Is being Transgender a choice?

[AgnosticBoy]

I'm of the opinion that gender expression is a result of social conditioning. I know I used the word "choice" in the title, but that's only because people tend to associate behavior that can be changed or conditioned as being a "choice" (borrowing from the debate on born this way vs. choice).

In this thread, I want to focus on being transgender. Based on my above opinion, I also believe that being transgender is also a result of social conditioning (i.e. childhood experiences, what they learn from society, etc). If I'm right then I think that the recent focus on transgenderism in the media, in Hollywood, in schools, could lead some children to become transgender. And there is nothing wrong with that.

I also bring these points up because when some parents complain about their kids learning about transgenderism in school, the reaction is that it won't impact (some say "groom" ) the child into becoming transgender. If my view is correct, I think the pro-trans crowd should acknowledge that it can potentially influence children AND there's nothing wrong with that.

For Debate
1. Is being transgender a result of social conditioning?
2. Edit: Removed. Teaching kids about gender identity can be a separate thread.

[boatsnguitars]

Peace to you all,

Human sexuality is binary. Sex is determined at conception and one's body is what one grows up with.

People who call out this stuff are seeking to control and subdue the lives and loves of others.
No wonder that some transgenders are angry.

There have been and always will be people who want to live as the opposite sex. OK, no big deal. There is no need to turn society on its head by making those people the focus of everything we say and do. None of that is to say that we should mistreat those people who express themselves differently in any way.

So leave them alone and let them be free.

I now understand why you began the topic concerning experts.

I didn't........... it is a thread!
I don't trust in the word at all. You won't ever see a post of mine that sells an idea because an 'expert' said so.

There is a difference between transvestism and transgenderism by the way.

Of course there is, but since I have not known any transgenders I made mention of a transvestite.

You said the same things I was thinking, oldbadger (peace to you!)

Seriously, I feel like I walked into the twilight zone reading the tail end of this thread. So I went back to the beginning. I thought, surely I must be mistaken that (some) atheists (and/or the non-religious) are arguing against transgenderism. Using terms like "so-called" transgenders. Isn't it supposed to be the religious people who are doing this kind of thing? Did no one learn from the way gay people have been treated and looked down upon? Did gay people not struggle against the same thinking as being displayed here?

It is fear and ignorance. I admit to having suffered some of that myself. But we can always arm ourselves with some knowledge, right?


Oldbadger might not know any people who are transgender... but I do know transgender people. Inside and outside of my family. The one closest to me knew as a teenager, but did not come out as transgender for more than a decade later. (I had more details added here, but I changed my mind about sharing them.) As for people 'changing their mind' about their gender, from what I understand after some discussions, it can be a journey (or at least appear to us to be a journey). It is pretty normal for a gay man to have had girlfriends in high school or later. Gay men can be married to women before realizing or accepting their sexuality. Sometimes people might not accept themselves; sometimes they might know only that something is different, but not know what. Why would it be different for someone who is transgender?

These are not my stories to tell, so the details are deliberately vague... and you know what, I'm a little uncomfortable even doing this (hence I removed some details above and also at the end of this post). Someone once tried to justify something about me and my child many years back (without me knowing; I just happened to overhear), and I was not grateful. I was just mad. I didn't owe that person an explanation; it was none of their business. Kind of the same thing here.

None of this is ANY of your business.

People should not have to justify their sexuality or their gender to you.

You are not owed an explanation.


**

I can understand some concern for young people, though I think some people use that as an excuse to argue against transgenderism to begin with (same as when people said similar things about being gay). But even that is between the child and the parent(s). I am glad that my children are adults, but if one of them had come to me as a child and said they were transgender, I would have fought for their right to be who they said they were, to be called by the name and gender that they chose, and to wear the clothes that they feel comfortable in. I would have worried (at least at the start before researching) if they had wanted to start hormone treatments and surgery before adulthood, because I would not have wanted to make a mistake in that big decision. But since I never had to deal with that, I never researched it. But here is an article I just googled (written by Jack Turban is a resident physician in child and adolescent psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital and McLean Hospital. His research focuses on the mental health of transgender and gender diverse youth.):

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/22/18009020 ... medication

Some good points in there. Might be worth a read.


I had more written, but I think I will just end the post here.


Peace again.

(edited to add: I don't know if it needs to be added, but I will add that the decision about a young person is between that young person, their parents, and of course the physician/appropriate medical person. What might be right for one person might not be right for another person.)

Well written, Tam.

