the thing. Unlike someone believing they can fly, when a trans person says they are a certain gender, they don't just believe it to be true, it actually is true. Gender is not determined by genitals, or x/y chromosomes. It is determined completely independent of sex.


Since when? Smiley: confused

According to The American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 'gender' refers to one's sex, based on reproductive organs. I mean, that's why trans people get **** changes, right? If our gender wasn't determined by our genitals, they wouldn't be having the whole gender identity crisis in the first place, would they? You could be a woman with a **** or a man with a vagina. Hell, if you're born a hermaphrodite, you could be both!

What you're saying is that gender is a matter of personal perception. If we accept that then we also have to accept that species is a matter of personal perception. A person could truly believe himself to be a peacock. As it just so happens, that's actually a thing. It's called species dysphoria.


We went down this road already. Gender is originally defined to be separate from sex. **** being defined by your genitals and gender by stereotypical actions that correspond to a sex. However, throughout time, the word has been used to mean **** as well. So, now, depending on the context, it can mean both. In any case, it doesn't support Rachel's argument. Regardless if you believe that you are a woman or a man, it doesn't change your sex, neither does mutilating your body. Using the mutually exclusive definition of gender says that Max is a MAN, who has a female gender. He is still a man. So, pretending to be a woman, is no different than a person pretending to be anything else.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#157 Aug 28 2013 at 3:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
So, you're saying it's a physical disorder and not a mental disorder?
It's not that simple. It's a combination of the two.
____________________________
#158 Aug 28 2013 at 3:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
Regardless if you believe that you are a woman or a man, it doesn't change your sex
Correct.

Quote:
neither does mutilating your body.
Well, i don't know. Maybe, maybe not. It's not really relevant either way.

Quote:
Using the mutually exclusive definition of gender says that Max is a MAN, who has a female gender. He is still a man. So, pretending to be a woman, is no different than a person pretending to be anything else.
Or rather, she's a woman who has a male sex.
____________________________
#159 Aug 28 2013 at 3:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Using the mutually exclusive definition of gender says that Max is a MAN, who has a female gender. He is still a man. So, pretending to be a woman, is no different than a person pretending to be anything else.
Well not quite, you have a person who's chromosomally male, with a brain that's irreversibly wired as if they were female.

Rachel9 wrote:
Alma wrote:

So, you're saying it's a physical disorder and not a mental disorder?

It's not that simple. It's a combination of the two.
That's my understanding, you have a mind that has the opposite gender differentiation as the genitalia. That difference, and the inability to reconcile it, leads to the mental disorder.

Or something like that...


Edited, Aug 28th 2013 2:53pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#160 Aug 28 2013 at 4:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Are you claiming that every transgender has/had a disorder?

Judging from the previously linked article, it's a birth defect.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#161 Aug 28 2013 at 4:04 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
8,968 posts
Rachel wrote:
No we don't. Species is determined by physical characteristics. So is sex. But gender is not.


This fact doesn't support your argument. Because gender is not determined by physical characteristics, there is no reason to provide medication to alter your sex, just because you have a different gender.

Rachel wrote:
Well, i don't know. Maybe, maybe not. It's not really relevant either way.


It doesn't change your sex. So therefore, you can't consider it a "cure" to the problem, if it doesn't actually do what you're proclaiming it to be doing. You're merely making physical alterations to appeal the mind. With that being said, the attention is on the mind, not the body. So, the "basic treatment", i.e. cheapest, is mental therapy.

Rachel wrote:
Or rather, she's a woman who has a male sex.


As before, you can't change definitions to support your agenda. That statement is misleading, because you're not clearly differentiating **** from gender. The correct answer is that the person is a male **** with a female gender. The **** came first in life, not the gender.

Rachel wrote:
It's not that simple. It's a combination of the two.

It really is. If the body didn't physically change or differ from the norm, then it isn't physical. Having a different gender from a sex, doesn't mean that anything is inherently wrong with your body.

SPG wrote:
Well not quite, you have a person who's chromosomally male, with a brain that's irreversibly wired as if they were female.


How is that different from anything else? If there were a man who was wired to think he were a child and wanted to act as such, people would label him crazy.

Edited, Aug 29th 2013 12:04am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#162 Aug 28 2013 at 4:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Almalieque wrote:
SPG wrote:
Well not quite, you have a person who's chromosomally male, with a brain that's irreversibly wired as if they were female.


