General transgender discussion thread - Take the tranny related debates here.

[teriyakiburns]

The euphemism treadmill tramples every onward.

 

[Mellow Malevolent]

So I'm going to break this up into a couple of posts, but I am curious about people's reaction to some of my thoughts on the trans phenomenon. With everything in my life I try to approach it from as empirical a viewpoint as possible, so my own feelings is that obviously being cis and being trans are not equivalent, but I'm not interested in coming at it from the moral correctness of being trans. It's obviously phenomenon that presents itself, so the question is: what is the source?

So my first big thing is gender dysphoria.

I have a big problem when it comes to the way gender dysphoria is presented in the current trans narrative. All the word dysphoria means is a persistent feeling of unhappiness, and gender dysphoria is not the only type of dysphoria that people can suffer. There’s a claim to the uniqueness of gender dysphoria as a symptom, but I don’t see how you can claim that it differs all that greatly from other types of body dysmorphias. A man with muscle dysmorphia is experiencing dysphoria about the state of his body, he has an obsessive mental disorder that makes him believe that his own body is too small, insufficiently muscular and insufficiently masculine. A woman displaying anorexia is probably also suffering from severe dysphoria about being insufficiently thin and feminine. We don’t say that these people are experiencing a disconnect between their true selves and societal expectations/their bodies, we wouldn't call giving them steroids "body affirming treatment", and we don’t say that they were coercively assigned smallness at birth. We say they are suffering from an obsessive compulsive disorder that needs to be treated. So, if there is a trans person or trans advocate present in this thread who would like to lay out why it is that we should consider trans dysphoria as something other than an obsessive compulsive disorder, I would be interested in hearing the argument.

And then there is Body Integrity Identity Disorder. BIID sufferers have an obsessive belief that they should remove a limb, or blind or deafen themselves. What little studies there are, have shown that there do seem to be, just like the studies in trans people, neurological differences between a BIID sufferer and normal brains. There are also seems to be a connection to paraphilias, with having a paraphilia being a potential predictive factor (perhaps not surprisingly, BIID sufferers are predominately male, and males are much more likely to have paraphilias than females). I don’t see how you can look at the presentation of BIID and not conclude that trans gender dysphoria is a different expression of the same sort of obsession. Absent the connection to the gay-rights movement, and the idea of gender nonconformity as being okay generally (which is part of gay-rights because both of sex, and also the tendency of gay men and women to do cross gender behavior (the sissy gay man, the butch lesbian)), I feel like the specific trans obsession with physical transition through surgery and hormones would be viewed far more skeptically. I'm going to expand on this more in another post, but to me, the situation looks like gay and lesbian tendencies to not always have gender conforming behavior is being used as a justification for legitimizing an obsessive paraphilia as an identity, in a way society would not accept for other paraphilia's. So, I'm curious, do trans advocates feel that BIID is an entirely separate phenomenon, are they unaware of it, do they support the "trans-abled" community?

Edited to correct typos

 

[Shturman]

So, if there is a trans person or trans advocate present in this thread who would like to lay out why it is that we should consider trans dysphoria as something other than an obsessive compulsive disorder, I would be interested in hearing the argument.

I'll take a crack at it, but bear in mind this is a rough response to your questions and I'm open to hear opinions/studies that may contradict my opinions as this isn't a psych topic I've read much about, and therefore am willing to learn and refine my beliefs.

For starters, there's the blatant shying away of the moniker "disorder" in terms of anything to do with the trans community; after decades of being labeled as a medical disorder and being stigmatized for it, there's an inherent desire to do away with the belief that being transgender is inherently a mental disease. You'll notice that gender dysphoria is never termed as a disorder or disease in studies; it gets it's own label and there's a distinct disconnection to the "disorder" tag.

In terms of BDD, there's a notable shift in tone. It's closer to an OCD, with compulsive, repetitive behaviors and extent anxieties relating to the perceived flaw or wrongness of self that ultimately eat away at the persons body and mental health.

The similarities are certainly stark, and I believe that gender dysphoria can become BDD if the underlying causes for the gender dysphoria are severe. Personally I'd call gender dysphoria a form of watered down, gender-specific BDD. Now, as for the treatment of it, I do have to argue that gender affirmation to treat dysphoria in the terms of HRT and plastic surgery can be effective to trans people... within reason. Reality -and mental health wellness- must be a factor in this treatment, lest it turn into surgical addiction and leave the affected worse off than they were before as they miss the forest for the trees.

