gamevideo113 wrote:I think the term "cisgender" is quite an odd one. My natural assumption about someone who says they are male would be that they were born male and stayed that way. I would only assume otherwise if they specified transgender male. Idk, i guess i find it somewhat redundant.
Cisgender is both male and female
Yeah i know, i think the same goes for "cisgender female".
Well it's an academic term, where nuance is more important than it is for most people in their every day life.
Could be. I have seen people use it in very "informal" instances (so to say) though, and I think it is spreading to everyday's use. Nothing wrong about it, i simply view it as saying "i have bought a new pair of black shoes which were painted black during their production cycle". I mean, why would you specify it considering that probably 99% of black shoes got their color that way? The "obligation" of further specification should be on the owner of the 1% of aftermarket-coloured shoes, not on everybody. (I'm not saying cisgender people are obliged to specify that they are cisgender, i was just making an example to make my point).
For sure, because that's partially fad now, and partially emancipation. Just like in the past people would say retard or moron and now they say down syndrome.
In any case, no one, or at least not systematically, is beat up or discriminated against for not having their shoes painted during the production cycle. So perhaps people do it as a way of showing solidarity or inclusiveness to those who do always n.eed to legitimize and explain their identity and existence. Though whether it will ultimately have that effect remains to be seen.
Dolan wrote:There's not much mystery about it, it's just another type of fetish, except that it affects how sexual interest is targeted. Instead of being targeted externally, it's targeted on oneself.
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that this gender stuff is done for sexual satisfaction, or is it a sublimation of libido into something else? Furthermore, is it actually abnormal to direct sexual interest towards oneself? Isn't that basically what girls do when they wear clothes with the express purpose of being 'cute' or 'sexy;' and isn't that essentially what men do when they feel pride or satisfaction in their penis? I like your idea of it being sex-related, though. I mean, if it weren't sex-related then what would it be?
Yeah, basically transsexuality is the result of someone developing a fetish for role-playing as the opposite sex. That's why the great majority of trannies go over the top with make-up and other female trappings, because what exhilarates them is the feeling of sexual metamorphosis. They don't simply become an ordinary, dull member of the opposite sex, no, they have to turbocharge everything: big boobs, diva make-up and fabulous hairstyle, mannerisms that exaggerate femininity to the point that some of them end up looking even more feminine than average women. It's not just a simple wish to correct a "mismatch" between feelings and gonads, no, they want the whole show, the whole excitement of them being the opposite sex.
gamevideo113 wrote:I think the term "cisgender" is quite an odd one. My natural assumption about someone who says they are male would be that they were born male and stayed that way. I would only assume otherwise if they specified transgender male. Idk, i guess i find it somewhat redundant.
Cisgender is both male and female
Yeah i know, i think the same goes for "cisgender female".
Well it's an academic term, where nuance is more important than it is for most people in their every day life.
Could be. I have seen people use it in very "informal" instances (so to say) though, and I think it is spreading to everyday's use. Nothing wrong about it, i simply view it as saying "i have bought a new pair of black shoes which were painted black during their production cycle". I mean, why would you specify it considering that probably 99% of black shoes got their color that way? The "obligation" of further specification should be on the owner of the 1% of aftermarket-coloured shoes, not on everybody. (I'm not saying cisgender people are obliged to specify that they are cisgender, i was just making an example to make my point).
For sure, because that's partially fad now, and partially emancipation. Just like in the past people would say retard or moron and now they say down syndrome.
In any case, no one, or at least not systematically, is beat up or discriminated against for not having their shoes painted during the production cycle. So perhaps people do it as a way of showing solidarity or inclusiveness to those who do always n.eed to legitimize and explain their identity and existence. Though whether it will ultimately have that effect remains to be seen.
Makes sense.
@Dolan Really interesting opinion on the matter, and probably accurate as well.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
umeu wrote:And you base this on? Which research, including research method? Or is this another one of your theories, like cultural flexibility?
No, such a theory is also supported by sex researchers. It's basically half of Blanchard's autogynephilia theory.
But really, all you need is to observe their behaviour and think outside the box, not let yourself beguiled by the assumption that behind every behaviour there is good will and lack of deception.
Dolan wrote:There's not much mystery about it, it's just another type of fetish, except that it affects how sexual interest is targeted. Instead of being targeted externally, it's targeted on oneself.