How is that different from anything else? If there were a man who was wired to think he were a child and wanted to act as such, people would label him crazy.
Child parentalization is a real **** just for the record.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#163 Aug 28 2013 at 4:15 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
Jophiel wrote:
"Look, I realize that I'm not actually your boss or anything but I am paying you and do you have to be checking Twitter right now?..."


#TwoMinuteWonderOrThree?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#164 Aug 28 2013 at 4:15 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,092 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Species is determined by physical characteristics. So is sex. But gender is not.


Then why the need to have a **** change? Why not just go drag? The **** change thing seems to indicate that the trans person is unhappy with his/her sex, in which case we're back to the peacock situation where someone with species dysphoria wants to be turned into something of the avian kind.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#165 Aug 28 2013 at 4:23 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
Mazra wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Species is determined by physical characteristics. So is sex. But gender is not.


Then why the need to have a **** change? Why not just go drag? The **** change thing seems to indicate that the trans person is unhappy with his/her sex, in which case we're back to the peacock situation where someone with species dysphoria wants to be turned into something of the avian kind.


Generally speaking, the vast majority of trans individuals don't go through with SRS. Plenty of them don't do it because cost, risk, cons, etc. And plenty of them just don't want it, because the organs aren't something they particularly care about (or they care about the cons far more than the pros).

But there are other considerations. To get the bluntest of them out of the way, in most countries, you cannot change your official gender until after you have had SRS. This is increasingly less common, particularly in the EU, but only one US state allows you to change your gender without SRS. And there's no significant action on that front, that I'm aware of, to change that.

But there's also the fact that we live in a world where most cultures directly link the gender identity to the organs. So trans persons who want to transition more fully, or "pass," often want to go as far as possible with the actual physical transformation. The specific emotional feedback they get from that varies wildly, but if you've been raised in a culture that insists on telling you that your gender is what's between your legs, its not surprising if it would be hard to shake that (even if your actual understanding of gender identity surpasses that idea).

But it's ultimately an extremely personal decision made based off of many rational and emotional factors specific to each individual.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#166 Aug 28 2013 at 4:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Mazra wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Species is determined by physical characteristics. So is sex. But gender is not.


Then why the need to have a **** change? Why not just go drag?
Most people don't actually get the **** change. Other treatments are usually sufficient.

Mazra wrote:
The **** change thing seems to indicate that the trans person is unhappy with suicidal because of his/her sex
That's the crux of the problem. It's not that they're sad, it's that they'll often kill themselves. Even if a **** change isn't a preferred solution it can be much better than the alternative. (9.3% rate is what I see, at least for attempted suicide? With some sub-populations being much higher?)

We can't turn people into peacocks.

Edited, Aug 28th 2013 3:31pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#167 Aug 28 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
We can't turn people into peacocks.

We can't turn men into biological women either.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#168 Aug 28 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
We can't turn people into peacocks.

We can't turn men into biological women either.
Well I guess not, but we can sure fake it a lot better than a peacock.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#169 Aug 28 2013 at 4:35 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
We can't turn people into peacocks.

We can't turn men into biological women either.


But we can address down some of the most socially relevant biological differences between males and females. And since gender is a social construct, that's what matters.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#170 Aug 28 2013 at 4:47 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,092 posts
This is so **** confusing. Especially the gender/sex thing. Like, I can wrap my head around the fact that some people believe themselves to be male when they are, physically, female. I get that. I also get how some might, in the name of philosophy, argue that they are whatever they believe they are, since reality is a matter of perception.

What I don't get is why a person with species dysphoria is different from a person with gender dysphoria.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#171 Aug 28 2013 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Mazra wrote:
What I don't get is why a person with species dysphoria is different from a person with gender dysphoria.
That I don't know. I tried looking up species dysphoria on google scholar to see if there were any papers on causes, but there weren't many from what I can tell. That and I'm not touching the couple I did find, because not comfortable reading a paper on bestiality at work, even if it is a scientific paper. Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Aug 28th 2013 3:54pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#172 Aug 28 2013 at 4:54 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
We can't turn people into peacocks.
We can't turn men into biological women either.
Well I guess not, but we can sure fake it a lot better than a peacock.

I dunno... I've seen photos from some of those Furry conventions!

Really, I think the peacock argument isn't a great one but was mainly making the point while giving you crap.
idiggory wrote:
And since gender is a social construct, that's what matters.