 

[Totallyunknown]

I'm a straight female (biologically so) attracted to biological men who has 98% interests and hobbies in things dominated by men because in my opinion, I was raised primarily by a man and developed my interests early on. I continually relate to men in ways women usually do not because I've been able to observe their socialization for a long time with a positive male role model and influence.

And I've also experienced trauma as a woman I only experienced pretty much because I am a woman. And I know this. And I know I observed my male friends not face these same issues or even be awarded for morally questionable behavior. So it seems pretty easy for me to see a clear link between this and the desire or belief that you're not actually the sex you are when you seemingly relate more to the opposite sex and/or see a benefit in it.

I'm kind of making this post though because YouTubes advertising algorithm usually pushes OLG lottery or Old Navy or some e-commerce host. Today it targeted me for an ad that is clearly for men - a biker dating website which asked if I owned a bike and to join to meet 1000s of women who shared my interests. After laughing my ass off because again, my interests are so male centric I think the wires crossed for a moment and it forgot I'm actually a straight woman but I thought this must be what trans think "gender euphoria" is. Like, I tricked the algorithm in some way to the point it showed me advertisements targeted at the opposite sex.

Which really drove home the point how much of an act one really needs to put on to successfully pass as the opposite sex and why something so insignficantly stupid like maybe a targeted ad would produce "euphoria".

ed for spelling

 

[Mellow Malevolent]

I'll take a crack at it, but bear in mind this is a rough response to your questions and I'm open to hear opinions/studies that may contradict my opinions as this isn't a psych topic I've read much about, and therefore am willing to learn and refine my beliefs.

For starters, there's the blatant shying away of the moniker "disorder" in terms of anything to do with the trans community; after decades of being labeled as a medical disorder and being stigmatized for it, there's an inherent desire to do away with the belief that being transgender is inherently a mental disease. You'll notice that gender dysphoria is never termed as a disorder or disease in studies; it gets it's own label and there's a distinct disconnection to the "disorder" tag.

I get the desire to get away from the stigma of mental illness, but it seems weird to me that we don't label the condition a disorder, because it is a condition that causes distress, that needs to be addressed medically. So while it may hurt people's feelings, it is still a medical disorder, in the same way clinical depression or bipolar disorder are. Here I'm really talking about the dysphoria that leads someone to feel that there genitals need to be surgically altered. This is desire to to make extreme changes to the body. That level of dysphoria being generated should be considered disorder to be treated medically. There's a comparison to be made to gays and lesbians here, but the obvious difference is that a gay man or lesbian does not need medical intervention to live a happy life. Whereas gender dysphoria require some sort of intervention to solve.

In terms of BDD, there's a notable shift in tone. It's closer to an OCD, with compulsive, repetitive behaviors and extent anxieties relating to the perceived flaw or wrongness of self that ultimately eat away at the persons body and mental health.

The similarities are certainly stark, and I believe that gender dysphoria can become BDD if the underlying causes for the gender dysphoria are severe. Personally I'd call gender dysphoria a form of watered down, gender-specific BDD. Now, as for the treatment of it, I do have to argue that gender affirmation to treat dysphoria in the terms of HRT and plastic surgery can be effective to trans people... within reason. Reality -and mental health wellness- must be a factor in this treatment, lest it turn into surgical addiction and leave the affected worse off than they were before as they miss the forest for the trees.

I can understand the need for surgery in a harm reduction sense, given that persistent dysphoria is obviously a factor in a suicide prevention. Ditto HRT, which obviously help by altering appearance, such as muscle build up and fat deposits. But given the complications possible, more so with the surgery, but even with hormone therapy, it seems crazy to be pushing forward those types of medical interventions as a standard care, rather than using it as a last resort, if things like presenting as the opposite gender or other forms of therapy don't help. And currently the rhetoric of the trans community seems to be really strongly about pushing for medical transitions. That seems incredibly problematic to me.*The push to remove gatekeeping for these procedures seems particularly suspicious. I don't think there's any other medical procedure where we would allow something so invasive as a first recourse.

Another thing I find suspicious is when people describe HRT as having a direct psychologically helpful effect, as in people feel more like their identified gender purely because of hormones. There is no mechanism for that to make sense. The human brain response to hormones, like all neuro-active chemicals, by changing mood levels. But even for neurotransmitter related drugs like SSRIs, the science on what the proper level in the human brain is supposed to be is really specious. So this idea that you can "feel" the correct hormone levels, when hormone levels vary wildly in the body and the brain even over the course of a day, doesn't make sense. The only explanation that seems possible is a placebo effect, where taking the pill confers a psychological benefit from the symbolic association more than the physiological effects.

