Caitlyn Jenner

Black Dog · June 4, 2015

This statement is clearly false. You can infer from the data that SRS is not a "cure" since the data shows problems clearly persisted long after the SRS.

This strawman again? No one has suggested it is a "cure."

You could possibly argue that SRS is better than nothing which would make SRS a clinically "effective" treatment. But it is not a "cure". [/size]

Which I have every time this subject has come up. As the study concludes:

This highlights that post surgical transsexuals are a risk group that need long-term psychiatric and somatic follow-up. Even though surgery and hormonal therapy alleviates gender dysphoria, it is apparently not sufficient to remedy the high rates of morbidity and mortality found among transsexual persons. Improved care for the transsexual group after the sex reassignment should therefore be considered.

It's also worth keeping in mind that this study would cover people who would have had SRS as far back as 1989, a time when the social conditions and treatment options available would have been far less advanced.

Hal 9000 · June 4, 2015

Ya know, If those dudes figure out the whole head transplant thing, we could have have a male and female swap heads and solve 2 transgender cases at once.

WestCoastRunner · June 5, 2015

We've already been over this. No homosexuals aren't "mentally ill" but one cannot deny that an error in the brains wiring exists.

And this archaic thinking is precisely why other countries continue to deny them their human rights and kill them on the spot. I'm glad you are not a govt decision maker in Canada.

WestCoastRunner · June 5, 2015

Ya know, If those dudes figure out the whole head transplant thing, we could have have a male and female swap heads and solve 2 transgender cases at once.

Very profound and thanks for contributing.

Smallc · June 5, 2015

And this archaic thinking is precisely why other countries continue to deny them their human rights and kill them on the spot.

Yes, thinking of them as different and equal is so dangerous.

Shady · June 5, 2015

And this archaic thinking is precisely why other countries continue to deny them their human rights and kill them on the spot. I'm glad you are not a govt decision maker in Canada.

I don't know what you're talking about. You're denying science. But I never suggested denying them human rights. Your comment is nonsensical.

On Guard for Thee · June 5, 2015

I don't know what you're talking about. You're denying science. But I never suggested denying them human rights. Your comment is nonsensical.

What science is that I wonder...

WestCoastRunner · June 5, 2015

I don't know what you're talking about. You're denying science. But I never suggested denying them human rights. Your comment is nonsensical.

By stating that an individual's brain is wired incorrectly is setting them apart from society in general, resulting in them being treated differently than you or I. What makes you so special that you can judge them differently?

WestCoastRunner · June 5, 2015

Yes, thinking of them as different and equal is so dangerous.

Equal? Are you sure about that?

poochy · June 5, 2015

Yes, thinking of them as different and equal is so dangerous.

Well, i agree with your general view point, but maybe pointing this out just isn't as important as preventing the possible harm that comes from pointing it out. The world isn't as enlightened as we would like it to be.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

That's not my question. Is the onus on the Trans gender man or woman to disclose their sex of birth before even attempting to enter into a personal relationship?

You want a simple answer to a complicated issue. It doesn't matter what you or I think. All that matters is the individuals in the relationship. To me, it's a strange question. It's like asking if a man with a micropenis should have to disclose that to a woman he's interested in ahead of time. It's a bizarre fixation on genitals, when there's more to a relationship than sex. However, I'm assuming that a transgender woman or man probably wouldn't get to the point of being comfortable enough to sleep with someone and not let them know. But I don't understand this whole idea of "onus" as if there's some sort of responsibility there.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

If one decides to raise a family I think it would be a good idea. A man who turns into a woman won't ever have children.

That's completely wrong. There's nothing stopping a transgender person from having children, given that they haven't had gender reconstruction surgery.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

This response shows you're simply not to be taken seriously on this. Do you understand the correlation isn't causation and that there's a great many other factors that could contribute to the higher rate of suicide? Do you understand that a better control group would have been to compare outcomes to a group that didn't undergo SRS? Of course you don't: you're blinded by your inexplicable distaste for these people and will disregard any evidence that doesn't support your baseless bigotry.