I suggested that I was concerned that the conversation would be dominated by the exceptions, and it largely has been. But, more to your point a few things stand out to me:

1. Why would anyone care what a person decides for themselves? I'm offended by people like Andrew Tate - even before the allegations of abuse. I think the hyper-masculine, misogynistic, 'bro" mentality is hurtful, absurd and disgusting - yet, I wouldn't wage a campaign to have the government write laws against it (beyond those rather sensible laws that you can't practice misogyny in the workplace, etc).
2. Combining my first point and your post: we keep talking about exceptions, yet, each individual case ought to be between the person, their parents (if minors) and their doctor (if required). Philosophically, I don't see any problem with a change in how we use our terms (language and meaning changes all the time). If a person who feels like they are a women and wants to call themselves a woman, I don't know the real problem. (Again, there are a few cases where sports seems to matter - but that is an artifact of our gender-based sport paradigm - which is artificial to begin with (as most social structures are).

[AgnosticBoy]

Seriously, I feel like I walked into the twilight zone reading the tail end of this thread. So I went back to the beginning. I thought, surely I must be mistaken that (some) atheists (and/or the non-religious) are arguing against transgenderism. Using terms like "so-called" transgenders. Isn't it supposed to be the religious people who are doing this kind of thing?

I understand where you're coming from, but I would also say that no one should be suggesting that transgenderism or anything else is beyond questioning or debate. We should encourage free-inquiry, even on sensitive matters. The alternative would not be conducive to truth since it would lead to barring evidence (including evidence that something is harmful) that would go against such unquestionable views. For instance, if transgenderism is wrong, or some aspect or policy that's pro-trans is wrong or harmful, then anyone (brunumb, other atheists, Christians, etc.), should be allowed to present that evidence. If brunumb is wrong, then present evidence that their argument/questioning is invalid.

Did no one learn from the way gay people have been treated and looked down upon? Did gay people not struggle against the same thinking as being displayed here?

Oh yes, gay people suffered from a lot of ignorance and stereotypes pushed by Christians. But please do not make the mistake of thinking that ANy type of disagreement or questioning of transgenderism is ignorance. Mere questioning doesn't make something ignorant. Questioning based on unreasonable/biased/incorrect information is ignorance.

My personal position on transgenderism is that it is not harmful, even if it is a choice for some.

If someone identifies as a gender that is different than their biological sex, then we should accommodate that as far as we reasonably can.

[oldbadger]

Peace to you all,

You said the same things I was thinking, oldbadger (peace to you!)

Seriously, I feel like I walked into the twilight zone reading the tail end of this thread. So I went back to the beginning. I thought, surely I must be mistaken that (some) atheists (and/or the non-religious) are arguing against transgenderism. Using terms like "so-called" transgenders. Isn't it supposed to be the religious people who are doing this kind of thing? Did no one learn from the way gay people have been treated and looked down upon? Did gay people not struggle against the same thinking as being displayed here?

It is fear and ignorance. I admit to having suffered some of that myself. But we can always arm ourselves with some knowledge, right?


Oldbadger might not know any people who are transgender... but I do know transgender people. Inside and outside of my family. The one closest to me knew as a teenager, but did not come out as transgender for more than a decade later. (I had more details added here, but I changed my mind about sharing them.) As for people 'changing their mind' about their gender, from what I understand after some discussions, it can be a journey (or at least appear to us to be a journey). It is pretty normal for a gay man to have had girlfriends in high school or later. Gay men can be married to women before realizing or accepting their sexuality. Sometimes people might not accept themselves; sometimes they might know only that something is different, but not know what. Why would it be different for someone who is transgender?

These are not my stories to tell, so the details are deliberately vague... and you know what, I'm a little uncomfortable even doing this (hence I removed some details above and also at the end of this post). Someone once tried to justify something about me and my child many years back (without me knowing; I just happened to overhear), and I was not grateful. I was just mad. I didn't owe that person an explanation; it was none of their business. Kind of the same thing here.

None of this is ANY of your business.

People should not have to justify their sexuality or their gender to you.

You are not owed an explanation.


**

I can understand some concern for young people, though I think some people use that as an excuse to argue against transgenderism to begin with (same as when people said similar things about being gay). But even that is between the child and the parent(s). I am glad that my children are adults, but if one of them had come to me as a child and said they were transgender, I would have fought for their right to be who they said they were, to be called by the name and gender that they chose, and to wear the clothes that they feel comfortable in. I would have worried (at least at the start before researching) if they had wanted to start hormone treatments and surgery before adulthood, because I would not have wanted to make a mistake in that big decision. But since I never had to deal with that, I never researched it. But here is an article I just googled (written by Jack Turban is a resident physician in child and adolescent psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital and McLean Hospital. His research focuses on the mental health of transgender and gender diverse youth.):

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/22/18009020 ... medication

Some good points in there. Might be worth a read.


I had more written, but I think I will just end the post here.


Peace again.

(edited to add: I don't know if it needs to be added, but I will add that the decision about a young person is between that young person, their parents, and of course the physician/appropriate medical person. What might be right for one person might not be right for another person.)