*At the same time, I know there's the weird phenomenon of transtrending, or people claiming trans identity despite seemingly having no symptoms of gender dysphoria and not even really trying to pass as the opposite gender. But I'm talking specifically about trans people experience and gender dysphoria here

 

[Shturman]

I get the desire to get away from the stigma of mental illness, but it seems weird to me that we don't label the condition a disorder, because it is a condition that causes distress, that needs to be addressed medically. So while it may hurt people's feelings, it is still a medical disorder, in the same way clinical depression or bipolar disorder are. Here I'm really talking about the dysphoria that leads someone to feel that there genitals need to be surgically altered. This is desire to to make extreme changes to the body. That level of dysphoria being generated should be considered disorder to be treated medically. There's a comparison to be made to gays and lesbians here, but the obvious difference is that a gay man or lesbian does not need medical intervention to live a happy life. Whereas gender dysphoria require some sort of intervention to solve.

I agree; while it does make sense to want to separate surrounding gender-specific issues from the stigma of mental illness after progressives managing to declassify transgenderism as a disorder, if gender dysphoria walks like a disorder, swims like a disorder, and quacks like a disorder, it probably shouldn't be given exemption status simply due to it's direct relation to gender identity. However, with the "you don't need dysphoria to be trans" bullshit, I have no idea how it'll be portrayed in the future.

I can understand the need for surgery in a harm reduction sense, given that persistent dysphoria is obviously a factor in a harm reduction sense. Ditto HRT, which obviously help by altering appearance, such as muscle build up and fat deposits. But given the complications possible, more so with the surgery, but even with hormone therapy, it seems crazy to be pushing forward those types of medical interventions as a standard care, rather than using it as a last resort, if things like presenting as the opposite gender or other forms of therapy don't help. And currently the rhetoric of the trans community seems to be really strongly about pushing for medical transitions. That seems incredibly problematic to me.*The push to remove gatekeeping for these procedures seems particularly suspicious. I don't think there's any other medical procedure where we would allow something so invasive as a first recourse.

Another thing I find suspicious is when people describe HRT as having a direct psychologically helpful effect, as in people feel more like their identified gender purely because of hormones. There is no mechanism for that to make sense. The human brain response to hormones, like all neuro-active chemicals, by changing mood levels. But even for neurotransmitter related drugs like SSRIs, the science on what the proper level in the human brain is supposed to be is really specious. So this idea that you can "feel" the correct hormone levels, when hormone levels vary wildly in the body and the brain even over the course of a day, doesn't make sense. The only explanation that seems possible is a placebo effect, where taking the pill confers a psychological benefit from the symbolic association more than the physiological effects.

*At the same time, I know there's the weird phenomenon of transtrending, or people claiming trans identity despite seemingly having no symptoms of gender dysphoria and not even really trying to pass as the opposite gender. But I'm talking specifically about trans people experience and gender dysphoria here

Oh absolutely. If you have a trans / GNC person who's happy just by cross dressing and going by different pronouns and nothing else, trying to push them into permanently changing their bodies just because it's expected of being trans is predatory. Being trans should be about baby steps and years of consideration as an adult, because permanently changing your body shouldn't be something that's pushed onto fucking 12 year old boys that like dresses and disney princesses. The push for immediate change, now now NOW is an upsetting trend that's catching on with troons; it's no wonder a good amount of the suicidal ideations skyrockets after GRS.

As for the "euphoria" or "high" of HRT; it's bullshit, pure psychological placebo. I've been on HRT for about 6 years and not once has there anything close to a euphoric feeling. At most, you accidentally jab a nerve and your thigh is sore for a couple days, that's it. Beyond that, any trans person claiming that they can actually feel their body accepting the "right" hormones or that they get high from their HRT is regurgitating Kevin Gibes level of copium and AGP.

 

[murph]

As for the "euphoria" or "high" of HRT; it's bullshit, pure psychological placebo. I've been on HRT for about 6 years and not once has there anything close to a euphoric feeling.

If you are a "male to female" troon it is not "replacement" nor is it "therapy". It's cross sex hormones that were never meant to be in your body. Obviously there will be adverse effects.

 

[Shturman]

If you are a "male to female" troon it is not "replacement" nor is it "therapy". It's cross sex hormones that were never meant to be in your body. Obviously there will be adverse effects.

It's a pros vs cons situation; what are you willing to lose for the things you want to gain? The hormones will change your body and will cause issues down the line as you age, but some of the changes it causes your body give a psychological peace of mind, and for some people, it's enough. I'm content with the decision I made years ago as an adult and I've taken steps to alleviate the negative effects that the hormones can cause; that's all a trans person who's competently made the decision to start hormones really can do.

