DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Transgenderism

I’m a fairly middle of the road type of person (I think).

Thirty years ago, I would have thought Transgenderism was a lot of weird hooey.

Now I’m thinking that some people really are born with the wrong sexual body.

Especially in cases where a “transgender-person” exhibits (at a very young age) distinct behaviorisms of the sex opposite of the body that they were born with. Behaviorisms that clearly were not learned. (they were born that way)

I feel bad that in the past, these people, have lived mostly tortured lives.

So OK, for what it’s worth, I’m more accepting today of Transgenderism. Personally, I think I’d still have to go with a traditional heterosexual partner.

And so what? It’s no skin off my...

I don't care because it's not my problem.

Science says they are real. Always have been.

Some trans person wanting whatever doesn't affect my ability to pay my bills.

So as such, I don't care. Civil rights for all, or none at all.

As a kid and young adult, I never thought about it, never had a reason I guess.

In my mid 20s I hired someone that a couple years later came out as transitioning. I could always tell that Chris was not comfortable in his (born male) own skin, but didn't know why. Super great person and I was there to support in any way. Chris' wife was very supportive, and from what I hear they're both doing great are still together.

I also had the opportunity to work with someone that we all knew was more male than female (born female). It took a decade, but I will always remember the day that Nic (born Robin Nicole) pulled me aside and told me that he started his transition to being a male. It took 50+ years to get there, but he did it. He had a brash and annoying personality, but he was a good person - and everything about him changed when he started the transition (he became less brash, more comfortable in what he and who was). Unfortunately he passed away a year or so after the transition (unrelated).

I think the problems people tend to have with this subject are (a) they don't understand it, and what people don't understand, they tend to fear and (b) they don't know anyone who is transgender.

In the end, they're human too - that is all that matters to me.

as a teacher this has become a very big issue in public schools.

how to treat transgenders, what to call them, how to deal with questions from other students, what restroom should they use, etc

Even if they do show certain mannerisms at an early age, since when do we allow children to assume responsibility for anything until they are a certain age? There are also plenty of cases of people that have undergone a sex change only to regret it later, and current science shows that 70-80% out grown suspected 'transgenderism'. I don't doubt that some of them are real, but we shouldn't then treat them all as real.

"real" ? define real. We are all humans created by God. Period. Is any mortal qualified to define "real"?

You're argument falls apart with people who don't believe in your God.

It's exactly why there's no one size fits all argument. So yes, mortals who don't believe in what you believe are absolutely qualified. Just like you somehow think you're qualified to make this statement. Or myself, for that matter.

Yeah, yeah, just define "real" stop the BS rhetoric

It's already been defined.

You not liking the definition because "God" doesn't change anything.

Really? Where? God doesn't have to change anything. Just define real.

Define real? Or define transgender?

actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.
"Julius Caesar was a real person"
synonyms: actual, nonfictional, factual, real-life; More
2.
(of a substance or thing) not imitation or artificial; genuine.
"the earring was presumably real gold"
synonyms: genuine, authentic, bona fide; More

I would take a shot, but I'm attempting to act classy today since we're celebrating a title.

Current science? What the hell are you saying. Are you suggesting this is just a mental disorder? Care to share all that scientific data with us. Or is this just one or two quack psychiatrists who claim this?

So are psychiatrists in general quacks or just the ones that don't agree with your opinion?

I'm laughing about the opinion question. I haven't seen the science so how the hell can I have an opinion on it? Oh wait that's what you guys do so well. Ignore all the science then spout off an opinion. I don't do that.

Now, can you show the science Erik was spouting off about or do you just want to argue something irrelevant here to cover your ignorance on the issue?

I've not argued any position in this thread, I'm just curious of your dismissal of psychiatrists, is it in a general sense or what criteria are you using to dismiss these psychiatrists that until your post weren't being argued either.

Since your opinion lite on this subject how did these doctors become quacks?

Hey, I want to address psychiatrists.

I’m not happy with how psychiatry has “labelled” (defined “abnormal” behavior) so many “new” mental defects. To me this is job/field enhancement.

As a child I would have surely been “diagnosed” with attention-deficit-whatever.

I was an unpopular, class clown, attention seeker.

Such a diagnosis would have undoubtedly left me with feelings of self-doubt and/or inadequacy.

But I turned out alright.

My mom fixed my ADD with this thing called a belt.

I'd agree with everything except the "It's not my problem".


There's a quote by Hemmingway, from some book i've never read, I think it's "Do not ask for whom the bell tolls, for it tolls for thee"

A professor of mine (hollocaust survivor) used to reference it. Probably the most gangster guy I've ever met. Incredible story.


Anyway, we can't save the world, but if there's injustice going on, I much prefer standing on the correct side.


But otherwise, it was that and Keith Olberman who won me over to most of the LGBT causes. And I can't stand Olberman usually, but he made a speech about love which completely won me over. One of the very few times where my opinions changed in a moment.


There's some things which are a really big deal to some people, and have very little affect on my life. It's no different than picking someone up walking in the rain and giving them a ride to their destination when it's on your way. Not a big deal for me, but a huge deal for them.


And just like you said, "Civil rights for all, or none at all". It's no different at all, I like that. We are all human.