THIS ^^^^^^^^^

We need much more love and understanding towards others, I think.
You are right in that I don't know any transgender people, although it is possible that I simply might not know of a transgender's past, have never known that they transferred gender.
I've known people who were transvestites and maybe some of these had suffered the operations to change gender?
And I've known many gays of both sexes.
This journey (for Transgenders) can be very lonely, scary and very very painful, I understand.

As you have pointed out, such prejudices are nothing to do with Christianity because many congregations and churches have accepted these conditions, the most busy Christian church where I live accepts all and its emblem is a circular rainbow.

[Purple Knight]

None of this is ANY of your business.

People should not have to justify their sexuality or their gender to you.

You are not owed an explanation.

This is how I want to live too.

People should be able to do what they want, identify how they want, it makes no difference to anyone who is not physically harmed by it.

Unfortunately this places me on the side that is arguing against transgenderism.

Because the real question is not if Bob can call themself a girl. Of course they can. Bob has free speech. Nobody is forced to use any particular definition either. The dictionary never had legal power. If Bob is a girl by their own definition, then they are.

The real question is if Brunumb should go to jail for saying Bob isn't a girl. By the same logic, he could say, of course I can; I have free speech. I'm not forced to use a particular definition. The dictionary doesn't have legal power. If Bob is a boy by my definition, then he is.

It's connected to whether transgenderism is a choice, because when people can't help things, we have to move aside a little and give them special rights or endure a little harm we otherwise wouldn't. If it's not a choice, and Bob really has some brain condition where they can't feel comfortable playing sports among boys, then saying they can't play on the girl's team is saying Bob can't play at all, and that's neither fair nor right. But if it is a mere choice, and Bob easily could compete with the boys who are better matches for Bob's physical ability, at that point it's unfair to the girls when Bob will simply mop the floor with them.

It's connected to whether transgenderism is a choice, because when people have special needs, they get special rights. But if they do not have any such needs, it is wrong that they should have special rights. If I horseplay with a normal person, even if I'm a little pushy, probably nothing will happen to me. If I do the same physical actions to a baby, or a quadriplegic, I'm going to be in big trouble. If nothing is wrong with Bob and nothing will happen to Bob's brain when Brunumb says, "You're a boy, Bob, just suck it up," then there's no more reason that Brunumb should be stopped from saying that, than that Brunumb should be stopped from calling someone fat or ugly. But if Bob's brain is especially vulnerable to an insult in that area and will explode and/or cause Bob disproportionate harm, then stopping Brunumb is probably justified.

We live in a society where everyone wants special rights, but they're given on a basis of need. Everyone says that they have the need. That's the reason someone would have to justify their sexuality.

A great example that I feel is analogous is someone who claims to be gay because they were a victim of assault and they want "hate crime" tacked on to get their attacker punished worse. They're going to have to answer some questions, because they're the one who wanted more. If nobody wants more, in this day and age, people just leave them alone.

Transgender people as a whole, want more. When they want more, they might have to answer some questions.

[Purple Knight]

We need much more love and understanding towards others, I think.

I wish this included cis people, straight people, those who identify as biological men or women, and free speech advocates.

Also Purple Knight, because he's not in on the very obvious truth that only people who deserve it should get love and understanding. He has a touch o' the 'tism. It's not his fault that he doesn't get it. He's a sperg. He's super literal. If you tell him equality, love, and understanding, he'll do stupid sperg stuff like apply it to the other side.

[Purple Knight]

Clownboat's mission:- To provide the freedom to nasty old women to be able to insult and upset neighbours as they see fit.

Go to it!

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates

Readers, ask yourself which is vile, or perhaps both are vile to some degree?:
An old lady using the wrong pronoun on purpose, or oldbadger calling such a person a nasty old women. Obviously both are insulting and cause offence. Should we really seek to incarcerate the old lady or oldbadger though? I would prefer neither go to the clink in this instance. I say, let people be free to see what type of person the old lady, by her own words of course. The same can be said of oldbadger, but neither should require law enforcements involvement IMO as that would be to seek to dominate and control them.

While Oldbager hasn't stated it explicitly that I have read, there is a consistent case that the old lady should go to jail and Oldbager should not, that doesn't even fall back on the "that's different" argument, and it's an offshoot of something most conservatives believe, which is that an act can be wrong in the initiatory, but the same act, when defending the self or others, can become less wrong. Every conservative I have ever met, thinks that taking a life in self-defence, is not the same as taking a life of somebody who is not bothering you.

The major problem is that nobody who is not special has ever heard of a right not to be insulted, hurt, misgendered, or otherwise emotionally abused. We all are, all the time, every day, and nobody ever even takes notice, except to say, well, he shouldn't have said that, that was mean. Nobody ever heard of a right not to be misgendered before the trans thing, even though it happens to ugly girls all the time, and even though in some cases, these kinds of insults can be enough to make them kill themselves and include mis- or de-gendering, like, "You have no boobs, do you also have no #####y? Is it just, like nothing, down there?"