Haven't you noticed that this is a common tactic employed here? When there's research, facts, and evidence that show certain posters to be wrong, they simply throw their hands up and claim the research is biased or politically motivated, in other words lying about their claims. These posters positions can't be falsified and therefore nothing is even worth arguing with these people.

Shady · June 5, 2015

By stating that an individual's brain is wired incorrectly is setting them apart from society in general, resulting in them being treated differently than you or I. What makes you so special that you can judge them differently?

It's just acknowledging reality. But I never said anything about treating them differently. There's no reason to.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

It's also worth keeping in mind that this study would cover people who would have had SRS as far back as 1989, a time when the social conditions and treatment options available would have been far less advanced.

It's also possible that transgender people who go through surgery are the most severely affected by dysphoria and possibly social situations where they've been abused and oppressed. They may be the ones who have the hardest time adapting without surgery and therefore more likely to commit suicide. We just don't know. But TimG wants to make the claim that reassignment surgery causes suicides because TimG doesn't have a very good grasp of science.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

Yes, thinking of them as different and equal is so dangerous.

Yeah, calling them "mentally ill," "defective," "wired incorrectly," "abnormal," etc. are all things that scream "different but equal" and not at all stigmatizing. :rolleyes:

Canada_First · June 5, 2015

Yeah, calling them "mentally ill," "defective," "wired incorrectly," "abnormal," etc. are all things that scream "different but equal" and not at all stigmatizing.

Is it your position that wanting to change ones sexual gender identity is a normal behaviour?

Shady · June 5, 2015

Yeah, calling them "mentally ill," "defective," "wired incorrectly," "abnormal," etc. are all things that scream "different but equal" and not at all stigmatizing.

Like I've already said, it's a mistake to refer to homosexuality as an illness. But it's just acknowledging biological and scientific reality when understanding that a male brain is not suppose to be wired in such a way as to be attracted to the same sex. It doesn't mean it's wrong if one is.

Smallc · June 5, 2015

Well, i agree with your general view point, but maybe pointing this out just isn't as important as preventing the possible harm that comes from pointing it out. The world isn't as enlightened as we would like it to be.

You're probably right, but, I've never been scared of reality.

Smallc · June 5, 2015

Like I've already said, it's a mistake to refer to homosexuality as an illness.

I would agree, and I mistakenly used the term earlier. I'm not sure how acknowledging that someone's mind is wired slightly differently (they obviously are - and it isn't just homosexuals that are wired differently from what would be the baseline) is offensive when you don't want to treat them any differently.

TimG · June 5, 2015

This strawman again? No one has suggested it is a "cure."

Yes they do: any time they try to argue that gender disphoria is not a mental illness that needs treatment. Or anytime they reject arguments that surgical interventions should be the strongly discouraged (especially in minors).

I know you play a cute game where instead of acknowledging the points I raise you say they don't matter because no one argues what I claim. And when I provide evidence of people arguing what I say they argue you try to pretend they should be ignored because they are "exceptions" that no one is really arguing that.

The fact is many people in media talk like sex changes are no big deal and they should be treated like changing a pair of socks. They do not treat gender disphoria for what it is: a serious psychological problem like addiction, bulimia or anorexia.

cybercoma · June 5, 2015

Yes they do: any time they try to argue that gender disphoria is not a mental illness that needs treatment. Or anytime they reject arguments that surgical interventions should be the strongly discouraged (especially in minors).

I know you play a cute game where instead of acknowledging the points I raise you say they don't matter because no one argues what I claim. And when I provide evidence of people arguing what I say they argue you try to pretend they should be ignored because they are "exceptions" that no one is really arguing that.

