Keffals - Comment #5,957,986

It's muh freeze peach to be a shithead to people I tell you what!

As a disclaimer I don’t support the moron this article is about
that being said, as you are not a doctor of psychology your opinion on the matter doesn’t have any weight

You don't know what free speech means, do you?

Then no one can have a public opinion on any matter unless it's within their field of expertise.

I used to believe in it myself, but it all made less and less sense the more I thought about it. The idea of sexed brains is ridiculous, given how malleable brains are (a study of taxi drivers showed that their job gave them distinct brain structures.) There are only three reproductive functions: bearing children, siring children, or neither. The fact that these people cannot accept themselves and believe themselves to have an essence contrary to their bodies displays a sort of ideological indoctrination.

???
The part about malleable brains should highlight the fact that we don't fully understand how the brain works. Yes, people can be products of both nature and nurture. I also think it important to highlight that the idea of just scanning someone's brain to "prove" they are one gender or the other isn't something that the literature supports given the wide range of variation of traits in people, even if exclusively looking at those who are cis. However, this feels like trying to determine what software is on a system based only on physical examinations of the computer and actively ignoring anything in the interface itself.

Yeah, ideological indoctrination explains why it was never a thing before it was widespread, oh wait
I don't see how you can't accept sexed brains when you jsut stated brains can have distinct structure

Well you can have an opinion, but saying something is definitely real or not is what the experts decide, and if you are against their consensus you really need a scientific reason to be

Opinion has no weight =/= you cannot have an opinion.

Random person on the street can have the opinion the moon is literally made of cheese. One should not take that opinion as having the same weight as a geologist, astronomer, or astronaut that says it isn't.

Yes, there have been times in the past where experts were shown to be incorrect and "non-experts" more correct. Any good scientist will tell you if something cannot be overturned with new evidence then it isn't science. The problem is, most of the people touting how experts can be wrong are those with a specific agenda and deliberately refuse to become versed in the existing body of knowledge even for the purposes of understanding how and why the current paradigm is the way it is.

It doesn't help that moleman has a long history of bad interactions on the site.

The taxi driver brains were distinct in the context of the study, with the differences being still relatively small. The point being that our daily lives shape our brains and thus unreliable for telling the sex of an individual.
Transgenderism is a product of the Twentieth Century from the likes of Magnus Hirschfeld and John Money. Third genders are what Westerners label as "transgender", despite those things being separate concepts. Third genders came about in societies with strict notions of male and female, with said people often just being homosexuals (like the Kathoey of Thailand and Hijras of India) After all, the top countries for sex reassignment surgery are the super progressive Thailand and Iran.

Sex has always been about reproductive structures, as they have a large impact on our physiology. Women's pelvises are quite distinctly shaped, while women often must work hard to overpower relatively-inactive men.
Human brains are not computers and are shaped by daily activity. Furthermore, looking for physical evidence and weeding out all other explanations is how science works. Even then, one can resolve the issue with psychotherapy and a less rigid notion of male and female.

???
I don't understand exactly the relevance of the first two sentences in the context of my post.

Yes, human brains are not literally computers, the point is rather to be an analogy. If one limits the information solely to that which can be easily viewed and assume that the rest is irrelevant, then you are setting yourself up to miss something. The history of science is full of examples where how we assumed the universe worked fundamentally changed because our abilities to see it, either directly or indirectly changed as well. Try explaining germ theory centuries before microscopes, that the sun is the center of the solar system a millenia before Galileo. The technology of today does not appear to show a consistent indication that all of this topic can be shown in purely physical scans. Is this because said differences do not actually exist because humans are diverse? Is it that the technology is not far enough along but might be in the future? I didn't mean to come across as if we should just throw up our hands and give up, but there seems to be the implication from you that if we can't show it now, then the answer must be settled.

I definitely am more than fine with a less rigid notion of male and female. However, and maybe I'm misinterpreting this, you appear to be suggesting that trans individuals can have their issues "resolved" by means solely of psychotherapy. While I would recommend anyone who feels they are trans to seek out psychological help, I'm interpreting you post as saying that this is where assistance ends, and the goal is to :stop them from thinking they are trans". Apologies in advance if I am horribly misinterpreting the intention here.

It's more akin to the lobotomy, which had lots of literature backing it and people hailing the procedure a "revolutionary." It really is just a way to further commodify bodies. The top countries for sex reassignment surgery are Thailand and Iran, which are just bastions of progressivism. It's all nonsense.

Because it is all in their heads. Accepting one's own body is far healthier than undergoing cosmetic procedures that cannot be completely reversed, but that doesn't bring in the big bucks for the healthcare industry. Sorry that promoting body positivity is bigoted. I would also encourage less sex-based segregation of prepubescent children to help them understand each other better, but I would rather not prattle on too much and continue this pointless argument.

Magnus Hirschfeld was a hero and John Money's theories have nothing to do with the most commonly accepted definition of gender. He felt gender was something you can condition into someone, most people nowadays believe it's something innate. In fact, what happened to David supports our side than your side. David knew he was a boy deep inside, regardless of what his parents or his doctors said. It was a matter of instinct, inherent to his very being. That suggests there's something innate about gender identity, although we don't quite know what that is yet.

Also, John Money didn't even come up with gender identity, he just popularized it. That honor goes to my boy Robert J. Scholler, who despite some of his theories being a little oddball from a modern standpoint, never mutilated a fucking child. John Money's work is now universally shat on by any sexologist worth their salt, rightfully so.

Finally, I don't wanna bring my personal life into this, but I feel I have to. All people who were lobotomized were left completely mentally disabled. Meanwhile, transitioning has greatly improved my quality of life. I'm more confident, I'm more outgoing, I'm more comfortable, and there's so many out there who are the same way. Sorry, but "accepting our bodies" is not something that can be done. It's like making a gay person try to be straight. It doesn't work, and it's wrong.

Hey listen, if you want to continue this discussion with PMs and are willing to have have this conversation in good faith, I can go into depth on the experiences I know others have had as well. I do think we as a culture should, and indeed gradually are moving towards more acceptance of diversity in both who people are and how they are shaped, both in terms of how society views people and how people view themselves. Personally I never felt that sex based segregation was particularly in my past, though everyone's experience is different and perhaps I didn't recognize it where it was present.

"I would rather not prattle on too much and continue this pointless argument."

Oh, okay…

Except Robert Stoller was influenced by John Money (who is still respected by sexologists), and blamed mothers for gender dysphoria. Like it or not, Money's work is still foundational to Trans identity. Magnus Hirschfeld was a eugenicist who still pathologized homosexuality despite his good intentions. Case studies like that David guy are glorified anecdotes, with much of it being opinions instead of material evidence of said instinct.
One is beyond saving if one believes having cosmetic procedures done to conform to one’s feelings is equivalent to sexual preferences. Incidentally, sex reassignment surgery is often used to combat homosexuality (particularly in Iran).

You can claim victory in this quarrel, for I really don’t like pointlessly arguing with Internet strangers.

that is in fact the literal definition of free speech.
I mean you're using that ability right now to be less than polite.