The belief that hormones are some sort of magical ne'er do wrong potion is imbecilic at best and intentionally misleading at worst, and troons with their heads stuck firmly up their ass about the negative aspects of being trans is one of the major reasons the trans community is eating itself alive and sucking it's own dick in a fetishistic ouroboros.

 

[murph]

It's a pros vs cons situation; what are you willing to lose for the things you want to gain?

You will never be a woman.

The hormones will change your body and will cause issues down the line as you age,

Age has nothing to do with it. Your body is not female and the hormones will fuck you up.

but some of the changes it causes your body give a psychological peace of mind,

The only true peace of mind comes with accepting your own body.

that's all a trans person who's competently made the decision to start hormones really can do.

Anyone who decides to destroy their own body can not be called mentally competent.

'the trans community is eating itself alive'

Not fast enough.

You need competent talk therapy, I am sorry the medical establishment thoroughly failed you. The only way you'll ever approach happiness is by accepting your body as it is, as you were born.

 

[m1ddl3m4rch]

It's a pros vs cons situation; what are you willing to lose for the things you want to gain? The hormones will change your body and will cause issues down the line as you age, but some of the changes it causes your body give a psychological peace of mind, and for some people, it's enough.

No insurance should cover elective cosmetic surgeries or hormone therapies. Medical resources are finite, and they're not intended for beauticians unless you can afford it.

I'm content with the decision I made years ago as an adult and I've taken steps to alleviate the negative effects that the hormones can cause; that's all a trans person who's competently made the decision to start hormones really can do.

Who is paying for the hormones? Insurance?

The belief that hormones are some sort of magical ne'er do wrong potion is imbecilic at best and intentionally misleading at worst,

Gee, why would hormone salesmen be intentionally misleading

and troons with their heads stuck firmly up their ass about the negative aspects of being trans is one of the major reasons the trans community is eating itself alive and sucking it's own dick in a fetishistic ouroboros.

The problem with this line of thinking is that there's no such thing as a sane tranny. Trans is insanity.

 

[Mellow Malevolent]

See, this is where I get stuck. I knew someone, haven't spoken to them in years, who went through GRS (but we called it SRS at the time), and for them is was a question of doing the change or possibly attempting suicide again. And in that specific instance, where there is that level of psychological distress, I can see the medical community allowing GRS as a form of cope. But it doesn't seem like you could ever call that a good outcome. It's more like a stopgap measure.

It seems like gender dysphoria is a specific subtype of body dysmorphia disorder that (at least based on self-reported outcomes) might respond better to cosmetic surgery than most types of BDD. Because in most BDD's, cosmetic surgery is not effective for the majority of people in alleviating their symptoms, but from the studies that I've seen, for trans women in particular, while the overall risk of suicidal ideation and suicide is higher even after GRS, the longer someone has been living with the surgical alterations, the more they report satisfaction with their bodies, and decreased levels of anxiety and distress. So there's obviously a potential benefit, absent any other possible treatment. However, part of me, again thinking of other body dysmorphias, wonders why exposure response and other forms of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy are not presented as the first option. Those report much a higher rate of positive outcomes in normal dysmorphia, so I'm very curious why this wouldn't be the case with gender dysphoria. And I literally can find almost no studies on CBT for transgendered individuals. There is even literature reviews that say that it's basically nonexistent right now.

So, it's hard for me not to look at this is a case of the rhetoric surrounding trans issues obfuscating potential solutions. And this is where I feel like there's a problem with the way the concept of gender identity has been normalized in society.

Spoilering the rest of this because it's a big wall o' text that only interested people need to read.

---

Spoiler: Gender Non-conformity Sperging

On a theoretical level I understand how something like a trans identity could come about. Obviously gender is a combination of both biological realities and arbitrary “cultural” practices. But I think a mistake people make is assuming that because gender practices exist purely as cultural cues, with no biological foundation, there isn’t a biological component to identification with gender roles.

A thought exercise that I've had: Particular languages don’t have any biological foundation in the brain, but the ability to learn and process language is a function of the brain rooted in its biology. And there are certain language rules that people learn inherently without even realizing it. Why is it that the “Big Green Dragon” sounds correct to an English speaker, but not the “Green Big Dragon”? There’s a specific order to how adjectives work in English, the order force of adjectives: opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose. But it's not a grammar rule that native speakers have to be taught, instead we intuit it as we are first learning the language as children. It's one of those language specific things that is hard for non-native speakers to learn, especially when it's often never verbalized. Similarly, I speak French, and I struggle with explaining to a non-native French speaker how I know that house is feminine, but pen is masculine. So human brains absorb rules without deliberate conscious teaching needing to be a factor.