The fact is many people in media talk like sex changes are no big deal and they should be treated like changing a pair of socks. They do not treat gender disphoria for what it is: a serious psychological problem like addiction, bulimia or anorexia.

You want to see how your logic works. Here's my reply to everything you post from here on out.

"Everything you're saying is politically biased and false. You have an agenda, so your arguments aren't worth listening to."

See how that works?

Except you're saying it about scientific research that's based on fact-finding and evidence. I'm saying it about your unsubstantiated opinions, which actually are biased. That's the difference.

Black Dog · June 5, 2015

Yes they do: any time they try to argue that gender disphoria is not a mental illness that needs treatment. Or anytime they reject arguments that surgical interventions should be the strongly discouraged (especially in minors).

Doubling down on the strawmen eh? Good luck with that.

I know you play a cute game where instead of acknowledging the points I raise you say they don't matter because no one argues what I claim. And when I provide evidence of people arguing what I say they argue you try to pretend they should be ignored because they are "exceptions" that no one is really arguing that.

When have you done that? The next time you do would be the first.

The fact is many people in media talk like sex changes are no big deal and they should be treated like changing a pair of socks. They do not treat gender disphoria for what it is: a serious psychological problem like addiction, bulimia or anorexia.

Even if this is the case (which again, is unproven): so what? The media isn't the medical profession.

Black Dog · June 5, 2015

Like I've already said, it's a mistake to refer to homosexuality as an illness. But it's just acknowledging biological and scientific reality when understanding that a male brain is not suppose to be wired in such a way as to be attracted to the same sex. It doesn't mean it's wrong if one is.

Why? It's a defect, unnatural, an "error" etc etc.

BC_chick · June 5, 2015

So Bruce Jenner has come out by posing on the cover of Vanity Fair. Is this a publicity stunt? I don't think so. I say, Kudos to Bruce. He has done a lot to bring attention to the trans gender community given his olympic gold medal and his life with the Kardashians. Millions of people know him and can identify with and maybe have empathy for his/her situation.

Should Bruce/Caitlyn capitalize on these reality shows? Maybe so, as long as Caitlyn is strong enough to deal with it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/02/business/media/jenner-reveals-new-name-in-vanity-fair-article.html?_r=0

I'm not going to get into the thread-drift debate here, but I will address the OP. I'm very happy for Caitlynn, I think she's beaufitul and I admire her courage. However, it was done in a typical Kardashian manner - all glam and greed - which is a little disheartening.

First the glam. I watched a clip where Bruce and Kim are talking and Bruce 'confesses' to Kim that he stole one of her outfits. Really? A man worth $100million can't afford to buy the same dress? He is stealing clothes from his stepdaughter? And he wants to have 6 closets full of clothes and a 'glam room'?

Personally, I find this behaviour does little to help further transgender causes because it reinforces negative stereotypes. Most people don't understand the difference between transgender and transvestite and Bruce's entire monologue in every clip I watched (albeit not too many) seems to be much more tranvestite-like than it is transgender.

To each their own, but as I said, I don't think this benefits the MTF transgender community in a very positive way.

As for the greed, good grief. I don't think this is a publicity stunt in the sense that it's all fake, but Caitlynn certainly milked it for every last dime. From the start the whole family vehemently denied everything even though Bruce had breasts, nail polish, laser hair removal and a changing facial appearance.

By doing so, they created a media frenzy of is she or isn't she? Then in a perfectly orchestrated manner, she cashed in with the interview and the subsequent magazine spread, carefully making sure that she is not pictured as a woman any time beforehand (which we know never happens when someone is transitioning).

She didn't even pretend to do it for a greater cause by donating a certain portion to transgender organizations, it was all for Caitlynn's personal bank account - already worth $100mil.

It's not like she needed the money or could possibly spend it all so the capitalization was purely for greed.

Then I could go on about how she does not represent transgenders on many of other levels, but I'll stop there.

Edited June 5, 2015 by BC_chick