[oldbadger]

While Oldbager hasn't stated it explicitly that I have read, there is a consistent case that the old lady should go to jail and Oldbager should not,...................

No...... not my idea about this at all.

Where I live we don't chuck people in jail for being nasty.
Even repeat shoplifting/theft and other offenders don't often go to jail here.
No....nasty neighbour who sets out to upset other people can get a warning in extreme cases, not even a formal caution. If things persist then maybe a formal caution. The thing is, we do have legislation to combat deliberate hate speech and actions here, and even nasty lady is likely to scream for justice if s/he finds themself on the receiving end of some hate speech back!

But the transgender-phobes are not really interested in defending nasty neighbour, they just hate transgenders and so will be picking on any aspect of this that might come to mind, I think.

A member has noted that transgender-phobes can be agnostics or atheists and in the UK so many churches and congregations are now acknowledging, accepting and blessings LGBT people in to their midst that the secular-religious mix of 'phobes' might be more even.

Even our Church of England now recognises, accepts and blesses LGBT people, and ordains LGBT priests and bishops....... so the love and understanding for others is extending around here...... may it continue in all sections of our ciommunity.

The major problem is that nobody who is not special has ever heard of a right not to be insulted, hurt, misgendered, or otherwise emotionally abused. We all are, all the time, every day, and nobody ever even takes notice, except to say, well, he shouldn't have said that, that was mean. Nobody ever heard of a right not to be misgendered before the trans thing, even though it happens to ugly girls all the time, and even though in some cases, these kinds of insults can be enough to make them kill themselves and include mis- or de-gendering, like, "You have no boobs, do you also have no #####y? Is it just, like nothing, down there?"

Not special? Who is not special? Where I live you have the same protections that everybody else has.
And 'the trans thing' has existed as long as humanity has existed, as have all the LGBT people.
A person who deliberately upsets 'ugly girls' as described is a bully, a psycho-bully, so I have to ask you if you support the right for stronger people to bully weaker ones....do you?
I expect that you might have been bullied in previous times, many people have been, and it is a most sickly and filthy thing that, bullying of minors, in the workplace, out in the streets, in a neighbourhood..... and so I look upon psycho-bullies much the same as I view physical bullies.

[brunumb]

We live in a society where everyone wants special rights, but they're given on a basis of need. Everyone says that they have the need. That's the reason someone would have to justify their sexuality.

I have no issue with people who wish to live as the opposite of their genetic sex. The sticking point for me in the issue of gender ideology is the insistence that trans women are women. They are not. Sexual reproduction evolved as a binary process where male gametes unite with female ova to produce offspring. We can trace that back for millions of years. At no point has it been possible for an organism to choose its sex and reproduce according to that decision. It's funny to listen to people saying that gender/sex is a social construct whereby one can simply choose their gender, while at the same time denying that one can do the same with race, which in fact is a social construct. Go back through generations and there will always be male and female ancestors, but there may be so many different infusions of race that it can become quite meaningless.

There are privileges that we grant to genetic women that trans women should not feel entitled to. There is also a huge gulf between people who actually suffer from gender dysphoria and people who merely self identify as the opposite sex. I fully accept the former but not the latter. But, even if one does have gender dysphoria, there is no such thing as being born in the wrong body and there is no way that one can change their genetic sex. One can indulge in all sorts of physical modifications, but the fact of genetic sex remains unchanged. The compromise is to take on the persona that is preferred and live the best life possible while also accepting that it is not reality. That does not deny them the ability to live their life as a trans individual. It does, however, mean that they can't have all the privileges of genetic women. None of us can have everything that we might want. That's just a fact of life. There is no hatred involved in any of that no matter how much that rhetoric gets tossed around!

[AgnosticBoy]

[Replying to brunumb in post #188]
I've been a fan of your posts on this topic because you've made a lot of good points. I would be surprised to find anyone disagreeing with your posts entirely unless they lump you in with the transphobic crowd and dismiss all of your points (regardless of validity).

I think the vast majority of members here are okay with people being transgender. A big part of the disagreements here might be on how far we go in accommodating trans population. As it stands now, I probably accept 90% of all pro-trans policies that I've read about. Some might have expected me to agree with it only 50% of the time because I'm an agnostic (and Christians zero percent?). Some probably accept 100% of the pro-trans policies out there and will continue to do so. So we're probably debating about the 10% difference, and the readers and opposing sides here should not view any differences of opinion as an all-or-nothing matter (i.e. being for trans rights vs. not being for it).

[LittleNipper]

Any behavior that involves selective acceptance of a way of living is a choice. Wearing earrings is a choice. Getting tattoos is a choice. Engaging in sex is a choice. Like robbing a bank is a choice, Asking someone for sexual favors is a choice.