- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "Gender affirming healthcare"
Posted on 7/19/23 at 12:52 pm to HoopyD
Posted on 7/19/23 at 12:52 pm to HoopyD
quote:
If the argument is gender does not necessarily correlate with a person's sexual organs, then why is a surgery to alter the sexual organs to match the person's self-identified gender considered "gender affirming"?
I think about that question as well. There are some trans folks that seem to be ok with simply identifying as being nonbinary, gender fluid or identifying as a gender that is opposite of their sex without under going surgical or hormonal transition...or they limit it. Perhaps they dont suffer from the dymorphia as others do and its just how they choose to identify themselves.
The concept that gender and sex are separate and gender is just a social construct makes sense to me. Its not a new concept either and cultures have accepted this concept through out history. It does make me wonder if we were more open and accepting of those that identify as the gender opposite of their sex if we would see less cases of dysmorphia (am I using that term right?)and in turn see less of a desire to surgically alter themselves.
2
Posted on 7/19/23 at 12:58 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:I think you are saying that recognizing gender as a spectrum rather than a binary choice might make fewer people feel a need to shoehorn themselves into one of the two binary choices.
It does make me wonder if we were more open and accepting of those that identify as the gender opposite of their sex if we would see less cases of dysmorphia (am I using that term right?)and in turn see less of a desire to surgically alter themselves.
You may have a point.
Posted on 7/19/23 at 1:35 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
The concept that gender and sex are separate and gender is just a social construct makes sense to me. Its not a new concept either and cultures have accepted this concept through out history.
It is a new concept and cultures have not accepted this concept throughout history.
John Money is pretty much universally regarded as the first person to separate the two in 1955. Then 2nd wave feminists in the 1960s and 70s popularized the idea among the general public.
All of the "Two-Spirit," "Sekrata," "Hijra," nonsense is propaganda. If you actually look into those things you will not find what we think of as a "transgendered person." You will find descriptions of eunuchs, people who emphasize that they have both masculine and feminine personality traits or spiritual traits, gay or bi-sexual people, etc. But you will not find evidence that other cultures recognized a male as a female or a female as a male, which is what we're trying to force everyone to do and which is essential to the claim that sex and gender are entirely separate.
Just the fact that these cultures had different names for whatever group is being discussed is self-evident proof that they did not view this question the way it is being framed today.
They didn't say that their word for "man" or "woman" applied to anyone who claimed it, regardless of any other characteristic they might have had. They looked at the characteristics and created a new word to describe that set of characteristics.
What we called a gay, masculine woman or feminine, bisexual man, for example, they had other names for.
Those are not "additional genders."
This post was edited on 7/19/23 at 1:40 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News