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that this gender stuff is done for sexual satisfaction, or is it a sublimation of libido into something else? Furthermore, is it actually abnormal to direct sexual interest towards oneself? Isn't that basically what girls do when they wear clothes with the express purpose of being 'cute' or 'sexy;' and isn't that essentially what men do when they feel pride or satisfaction in their penis? I like your idea of it being sex-related, though. I mean, if it weren't sex-related then what would it be?
Yeah, basically transsexuality is the result of someone developing a fetish for role-playing as the opposite sex. That's why the great majority of trannies go over the top with make-up and other female trappings, because what exhilarates them is the feeling of sexual metamorphosis. They don't simply become an ordinary, dull member of the opposite sex, no, they have to turbocharge everything: big boobs, diva make-up and fabulous hairstyle, mannerisms that exaggerate femininity to the point that some of them end up looking even more feminine than average women. It's not just a simple wish to correct a "mismatch" between feelings and gonads, no, they want the whole show, the whole excitement of them being the opposite sex.
I've noticed that they go over the top - and become obsessed with their new identity - too. But I suppose it could just be the fact that I don't keep track of it when men or women talk about their gender, but do keep track of it when someone LGBT does. If it is entirely sexual then what do you think causes this behavior to come out only in certain people? A lack of more traditional sexual attention maybe? I've noticed that men tend to get jealous of all the attention women get.
umeu wrote:And you base this on? Which research, including research method? Or is this another one of your theories, like cultural flexibility?
No, such a theory is also supported by sex researchers. It's basically half of Blanchard's autogynephilia theory.
What's the other half?
This theory seems quite eurocentric. How does it account for phenomenon resembling transsexualism in other cultures such as in India, Thailand, North American native cultures, Senegal and the Polynesian islands? The "trannies" there, as you feel a need to call them, don't necessarily dress up over the up as you describe it.
As for your second part, please elaborate? What good or ill will do you mean? And why do you assume all, or the majority, have ill will? Deception for what purpose?
Well, Blanchard (and other researchers) think that one part of transsexuals are very effeminate gay men who choose to transition because extreme femininity gets rejected in the male gay world, where apparent masculinity is in high demand. So, since they are highly attracted to men, they'd rather change sex and live as a member of the opposite sex, basically a homosexual man with surgically implanted organs of the opposite sex.
Dolan wrote:Well, Blanchard (and other researchers) think that one part of transsexuals are very effeminate gay men who choose to transition because extreme femininity gets rejected in the male gay world, where apparent masculinity is in high demand. So, since they are highly attracted to men, they'd rather change sex and live as a member of the opposite sex, basically a homosexual man with surgically implanted organs of the opposite sex.
What about the other part? And again, what abiut transsexuals in other cultures, where for example it's not a secret that they are men dressed as women, but in fact known and they are seen as performing valuable duties within society? The idea of deception hinges on the assumption that society doesnt accept them.
umeu wrote:This theory seems quite eurocentric. How does it account for phenomenon resembling transsexualism in other cultures such as in India, Thailand, North American native cultures, Senegal and the Polynesian islands? The "trannies" there, as you feel a need to call them, don't necessarily dress up over the up as you describe it.
And that's perfectly fine if the theory doesn't cover how sexual fetishes manifest themselves in every culture. Researchers from those cultures are better prepared to study phenomena taking place in their own culture, after all. Since when is Western research responsible with the whole world?
As for your second part, please elaborate? What good or ill will do you mean? And why do you assume all, or the majority, have ill will? Deception for what purpose?
I mean, why would you simply believe someone who claims they feel like they were born an alien on planet X? Why give anyone the benefit of good will, especially when we're dealing with humans who are notoriously deceptive? As a scientist you shouldn't base your judgement on believing, but on verifying things.
Riotcoke wrote:Another thread going to be dominated by Umeu and Dolan's private conversation.
I prefer to talk to people i disagree with. At least i learn somethig from talking to him, even though hes often obnoxious. That cant be said about everyone :p
Riotcoke wrote:Another thread going to be dominated by Umeu and Dolan's private conversation.
I prefer to talk to people i disagree with. At least i learn somethig from talking to him, even though hes often obnoxious. That cant be said about everyone :p
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's interesting to read both perspectives
umeu wrote:This theory seems quite eurocentric. How does it account for phenomenon resembling transsexualism in other cultures such as in India, Thailand, North American native cultures, Senegal and the Polynesian islands? The "trannies" there, as you feel a need to call them, don't necessarily dress up over the up as you describe it.
