Self Identification - where does one draw the line?

All this talk of transgender issues reminds me of this video.

 

Honest question

How are transgenders, or any group of people that deviate from the norm somehow, supposed to get acceptance from the general public if not for media or just being loud in general?

Is this is a "there's too much in the media about X" or "there should be none of X in the media"? Like are you okay with less media attention to this (I mean, media in general is whatever, since ratings are bull anyway. Look at the kardashians, people watch the dumbest Bane Shift).




(I know I've been trolling before, I'm serious now though). Like, if you were a transgender or someone deviating, what would you feel that you would do that would be acceptable to get equal rights or whatever?

 

Hi there, me again. We can test your claim by looking at the correlation between quality of life for a transgendered individual and the general degree of acceptance the group experiences in a given area. Clements-Nolle et al. (2006) found that depression, a history of substance abuse treatment, a history of forced sex, gender-based discrimination, and gender-based victimisation were all independantly associated with attempted suicide [1]. They identify the population as being highly stygmatised, and conclude that increasing social acceptance of the transgender community, and decreasing gender discrimination, would help to significantly reduce suicide attempts.

In a similair vein, Ryan et al. (2010) find that the degree to which a transgendered adolescent's family accepts them plays a large role in their self-esteem and general health, as well as providing generally greater social support for the individual in question [2]. They find that the same correlation is true for LGBT+ youths in general.

Mustanski et al. (2010) looked at Mental Health Disorders, Pyschological Distress, and Suicidality in a diverse range of LGBT+ youths in the U.S.A. [3]. They found that 33% of their sample me the criteria for various mental health disorders, with Bisexuals having the lowest likelihood. This is a higher rate of diagnosis than the national average for youths, but is comparable to the rate of diagnosis for representative samples of both urban, and racial/ethnic minority groups (incidentally, validating the comparison Gerben made from a mental health standpoint).

When it comes to victimisation you're right that transgendered individuals (as well as LGBT+ in general) draw a lot of persecution. Ryan and Rivers (2003) examine the impacts on LGBT+ in both the U.S.A. and the U.K. They identify a pressing need for public policies to be developed regarding LGBT+ individuals, and argue for proactive measures to support their community [4]. It is an old paper at this point, and steps have been taken since it was published, but the 'T' of LGBT+ has not experienced the same degree of acceptance as the rest of the community for reasons beyond my comprehension.

As to the existence of transgendered individuals being down to them possessing a psychological disorder, Meyer-Bahlberg (2010) argues against the controversial inclusion of gender identity variants (GIV's) as mental disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders by the American Psychiatric Association [5]. He points to the widespread professional criticism of the decision, as well as noting that the classification of GIV's as mental disorders is not a conclusion reachable through a purely scientific approach.

So, given I think you'll take the same approach to this post as you did the last one I made in this style, i.e. ignore it completely to keep making your unsupported assertions, I'll include a TL : DR for you this time.

TL : DR - Acceptance and awareness of LGBT+ individuals is highly correlated with increased mental well-being for said individuals. As a population, their mental health is equivalent to those in ethnic minorities or those living within cities. Victimisation should be met with proactive policy making, not hushing the community up. Defining 'Transgenderism' (for want of a better word) as being a mental disorder is something with no scientific basis, and is a conclusion that a large number of professionals argue against.

References:
[1]http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v51n03_04
[2]http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6171.2010.00246.x/full
[3]http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.178319
[4]http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369105011000012883
[5]http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-009-9532-4

 

I have been through a thorough anlaysis on this subject and I have already come to a logical conclusion on the subject. I don't need to grandstand and debate with you silly moronic millennials. Transgender have psychological issues and the liberal progressives have forced this garbage down the throat of the consumers. I am so happy you swallowed this garbage good for you. All your studies prove is that these idiots have perpetuated the same views over and over. Off topic just looks like a virtue signaling libtard sausage party. You guys can circle jerk each other all you want its not gonna change a psychological disorder that causes ppl to think they are a woman when they are a man. I care more about these transgenders than you idiots do. Your just debating to win a debate. Looking forward to the time when braindead liberals will try to justify pedophilia..... lol

 

I do think the general idea of letting people decide for themselves what they are is actually more complex on the political spectrum.

For example, if someone wants to identify as a different race or culture than what they were born, the "left" will attack them for "cultural appropriation" or engaging in racism. Though there are also some other self-identification issues as well.

Of course, part of that problem is cacophony, where the people supporting self-identification might not actually have a problem with that, but the description of "the left" is so broad it also goes up against those people "fighting racism."

Anyway, I know that's not the context you're talking about, but... well, it's at least a slightly more related topic than dead creatures... even if if not as interesting.

 

Then share some of the studies you've read if you want others to reach the same conclusions as you. None of the posts you've made were supported by any actual evidence, and only one included a source other than yourself. Said source was not an expert on the subject, and just happened to have views you agree with. That is not supporting evidence.

You chose to enter a thread discussing transgender politics. You are on a forum populated by gamers, a large majority of whom can be considered 'millenials'. If you weren't expecting to get into a debate with people of that age bracket, I don't know what to tell you.

Not in the sense you mean, see my previous post.

What do consumers have to do with any of this? When did we start to include supply and demand?

You're right that I cannot speak to the quality of the research I've linked to. As I alluded to earlier in the thread, this is not my area of expertise. Which is why I took the time to research it and examine what the current scientific consensus was before making detailed comments. Now, it's possible I've managed to pick out 11 different sets of authors who all happen to be marginal voices in their field. However, they're all pointing to the same conclusion, and they are 11 different sets of authors. The chances of them all being non-representative of the scientific consensus on the topic is sufficiently low that I think it can be dismissed.

If you want to call the people carrying out the studies idiots, that's up to you. However, they are the experts on this, and you are not. No matter how much you might wish that to be otherwise.

I don't even know what virtue signalling is meant to mean, but again, you knew what this thread and sub-forum contained before you posted. You don't get to complain now about what's here when you have contributed.

Not a psychological disorder, see my previous post.

You certainly seem to be bothered about them significantly more, though you've failed to provide an adequate explanation for why.

I entered this debate because you were posting utterly ludicrous nonsense masquerading as fact, and ridiculing those with the decency to allow another human being to determine their own path through life. You are free to speak your mind, on any topic you wish. I will not try and stop you from doing so, and will gladly argue against anyone seeking to limit your freedom of speech. However, you must also be prepared to defend anything you say. Your freedom of speech does not give you freedom from consequences. If you post harmful misinformation because you cannot comprehend somebody having a different outlook on life to you, then I will take the time to research the topic, cite work from respected researchers, and argue you down on every point you make. If you can't handle that, then don't enter the debate in the first place.

Cute false equivalence. I hear minors are consenting adults.

 

I made a science!

two known facts:

• acceptance of transgenders lessens occurance of other psychological problems.
• Profhulk is not accepting of transgenders

Hypothesis
removal of Profhulk will decrease the amount of psychological problems in transgender people.

 

I think this alone shows how void of common sense and humanity your opinion (because that is what it is, an opinion) is. Sort of reminds me of how the Westboro Baptist Church justified their actions towards the LGBT community because they were in their own words 'caring and trying to save them.'

Cease dwelling on the fear of that which you don't know and appeal to your ability to be objective, especially when it comes to the well-being of your equals.

 

Well said, jelly-me