So I can conceive of gender roles existing in that same way, a package of ideas and behaviors, a gender "language", that you are absorbing as a child with no conscious awareness of the process, as part of normal neurodevelopment. And as part of the normal variance in human biology/neurology, sometimes people don't absorb the gender language of their associated biological sex.

But this accounts for gender nonconforming behavior, which seems to be different from gender dysphoria in modern trans rhetoric. One thing that gets me is that a lot of children display gender nonconforming behavior, and the majority of them do not grow up trans. It's a much better predictor of being gay.* And there's been a big push to accept people for their gender variant behavior, which makes sense. Being interested in behaviors that aren't linked to your birth sex obviously isn't a problem, and people shouldn't be shamed for it. I don't think that's controversial. And historically there are plenty of cultures that had third gender categories that were basically people living as the opposite gender, on a purely societal level. Obviously acceptance varied, but if we were to conceive of a modern third gender category, that would be people who we acknowledge are not biologically male or female, who have adopted the broad social roles of the other gender/sex. That would to still take time for people to get used to, it would be an ongoing process, but it seems fundamentally more workable conceptually, then this push to pretend that trans people are exactly equivalent to their cis counterparts, and that cisgendered people are not the default. Because it's this absolute negation of biology and the simple truth of the default nature of cis heterosexuality that seems absurd to most people.

*though obviously there are people like @Totallyunknown who just have what we would consider gender variant interests. And there are gay people, like myself actually, who more or less follow normal gender presentation rules (I'm a very tall bearded man).

Spoiler: AGP Sperging

Then there's the question of AGP. And as much as many people want to pretend it doesn't exist, the existence of AGP provides an obvious explanation for one of the weird statistical anomalies for trans women. This is Blanchard’s transgender typology, and I'm sorry to detractors, but I've never seen a good refutation of it. Trans women who report early gender dysphoria in their lives, who report gender nonconforming behavior in childhood, almost universally are attracted to men. So they are essentially effeminate gay men who are adopting the gender presentation and lifestyles of the gender that they are seeking to fill the sexual role of. If you watch Paris is Burning, you listen to the interviews and the trans individuals in that documentary come off as seeming like they want a normal life of a woman with a straight male husband. This is obviously an impossibility, but to be fair a lot of them were very small and effeminate, easy targets for abuse and exploitation in male centred spaces, gay marriage wasn't a thing, and even stable gay cohabitation was often not an option then. So that's group 1, gay men who present feminine already.

Conversely, trans women who do not report early gender nonconforming behavior or early dysphoria, who transitioned late in life, often after marriage to a woman, will almost always present themselves as lesbian or bi. And this is something like 60% of trans women. There's no explanation for why late onset dysphoria is even possible, if you accept the idea of built-in neurological differences that take place in the womb. And while there is some studies that show that exposure to androgens in the womb, for boys and girls, correlates both with gender nonconforming behavior and homosexuality, there's literally no evidence anywhere that late onset sufferers have increased androgen exposure. I've looked really hard for this, and as far as I can tell no one wants to look into this potential dichotomy, because of accusations of transphobia. This doesn't seem to be the case for trans men, the part of that is probably explained by the fact that biologically, having paraphilia's seems to be linked to having a high sex drive, which is linked to having more testosterone in your system. Women present paraphilias far less often than men do.

And if you assume that late onset trans women are AGP, a lot of behaviors start to make much more sense. This last part here is more anecdotal, but late onset trans women talk like they have a fetish. It just the way they talk about women, the fact that so many of them were married before they transitioned, their desire to access women’s spaces, and their obsessions with a sort of Hollywood version of femininity that ignores the messy reality of being a woman in society. You read the descriptions AGP men write of themselves, and it’s always “the powerful bitch who can walk out on the town and that everyone wants to fuck”, “or the sex kitten that men find irresistible”. That stupid attack helicopter story written by a trans woman that everybody was calling groundbreaking, before the twitter hivemind had it censored off the Internet, did this too: the main character talks about how she didn’t know whether she wanted to be the hot girl she saw or fuck them. So it’s this focus on the power they perceive women to have over others, with none of the drawbacks like harassment, stalking, violence that women have to deal with. And I have noticed that it seems that there is a resentment of women built into this fetish, because AGP trans women are absolutely vicious to their cis counterparts whenever those women don't fall in line, much more than they are to men. It actually reminds me of some of the childish misogyny that you see in some gay guys, but ramped up way, way higher. So it's seriously bothers me that under the guise of gender identity, we are normalizing this particular group of people.