Except that the use of hormones and surgery would imply that it's not purely a social construct they're concerned with. Last big thread, I was pointed to medical guides which said that GID affected people often go through youth thinking that they'll grow the "correct" genitalia or refusing to admit that they have their current set. That's not social, that's a biological mismatch they're feeling. Hell, the linked article posted (I believe by you) stated that the brain develops differently in utero, well before any cultural constructs would apply to it -- again, not social.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#173 Aug 28 2013 at 4:56 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
The problem is that you are conflating gender and **** in a way that doesn't actually work psychologically. It's understandable why you'd do so, but it's not historically sound. Western culture has only had two gender identities for quite some time, but other cultures have not. Many Native American cultures had four gender identities, present-day Iran has a sizable third gender identity, many oceanic cultures have 3 or 4, etc.

Essentially, in really basic terms, your gender is the set of cultural traits that you identity with. Our own culture realistically has far more than two gender identities, but we break them down into subgroups within a gender instead of recognizing them as distinct.

The reality is that gender itself is a personal sum of your own cultural understandings and identifications of masculinity and femininity, and most people have various measures of each to their own identity, falling along a spectrum of gender that they define (with heavy cultural influence). Some individuals, who generally use the term of genderqueer, do not have a gender identity that falls along this binary at all (either possessing no gender identity, or possessing one that's not defined by masculinity or femininity).

So a gender dysphoria is a fundamentally cultural issue. Overwhelmingly, trans persons care about their sexual organs because they've been raised culturally to care about their sexual organs in that way. If the genitalia were held to be culturally distinct from your gender (separating **** and gender in a manner that matches the psychological understanding of each), SRS would probably be something very few trans persons cared to pursue.

So, in simplest terms, it's because gender dysphoria is not **** dysphoria, but having the sexual organs that match the cultural bias of gender can be comforting to someone who holds genitalia not culturally associated with their gender.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#174 Aug 28 2013 at 5:00 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
So a gender dysphoria is a fundamentally cultural issue.

If this is the case, then it has a cultural, non-medical solution and there is no sense in feeling obligated to give Manning anything. Tell him to buck up and stop worrying about what the big ole world says about his penis. You don't solve cultural issues with medication and surgery.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#175 Aug 28 2013 at 5:02 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
It doesn't change your sex. So therefore, you can't consider it a "cure" to the problem, if it doesn't actually do what you're proclaiming it to be doing.
If there was a better, more complete way to change someone's sex, that'd be great, but there's not yet. But we can still get pretty close.

Quote:
You're merely making physical alterations to appeal the mind. With that being said, the attention is on the mind, not the body.
That's about right.

Quote:
So, the "basic treatment", i.e. cheapest, is mental **** i wish i could get therapy for $5/mo. Even with my great insurance, it costs me more than that :(

Quote:
The correct answer is that the person is a male **** with a female gender.
Yup, that's what i said.

Quote:
How is that different from anything else? If there were a man who was wired to think he were a child and wanted to act as such, people would label him crazy.
Because whether or not someone is a child is not a matter someone can decide themselves. Some things can be decided by each person, and some things cannot. For example, you can decide to like pizza, or that you're gay, or what your favorite color is, or what your gender is (when i say decide, i don't necessarily mean you actually have a choice that can be changed). You cannot decide your age, height, sex, or species.
[quote]Then why the need to have a **** change? Why not just go drag? The **** change thing seems to indicate that the trans person is unhappy with his/her sex,
Other than because it's required to fit into society? I don't know. it's complicated. At least for me, yes, I'm unhappy with my sex. I don't really feel like not trying to change it is an option. I'm not sure i could really explain why.
____________________________
#176 Aug 28 2013 at 5:05 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,092 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
not comfortable reading a paper on bestiality at work, even if it is a scientific paper. Smiley: rolleyes


Prude. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#177 Aug 28 2013 at 5:06 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Jophiel wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
So a gender dysphoria is a fundamentally cultural issue.

If this is the case, then it has a cultural, non-medical solution and there is no sense in feeling obligated to give Manning anything. Tell him to buck up and stop worrying about what the big ole world says about his penis. You don't solve cultural issues with medication and surgery.
You do when they become medical issues.
____________________________
#178 Aug 28 2013 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
For anyone struggling to understand, one of the easiest (if not perfect) ways to think about it is to remember that **** itself is not a simple biological breakdown of X and Y. The variability in Y chromosones alone is massive, and leads to a pretty huge range of body and brain structures that do often overlap with typically female types. And, by the same token, X chromosones aren't all perfect, beautiful little Xs. Some can be a lot more like Ys at time.