And that's perfectly fine if the theory doesn't cover how sexual fetishes manifest themselves in every culture. Researchers from those cultures are better prepared to study phenomena taking place in their own culture, after all. Since when is Western research responsible with the whole world?
As for your second part, please elaborate? What good or ill will do you mean? And why do you assume all, or the majority, have ill will? Deception for what purpose?
I mean, why would you simply believe someone who claims they feel like they were born an alien on planet X? Why give anyone the benefit of good will, especially when we're dealing with humans who are notoriously deceptive? As a scientist you shouldn't base your judgement on believing, but on verifying things.
I still don't get what you mean. What am I giving anyone the benefit of the doubt of? I'm merely asking why their intentions matter in this case, why you assume their intentions are bad (i wouldve asked why you assumed they were good if thats what you wouldve believed). When you talk about ill-will, to me it has connections to meaning or doing harm or breakong certain laws. If thats not what you mean, then olease elaborate. You answered the deception part as well.
As for other cultures, it seemed for me that this theory claims universality, but perhaps I'm wrong about that. So if transsexuality is a cultural manifestation, what about homosexuality? Is that also deceptive and ill-intentioned?
I think Dolan's perspective is totally reasonable except for the good will and deception part. I don't think the majority of transexual people has "hidden mischievous purposes" for doing what they do. If it's a fetish, then it is basically just what your insinct tells you to follow.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
XeeleeFlower wrote:Are you saying that genetics are unrelated to one's psychology?
A breakthrough came in 1993 with a family in the Netherlands where all the men had a history of violence. Fifteen years of painstaking research revealed that they all lacked the same gene.
This gene produces an enzyme called MAOA, which regulates the levels of neurotransmitters involved in impulse control. It turns out that if you lack the MAOA gene or have the low-activity variant you are predisposed to violence. This variant became known as the warrior gene.
About 30% of men have this so-called warrior gene, but whether the gene is triggered or not depends crucially on what happens to you in childhood.
Jim Fallon, professor of psychiatry at the University of California, has a particularly personal interest in this research. After discovering a surprisingly large number of murderers in his family tree he had himself genetically tested and discovered he had an awful lot of genes that have been linked to violent psychopathic behaviour.
As he puts it: "People with far less dangerous genetics become killers and are psychopaths than what I have. I have almost all of them"
But Jim isn't a murderer - he's a respected professor.
His explanation is that he was protected from a potentially violent legacy by a happy childhood. "If you've the high-risk form of the gene and you were abused early on in life, your chances of a life of crime are much higher. If you have the high-risk gene but you weren't abused, then there really wasn't much risk. So just a gene by itself, the variant doesn't really dramatically affect behaviour, but under certain environmental conditions there is a big difference".
If someone has all the expected genetic markers for psychopathy but they're not a psychopath, then why should we expect "gender identity" to be different? Typically, psychological traits are not predominantly genetic, I don't know of any psychological trait that is over 70% heritable and can be easily predicted in someone's kids, based on parents' genetics. Physical traits, like height, yes, but not psychological traits, because these are usually highly polymorphic (the result of a large number of genes, so there can be more causative factors that can variate).
[/spoiler] Just because an individual has a predisposition based upon their genetics, does not mean that they are locked into that. I never said otherwise. There are environmental factors that can "activate" dormant genes. Nonetheless, one's genes do affect one's psychology. You said this:
It's a psychological thing, not a genetic thing
which was what I was responding to. Genetics and environment shape an individual. I think that we can agree on this.
Time is wise and our wounds seem to heal to the rhythm of aging,
But our past is a ghost fading out that at night it’s still haunting.
fightinfrenchman wrote:Wow, another thread where Dolan uses slurs and dehumanizes people, what a shocker!
Well, if you ask me having a fetish is a very human thing. Not that i do, let's be clear
No but jokes aside, in all seriousness, i think this is not applicable to every trandgender person and i'm glad Dolan specified that only "a majority" and not all transgender people tend to have this particular behaviour. So far i think he hasn't been offensive, i'm not sure which are the slurs you are referring to. (But then again i'm not an excellent reader so i might have missed them)
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
How do you square transgenderism with feminism? One says men and women are the same and there's no such thing as inherently masculine or feminine personality traits. The other says men and women inherently have different personalities and a man can turn into a woman and vice versa. Which is it? Here's one feminist perspective on transgenderism:
Don't even get me started on that ^. If there are 52 genders, then bisexuality is another kind of patriarchy/bigotry which implies there are only two genders.