---

The other thing that I sort of want to address is the whole bathroom thing. It is true that a trans woman undergoing hormone therapy will have reduced muscle mass. But it doesn't change the fact that biologically, most men have a physical advantage in upper body strength over women. That's just the effects of testosterone, and that doesn't go away with feminizing hormone therapy, not entirely anyway. Even just differences in physical size obviously have an effect here. So even with postop trans women, there's an inherent potential for risk with trans women entering women's spaces, that there isn't for trans men entering men spaces. But right now the rhetoric is that trans women are women regardless if that they have gone through transition.

Obviously the people on this forum can point out the plenty of examples that there are of men entering women's bathrooms under the guise of the trans identity to creep and prey on women. I know that statistically it's a minority who do this, and that those that do it were not necessarily identifying is trans when they did it. But it doesn't change the fact that there is an inherent asymmetrical risk in the situation, one that reflects the long-standing issue that women do have to fear men when it comes to sexual assault. And I'm sorry, but coming at this from a biological or even in an ethological lens, I don't see how we escape that. Rape is a successful breeding strategy in species in nature. Obviously in human societies, there is a very strong social component to why men do it, it is not a universal behavior, but on a biological level you will never eliminate the risk of it being possible. If we're talking about a true egalitarian society, you have to take into account that there is 49% of society that are inherently stronger and more of a danger to the other 51%. There's not going to be a point where a trans woman doesn't present a potential risk. I don't know how you go about managing that, because bathroom laws are inherently stupid because of the lack of enforceability, but it is absurd to dismiss the concerns of people as transphobic. This is something that human societies have been grappling with forever, you can't just will it away with the statement that trans women are women.

 

[murph]

" wonders why exposure response and other forms of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy are not presented as the first option. "

Because there is a lot of money supporting trans extremism, and any study that might threaten trans validation is shut down immediately.

Dysphoria is real but validating the delusions behind dysphoria is an inhuman way to approach the problem.

Walls of text won't solve it. Getting stuck in your own mind won't solve it. I often hate psychology/psychiatry for making every human emotion into a pathology but I don't think it's completely worthless.

Hating your own body is a mental illness. No one is born in the wrong body.

 

[Mellow Malevolent]

Hating your own body is a mental illness. No one is born in the wrong body.

The more I read on it, the more this feels like the correct answer. I'm trying to come at this with as fair and openminded position as possible, but it doesn't seem to be possible to reconcile the idea of principle of medicine of doing as little harm as possible, and treating based on the needs of the body, and the current state of trans medicine. It's hard to find long term outcome studies in terms of physical limitations instead of reported self-satisfaction, but again, everything I've seen shows long term post-op trans people report many more physical limitations that cis gender counterparts at the same age. It's only on the one metric self-reported satisfaction that the outcomes seem good, but that's also the case for BIID sufferers in those rare cases where amputation does occur, and I just can't accept that that should be considered a good outcome either.

 

[The Silent Perjority]

As for the "euphoria" or "high" of HRT; it's bullshit, pure psychological placebo. I've been on HRT for about 6 years and not once has there anything close to a euphoric feeling. At most, you accidentally jab a nerve and your thigh is sore for a couple days, that's it. Beyond that, any trans person claiming that they can actually feel their body accepting the "right" hormones or that they get high from their HRT is regurgitating Kevin Gibes level of copium and AGP.

Apologies for cherry picking your post shturman but do you ever express these views in your community?
If you go on the Twitter or Reddit hugbox and start talking about this from the perspective of somebody who's actually been doing it for 6 years are you going to be instantly cancelled or screeched at?

I get it that people shouting "Die Troons" get dismissed but I have the feeling you'd get just as much opprobrium for voicing this as they do.
Can there be based discussions relating to transition in the online community?

 

[The Rabbit Holes]

Apologies for cherry picking your post shturman but do you ever express these views in your community?
If you go on the Twitter or Reddit hugbox and start talking about this from the perspective of somebody who's actually been doing it for 6 years are you going to be instantly cancelled or screeched at?

I get it that people shouting "Die Troons" get dismissed but I have the feeling you'd get just as much opprobrium for voicing this as they do.
Can there be based discussions relating to transition in the online community?

I'm not the person you're addressing, but yes and yes:

Online and IRL trans spaces are still massive hugboxes. The only way to get the outcome of "based" discussions if the participants have reached a certain maturity level.