If you think about that chromosone being the combined expression of the genes that go into making the biological differences between male and female, you can understand that we've actually chosen a very simplistic approach to defining the sexes that doesn't do justice to the true complexity that constitutes genetic, sexual differences.

As a quick example, studies have shown that certain brain structures of trans persons are more similar to the opposite sexes' average than their own. But something to remember is that the range of those structures for each **** is already wide, and that this is just one of MANY biological differences.

At the end of the day, whether or not you have a **** or **** (or both) doesn't actually tell you nearly as much about someone's biology as we are culturally inclined to think it does.

And @Joph, we solve MANY cultural issues with medication, and a fair number of people self-medicate cultural issues with surgery. And as prison is a cultural construct as well, I don't understand the logic there in the first place.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#179 Aug 28 2013 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
But the medical issue there isn't the gender, it's in how they are dealing with their own self identity. Which frankly sounds about the same as any other self-identity, body dysmorphia related mental disorder. You help them come to terms with who they are via therapy or perhaps medications that affect the affliction itself (in this case, the GID), not attempt to alter their body.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#180 Aug 28 2013 at 5:11 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And @Joph, we solve MANY cultural issues with medication, and a fair number of people self-medicate cultural issues with surgery.

And if they want liposuction or a boob job on their own time and their own dime, that's up to them. I don't think it's appropriate for a prison to pick up.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#181 Aug 28 2013 at 5:14 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
Jophiel wrote:
But the medical issue there isn't the gender, it's in how they are dealing with their own self identity. Which frankly sounds about the same as any other self-identity, body dysmorphia related mental disorder. You help them come to terms with who they are via therapy or perhaps medications that affect the affliction itself (in this case, the GID), not attempt to alter their body.


Except that you're randomly equating two different disorders and assuming they're equitable. Do you have any reason to do so other than the fact that you think they sound similar?

Do you really think the brain works that simply, and that psychology never once bothered to investigate that? Do you think they just jumped ahead and said "Sure, cut it off"?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#182 Aug 28 2013 at 5:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
Jophiel wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And @Joph, we solve MANY cultural issues with medication, and a fair number of people self-medicate cultural issues with surgery.

And if they want liposuction or a boob job on their own time and their own dime, that's up to them. I don't think it's appropriate for a prison to pick up.


If they are at high risk for suicide, and liposuction would change that, I do.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#183 Aug 28 2013 at 5:22 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,842 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And @Joph, we solve MANY cultural issues with medication, and a fair number of people self-medicate cultural issues with surgery.

And if they want liposuction or a boob job on their own time and their own dime, that's up to them. I don't think it's appropriate for a prison to pick up.


If they are at high risk for suicide, and liposuction would change that, I do.


The prison could limit them to 1200 calories a day. They'd lose weight, and cost them less.

So do you want to give everyone free elective cosmetic surgeries because it may make them less suicidal? Or only prisoners?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#184 Aug 28 2013 at 5:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
TirithRR wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And @Joph, we solve MANY cultural issues with medication, and a fair number of people self-medicate cultural issues with surgery.

And if they want liposuction or a boob job on their own time and their own dime, that's up to them. I don't think it's appropriate for a prison to pick up.


If they are at high risk for suicide, and liposuction would change that, I do.


The prison could limit them to 1200 calories a day. They'd lose weight, and cost them less.

So do you want to give everyone free elective cosmetic surgeries because it may make them less suicidal? Or only prisoners?


I'd assume we'd make it at least a relatively equitable example and add in extreme obesity and some kind of thyroid problem, to make it at least similar to something that couldn't be fixed except through surgery.

And I think I've already been clear on my position on what should be publicly available relative to mental health. I believe surgeries labeled medically necessary by psychologists should be made available. I believe in socialized health care, so for everyone, including prisoners.

If you're asking specifically whether or not we should foot the bill while holding constant the access to non-prisoners, my answer is still yes. But I don't consider that special treatment, because I would answer with yes to the inverse position as well.

Bluntly, I believe in extending health care to the largest population we can reach. I'm not going to discount a program because it can reach everyone. I'm going to say that reaching everyone should be a societal goal.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#185 Aug 28 2013 at 5:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
[quoteExcept that you're randomly equating two different disorders and assuming they're equitable. Do you have any reason to do so other than the fact that you think they sound similar?