Now if the question was, would I date a transgender, that would probably be a no. But I see no reason why I couldn't hang out with one. If someone is cool and can hangout, I'd rather be around them than someone who can't (no matter what their gender/orientation/what not)

With most of my gay friends, I don't usually think much about them being gay or at least not their sexual acts (frankly, I don't do that with any of my friends, period). So there's nothing to make things too weird compared to anything else.

What doctors? Stop twisting things and playing games. The science must be coming from just 1 or 2 quacks out there because I know the science Erik references isn't coming from a large collection of psychiatrists. So don't waste my time. Please post a link to all this science please.

In a strangely convoluted fashion you've managed to at least provide a glimpse into your ramblings and have narrowed it down to "it must be just 1 or 2" and not the entire profession. We're moving forward now, some anyway. We only have left to find out why you think, without having formed an opinion, these doctors are quacks? Whoever these 1 or 2 nameless doctors may be.

Oh and to answer what doctors? The quack psychiatrist(s), they are doctors.

Can you read? This is exactly what I posted to Erik on his post before you butted in and started an off topic side bar.

Yes I can read fine and you're not answering the question. Oh and if you don't want people to "butt in" on a forum I would suggest considering taking your conversation to PM's as the point of an open forum is open communication. But thank you for being so inclusive.

The ones that persist in their belief that they were born in the wrong body are real, the ones that outgrow it are not. I thought that would be simple enough.

I can't answer your question because I do not know who the doctors are who are doing all this science research Erik has claimed.

And really I don't care if people butt in. I know this is an open forum. Just don't expect me to answer stupid questions I can't answer without input from the original poster I was responding to. Thanks

First of all, if you're so interested, look it up. Nothing I say will convince anyone on here anyway. Doesn't anyone do their own research anymore?

You will find that out of the kids born with gender dysphoria, about 75% will go on to become happy gay adults. The remaining 25% become happy straight adults. Of those people that get sex changes, about 65% come to regret making the change. That it out of the small percentage that don't go on to become straight or gay.

As I actually know one of these people personally, I would like to think I have these facts well in hand, as I have done the research. Also, I would like to remind you I have a wife that is a nurse and researches medical conditions the same way that computer geeks code non-stop.

So...ummm... I dunno why we're arguing over how they become transgendered.

Mental condition, born like that, honestly it's whatever.

I think Eriks stat on the 75% though is intriguing.

So we do know that most gays seem to be born that way. Honestly, questions like these is why I defer to the subject matter expert.

No offense to us straight guys, but we have a poster that can tell us straight up how it works from a personal level.

It's like... We're straight guys arguing over how and why, so how bout we respectfully ask the member of the LBGT community to share her thoughts on this?

So you don't know who the doctors are and you have no clue about the science but you do know the doctors are quacks? Quite telling.

That explains everything. Thanks.

Sigh. I have to research it to find out if they are the same two quacks I think they are. I was hoping Erik might enlighten us on who the researchers of the scientific data he was referring to. I'll get back with you, maybe.

Seeing as I have read this over many years, and I have read many sources, you shouldn't have any problems finding the info. I don't recall all the authors, but it wasn't just two.

As you are asking for enlightenment, I would like some too. What medical knowledge do you have that allows you to determine and proclaim who is a quack and who isn't? I use my wife for this type of reference, as I have watched her wow doctors with her knowledge before.

I think you're being silly here. You made the claim. It would seen when someone makes a claim, it's up to them to provide links to back it up. Not somebody else.

If you are interested check out the film "The Danish Girl". It was up for an Academy this past February. It stars Eddie Redmayne. It's the film inspired by two of Denmark's better known painters at the turn of the century. Redmayne battles with his sexual identity and ultimately opts to have one of the first ever sex change operations. Back in those days obviously he was considered mentally ill and they wanted to put him in an asylum. not to mention the operation back then was incredibly dangerous.

Redmayne is excellent as the character and I believe he too was up for an Oscar for his performance. I thought the film was excellent but, not sure if it will be your cup of tea.

quote above by PDX:

"...and ultimately opts to have one of the first ever sex change operations."

This is a frightening level of desperation in 1900.

Or even 1930.

Or even 1974.

Now I want to watch blazing saddles.

I'm pretty old school on this in a way.

For living your life, I have no issue with people transitioning. It's their life and I don't feel comfortable interfering.

I do have a rule that might help.

If it dangles, your a man. Use the men's room.

If it doesn't, your a woman, use the ladies room.

If it used to dangle but doesn't any more, use the ladies room.

If it used to NOT dangle but it doesn't anymore can they do that?), use the men's room.

Dress accordingly and keep your hands to yourself which you should do regardless.

I know, that's not very sensitive or PC, but hey, it's the way I feel about it.

Whaaa. As I said, they won't believe me anyway, or try to discredit any link I put up. If someone wants to educate themselves, they should look it up.

Or...... you simply don't have anything to back it up.

Just sayin

. I don't doubt that some of them are real, but we shouldn't then treat them all as real.

Are you referring solely to the bathroom situation?

Just curious Erik what this statement means? I believe all people should be treated with dignity and respect. I also wonder what your timeline would be for an individual to decide if their "transgenderism" is "real" or imagined.

And, please see Swish's definition of real in this thread. I am just wondering how we can determine if another's mannerisms are real or imagined, occurring in fact or supposed.