As an example of the lack of maturity that the majority of trans are stuck wallowing in by their own choice:

Spoiler: irl hugbox bullshit

I know a lot of trans at different stages IRL, from post-op to "babies" and am de-transitioned myself. When I decided to detrans without any pomp or fanfare, it immediately became a silent point of contention amidst my trans peer and social groups. I was never consulted for discussion, nor approached privately for conversation. About 80% of the trans peers/social group a year later either did not speak to me and my trans partner, exhibited hostility towards my trans partner for continuing to date me, or slowly cut us out of social events and gatherings- but if confronted or questioned reverted to the typical childish behavior of a trans twitter user to avoid any "real" conflict, resolution, or responsibility: and to maintain the illusion that the community is "accepting".

We/I no longer have these large group of friends. We value our ability to have productive conversation, honest interactions, and our own fucking sanity over literal brainrot.

I think, in answer to some other posts here, this is why Therapy and Maturity needs to always, always take place before Trans is the solution. And why, so often, Trans is picked first. It's easier to attach your problems to a nebulous feeling of detachment, and it invites only "joy" to be told your issues all can be solved with a magic drug.

Maturity requires introspection, honesty, and the will to control yourself and own your actions for the betterment of yourself and others. The majority of people attracted to Trans are seeking the exact opposite of that, and the modern health system now legally caters to munchies.

Sometimes a person can be a mature, fulfilled, and happy trans, but it happens so rarely (because the real desire to present entirely opposite of your sex in a normal, productive way is gentically so rare that people like joan of arc were considered loony and a rare case) that you end up with the sentiment that trans=bullshit because literally every single other fuck out there is a regressive coomer.

 

[Shturman]

I'll go ahead and respond in a single post so that I'm not doubleposting like a newfag.

You will never be a woman.

Age has nothing to do with it. Your body is not female and the hormones will fuck you up.

The only true peace of mind comes with accepting your own body.


Anyone who decides to destroy their own body can not be called mentally competent.

'the trans community is eating itself alive'

Not fast enough.

You need competent talk therapy, I am sorry the medical establishment thoroughly failed you. The only way you'll ever approach happiness is by accepting your body as it is, as you were born.

You're correct; I shouldn't have chalked up the complications of hormones simply due to "age"- to be more accurate, the longer one is on hormones, the more likely that complications will arise.

As for therapy, I sought out a psychological diagnosis when I first realized I was trans so that I could ensure that I actually was within the guidelines for the clinical definition for GID. After the third meeting, he assured me that I was and recommended socially transitioning- wearing different clothes, doing different hairstyles, a more gender appropriate name- to start. The results were immediate and powerful, so I continued down the road with his guidance. If you genuinely believe that my therapist, after the first two meetings where he assessed my mental health and found me in mentally sound of mind, pushed me into transgenderism and purposefully misdiagnosed myself for his own selfish agenda, then I'm going to have to Respectfully Disagree.

No insurance should cover elective cosmetic surgeries or hormone therapies. Medical resources are finite, and they're not intended for beauticians unless you can afford it.

Who is paying for the hormones? Insurance?

Gee, why would hormone salesmen be intentionally misleading

The problem with this line of thinking is that there's no such thing as a sane tranny. Trans is insanity.

I pay for the hormones myself with GoodRX; it's actually cheaper with the coupon than it is through insurance. As for surgery, I find that I tend to agree with you that elective cosmetic shouldn't be covered by insurance- or if it is, it shouldn't just be for gender identity reasons. If a natal woman has fucked-up tits that's causing her immense amounts of mental distress, it should be considered just as "affirming" as GRS to get her breasts reshaped. All or none, and I don't get why "I'm trans so PAY FOR IT" is a good enough reason for exemption.

The more I read on it, the more this feels like the correct answer. I'm trying to come at this with as fair and openminded position as possible, but it doesn't seem to be possible to reconcile the idea of principle of medicine of doing as little harm as possible, and treating based on the needs of the body, and the current state of trans medicine. It's hard to find long term outcome studies in terms of physical limitations instead of reported self-satisfaction, but again, everything I've seen shows long term post-op trans people report many more physical limitations that cis gender counterparts at the same age. It's only on the one metric self-reported satisfaction that the outcomes seem good, but that's also the case for BIID sufferers in those rare cases where amputation does occur, and I just can't accept that that should be considered a good outcome either.