Hence the phrase "frankly sounds like". I'll happily admit to not being an expert -- anyone here with a PhD on the subject should pipe up so I know who to speak to.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#186 Aug 28 2013 at 5:50 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
I don't have a PhD but I have stayed at plenty of Holiday Inn Expresses.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#187 Aug 28 2013 at 6:16 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,796 posts
What I know of the issues, I know from gender studies classes, personal conversations with the **** community at school, and some additional knowledge from work (I work for a center that does research and offers education in the areas of addiction, and there's an extremely high rate of self-medication in the trans community, so they present as cases of co-occurring disorders and require special treatment).

You're obviously free to dismiss anything and everything I say. It's not like I'd be faxing a copy of my degree to you, even if I was a PhD or an MD.

I'm not particularly interested in searching for scholarly articles at the moment. The only ones I can think of from work I'm not at will to distribute, and I have no interest in searching through my class notes for materials. But I wouldn't imagine they'd be hard to find, if you were interested.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#188 Aug 28 2013 at 6:49 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
But I wouldn't imagine they'd be hard to find, if you were interested.

No problem. I'm not, really. I mean, I'll talk about it and all but the whole issue isn't one I feel any burning passion for and I'm not crusading to make things any different for Manning or anyone else so the amount of personal energy I'm willing to put into it is extremely limited.

Edited, Aug 28th 2013 7:49pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#189 Aug 28 2013 at 7:45 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,588 posts
Honestly, it's absurd that we're even asking this question.

NaughtyWord wrote:
Do you believe the cost behind a sex-change is a Constitutional Right?


No. 100x no. You do not ever have a constitutional right to require someone else to pay for something for you. Period. End of story.

Can we decide as a society that we think it would be nice to pay for things for people? Yes. But that's an entirely different question. Drop the "constitutional right" aspect of this and argue on compassion, or need, or "we can afford to do this, so why not?". It's just that even asking the question assumes someone has no freaking clue what a right is.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#190 Aug 28 2013 at 7:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
gbaji wrote:
No. 100x no. You do not ever have a constitutional right to require someone else to pay for something for you. Period. End of story.
You do when the government removes your ability to pay for it yourself.
____________________________
#191 Aug 28 2013 at 7:50 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
You do when the government removes your ability to pay for it yourself.
Manning removed it, not the government.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#192 Aug 28 2013 at 7:53 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,842 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
You do when the government removes your ability to pay for it yourself.
Manning removed it, not the government.
But if the Government hadn't made those pesky laws for Manning to break, then he wouldn't be in trouble!
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#193 Aug 28 2013 at 8:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
TirithRR wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
You do when the government removes your ability to pay for it yourself.
Manning removed it, not the government.
But if the Government hadn't made those pesky laws for Manning to break, then he wouldn't be in trouble!
Smiley: lol

Meh, I can't say I'm going to complain long and hard either way myself. As a free person I'd defend a legitimate treatment that he should have access to. As a prisoner I'm a bit less sympathetic. I think it'd be nice if he could have access to it, if the government decides it's not a treatment it's supporting at this time I can understand that as well. These things aren't universally covered by insurance by any means (though it seems they're a lot more-so than a few years back), and any "sex" disorder is a political landmine field even for moderates.

At least he's somewhere where he'll have some access to a therapist.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#194 Aug 28 2013 at 8:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
No. 100x no. You do not ever have a constitutional right to require someone else to pay for something for you. Period. End of story.

Of course you do. You have the right to imprisonment free of cruel or unusual punishment which would include the right to be adequately fed, watered and sheltered during your incarceration.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#195 Aug 28 2013 at 8:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I don't have a PhD but I have stayed at plenty of Holiday Inn Expresses.

I stayed in one the other day. IIRC it had a lovely breakfast.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#196 Aug 28 2013 at 8:57 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,968 posts
Rachel wrote:
If there was a better, more complete way to change someone's sex, that'd be great, but there's not yet. But we can still get pretty close.


Since your gender has nothing to do with your genitals, if you have a GENDER disorder, there is no reason to pay to alter your genitals or any other physical part of your body.

How would you resolve a problem with an underweight woman who views herself as overly obese? Would you help her lose more weight? Or would you help her see her true size?

Rachel wrote:
sh*t, i wish i could get therapy for $5/mo. Even with my great insurance, it costs me more than that :(

Well, it's free for Manning, along with other military personnel. So, again, there is no reason to pay outside of the basic treatment.

Rachel wrote:
Because whether or not someone is a child is not a matter someone can decide themselves. Some things can be decided by each person, and some things cannot. For example, you can decide to like pizza, or that you're gay, or what your favorite color is, or what your gender is (when i say decide, i don't necessarily mean you actually have a choice that can be changed). You cannot decide your age, height, sex, or species.


So, you're saying that being **** is a choice?

What criteria are you using to determine if something is decidable or not? It appears that you're just making stuff up. Till this day, you fail to comprehend the history and the purpose of the term gender. That is truly ironic coming from you.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#197 Aug 28 2013 at 9:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel wrote:
sh*t, i wish i could get therapy for $5/mo. Even with my great insurance, it costs me more than that :(

Well, it's free for Manning, along with other military personnel. So, again, there is no reason to pay outside of the basic treatment.
Since both you and lolgaxe are here I'm going to ask a question I'm already guessing I know the answer to. I'm assuming there's no coverage for most gender-related disorders and what not for the normal military folks, much less those who are bad and go to jail?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#198 Aug 28 2013 at 9:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
Well, it's free for Manning, along with other military personnel. So, again, there is no reason to pay outside of the basic treatment.
"Free" as in paid for by someone else. Yeah. Anything they give her is paid for by the tax payers. That's how it works. Therapists don't work for free. Someone is paying them. And they are being paid more than $5/mo per patient

Quote:
So, you're saying that being **** is a choice?
I specifically said that was not what i was saying. The word decide doesn't necessarily mean there is a choice.

Edited, Aug 28th 2013 11:51pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#199 Aug 28 2013 at 10:29 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
I'm assuming there's no coverage for most gender-related disorders and what not for the normal military folks, much less those who are bad and go to jail?
There's plenty of mental health specialists of every conceivable branch available. I've personally taken advantage of that against my will. As far as regulations and UCMJ is concerned I know there's a few against actual surgery and about the dress code, but things change so often and there's always exceptions you'd be better off contacting Tricare about it than me.

But that's with the assumption that the person in question wasn't a complete @#%^ up. Well, even the **** ups have access to the head shrinkers.

Edited, Aug 29th 2013 12:31am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#200 Aug 29 2013 at 12:35 AM Rating: Decent
*****
16,098 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Because gender is not determined by physical characteristics


What the actual ****

I've never looked at a **** and said "Yup, this might be a man."


Only in a leftist-utopia hellhole could someone look at a **** and call it a woman or look at a **** and call it a man.


Has anyone here, I do mean anyone, looked at a dog with a **** and exclaimed "You know, it might be male."


-NW
____________________________
The Pessimist: A person who looks both ways before crossing a one-way street.
#201 Aug 29 2013 at 2:01 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,968 posts
Rachel wrote:
"Free" as in paid for by someone else. Yeah. Anything they give her is paid for by the tax payers. That's how it works. Therapists don't work for free. Someone is paying them. And they are being paid more than $5/mo per patient

The "therapists" are the chaplains, who are already being paid to do their job. Paying a therapist $5 to do what the Chaplain is already being paid to do is more money.

How would you resolve a problem with an underweight woman who views herself as overly obese? Would you help her lose more weight? Or would you help her see her true size?

Rachel wrote:
I specifically said that was not what i was saying. The word decide doesn't necessarily mean there is a choice.


I know what you said, but as in the last thread we encountered, you can't just make up definitions to words.

1 a : to make a final choice or judgment about <decide what to do>
....... 3. : to induce to come to a choice
........: to make a choice or judgment


Once again... words have meanings. I know that you think the dictionary is a waste of space, but the rest of the world uses it understanding each other. Because I'm smart enough to realize that the meaning is more important than the word attached to it, what is the conceptual difference between the two words that you mean to say?

NW wrote:
What the actual @#%^?

I've never looked at a **** and said "Yup, this might be a man."


Only in a leftist-utopia hellhole could someone look at a **** and call it a woman or look at a **** and call it a man.


Has anyone here, I do mean anyone, looked at a dog with a **** and exclaimed "You know, it might be male."


-NW


You should probably read the rest of what I wrote where I explained the difference. the word "gender" was created for women who didn't want to be bound to certain things because of their sex. In other words, a woman doesn't have to be in a dress, with long hair who cook, cleans and work as a secretary. However, throughout time, we have used the words synonymously. In either case, it doesn't support Rachel's argument.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 47 All times are in CDT
Bijou, gbaji, Jophiel, Anonymous Guests (44)