A huge part of being trans that is getting downright ignored is that you have to limit your expectations and deal with the reality of the situation. If you're a 6'3 balding transwoman, you're never going to be able to pull off femininity like the 5'4 petite femboy with long hair that lies down the lane. Managing expectations is absolutely crucial to being content, and it's why so goddamn many are lying to themselves when they give a 5 star review to a botched mess of SRS- facing down the barrel of the reality that they have to live with an excruciating mess between their legs for the rest of their life, the only other option they have is to run the opposite direction and say that everything's fine and that they love the results, it's just like a real vagina/penis! This is not helped by the unstandardized practice of SRS and the growing majority of surgeons that are just in it for the money.

Apologies for cherry picking your post shturman but do you ever express these views in your community?
If you go on the Twitter or Reddit hugbox and start talking about this from the perspective of somebody who's actually been doing it for 6 years are you going to be instantly cancelled or screeched at?

I get it that people shouting "Die Troons" get dismissed but I have the feeling you'd get just as much opprobrium for voicing this as they do.
Can there be based discussions relating to transition in the online community?

@The Rabbit Holes beat me to it but they summed it up very well; any sort of discontent about the community, valid criticisms about the community, or god forbid being honest in situations where it's easier to lie results in a massive screeching slapback. It's far easier to shun and vilify the people questioning you than it is to deal with the actual problem, and it allows you to live in blissful ignorance of reality. It happens time and time again, and it's how you get idiotic hellholes like the Tranch seen as "trans havens".

 

[AnOminous]

I get the desire to get away from the stigma of mental illness, but it seems weird to me that we don't label the condition a disorder, because it is a condition that causes distress, that needs to be addressed medically.

What kind of thing that isn't a disorder requires surgery as a treatment? It either is or isn't a disorder, and if it isn't, it should not be covered by insurance, period. If I'm mad about, say, the shape of my nose but there's nothing actually wrong with it, I don't get a free nose job at everyone else's expense. If a woman is unsatisfied about the size of her breasts, she doesn't get free silicone implants.

So why the fuck are troons entitled to free shit just because they want it when there isn't a medical disorder?

 

[m1ddl3m4rch]

If a natal woman

You're being overly specific here. There are not natal women and trans women, and they're both women. That doesn't work. Women are adult human females. Males have no claim on the word woman. You're just a mutilated male, not any kind of woman. Women don't need to be more specific in their language ('cis,' 'natal') to differentiate themselves from mutilated men who pretend to be women.

If a natal woman has fucked-up tits that's causing her immense amounts of mental distress, it should be considered just as "affirming" as GRS to get her breasts reshaped.

It is considered just as affirming, in that they're both just cosmetic surgeries. Women everywhere are not entitled to boob jobs because they're subjectively discontent with their appearance. Everyone has to deal with their own imperfections.

All or none, and I don't get why "I'm trans so PAY FOR IT" is a good enough reason for exemption.

Because 'transness' is not a proveable condition. You can't test for it, it relies on self reporting. You're having your body cut up or dosed in pursuit of a belief incongruent with reality. You're no more a woman than Stalking Cat was a tigress. And just like him, you'll have to pay for your extreme body modifications out of your own pocket.

 

[Ser Prize]

Getting HRT to cure gender dysmorphia is like getting liposuction to cure anorexia.

 

[Mellow Malevolent]

What kind of thing that isn't a disorder requires surgery as a treatment? It either is or isn't a disorder, and if it isn't, it should not be covered by insurance, period. If I'm mad about, say, the shape of my nose but there's nothing actually wrong with it, I don't get a free nose job at everyone else's expense. If a woman is unsatisfied about the size of her breasts, she doesn't get free silicone implants.

So why the fuck are troons entitled to free shit just because they want it when there isn't a medical disorder?

Right, that's what I have an issue with, because it feels like there's a doublespeak going on. Being trans is both a state where people are experiencing the symptoms of a psychiatric disorder, that they need help from society to correct, but is also an identity, where the individual know their own body and mind best ( like a gay man or lesbian knows their own mind). But the distress is internal and inherent to the trans identity, where it's not in other identities. Somehow the mishmash of these two positions ends up producing a moral statement that it is denying a person's identity to suggest treatments other than transitioning. Like people are saying, it's the one case in society where somehow we believe that the patient is entirely qualified to treat themselves, and suggest their own medical interventions.

@Shturman, I am still skeptical that medical transitioning should be considered a good solution to gender dysphoria, but at least in your case you pursued it through medical consultation. Then the issue becomes more about whether or not the psychiatric industry is providing good treatment. But it's absurd to say that trans people are best position to know what is good for them, when we would actually not accept this logic for any other psychiatric disorder producing the same level of distress. It can't both be something that needs to be corrected, and something inherent that doesn't need to change it all.