Gender identity: Crazy/delusional?

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Dinosaur, Feb 27, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Glad we agree. The capacity for change accounts for those causes effecting change.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Of course it does Syne. The ability for water to change phases is what causes ice and steam - temperature has nothing to do with it.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Can also be the brain adapting to differing levels of sexual hormones, the internal environment.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    I don't deny the self-reported, subjective sense of identity. Do transgenders have the DNA of a third gender? No. Does the science show them to be born with transgender brains? No. Are social definitions anything but fad (argument ad populum)? No.
    Can be, or has scientifically been demonstrated to be? Sex hormones act on the brain's development in utero, yet we don't have studies showing new born brains predict transgenderism.
    Either you're agreeing too, or not parsing English too well, I see. I just differentiated capacity from cause, but you seem to be insisting on a stupid straw man reflecting nothing that was actually said.
    Here, let me spell it out for you. The capacity of water for phase change (the capacity of the brain for neuroplasticity) accounts for/facilitates temperature (behavior, experience, or environment) causing a phase change (brain structure change). Without the capacity, there would be no accounting for how the causes effect the change. Unless, of course, you prefer magical thinking to science.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  8. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Science has ruled out psychological causes for most forms of transgenderism. Therefore, the cause must be biological. This is often how these things go, it used to be thought that autism had a psychological cause until they could see that autistic brains were atypical. The same thing seems to be happening now.
  9. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Where the science ruling out psychological causes? Are psychological causes the only contributor to neuroplasticity? No? Then how can it be concluded it's wholly biological?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    "Transgender" refers to having a gender identity that differs from one’s sex assigned at birth. "Gender identity" refers to the basic conviction of being a man, woman or other gender (e.g., bigender, genderqueer, gender questioning, gender nonconforming). "Sexual orientation" refers to one’s sexual attraction, sexual behavior and emotional attachments to men, women or both.
    Sounds all psychological to me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    No, you just assigned a causal role to capability. That's a confusion you've been trying to sell for a few pages now.
    It doesn't account for the phase, or the phase change.
    Transgenders have the DNA appropriate for transgenders. Humans are not born with clearly gendered brains at all, as far as anyone knows.

    And you are losing track of whatever argument you were trying to make about gender identity - as we see shortly thereafter:
    Because you forgot about neuroplasticity already, the big word having served its purpose as noise.
  11. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    So in other words a trangender’s sexual orientation is inconsequential to the discussion, and there was no useful purpose in citing Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner as an example.

    Actually the HS wrestler in Texas was a girl transitioning to a boy, and her strength advantage was likely due to her hormone regiment. But even with the increased testosterone, her level was still considered within an acceptable range for competition. So yes, XX women on steroids can have an overwhelming physical advantage over other women in a bathroom or locker room setting. But then again natural women in superior physical condition can have a significant advantage as well.

    You claimed that transgender women with penises to be a threat to other women because of their perceived strength advantage, yet XX women with physical and tactical superiority, and or impaired mental states, can pose a greater danger to other women than a transgender armed with a penis.

    If it’s criminal activity in these setting that worries you, why only focus on a minor aspect of it? Why not screen all female users of restrooms and locker rooms for weapons and intoxication? Maybe post some armed guards as well? Or take an NRA tack and require all women to carry firearms and stand their ground.

    I’d say unisex facilities would be a worthy goal as well.

    Neuroplasticity occurs in the brain throughout one’s entire existence, which includes development in the womb. The brains of trangenders are likely conditioned in the womb to states resembling their perceived genders.

    In a study of 250 genetic females with congenital adrenal hyperplasia who were raised as females, 95% identified as females in adulthood and 5% identified as males or with gender dysphoria, which is at least 10 to 20 times more frequent than in a control population for female-to-male transgenderism.2 "This suggests that prenatal and early postnatal androgens play some role in gender identity development," Dr. Rosenthal said.

    In these cases when gender identity was biologically fixed at birth, subsequent social conditioning afterwards was not a major determinate regarding their eventual gender affinity. So it would be reasonable to assume that transgenders who identify at a young age have been similarly conditioned from birth.
  12. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Straw man, otherwise show where you obviously misunderstood what you were told. You even quoted me as saying "changes to the brain caused by behavior, experience, or environment" in post #135.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You're obviously backpedaling to this straw man because you've been caught misrepresenting the science.
    Without the capacity for such change there is no such change. That's so simple even you should be able to understand it.
    Science denier. Testosterone in utero (comparable to that of a 25 yr old man) very much does differentiate newborn male and female brains. Look it up....or just keep making a fool of yourself with your ignorant and misinformed bare assertions.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Yeah, neuroplasticity changes due to behavior. Or did you already conveniently forget that part?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Or are you claiming all behavior is now biological?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Only if you've so quickly and easily, or conveniently, forgotten that we were also discussing the repercussions in shower rooms.
    You're right, and that trans boy did have an advantage, even over girls in superior physical condition, due to testosterone. So just imagine the advantage she would have over average women, and how much more of a physical advantage a genetic male would have over the average woman. You can't dismiss a greater threat by citing a lessor one....unless you're naive or intellectually dishonest. That's like saying no one should fear bees because I'm not allergic to bee stings. It's garbage as reasoning.
    Bare assertion. Support that claim.
    I always advocate for women to legally arm themselves, as that's the only true equalizer. Genetic men are orders of magnitude more dangerous than any woman, and crime statistics bear that out.
    Including shower rooms....for your daughter? In high schools?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Or are you a predator?

    LOL! So genetic females identified as female 10 to 20 times more than FtM transgenders? That illustrates the strength of genetic sex, even over congenital disorders, compared to average transgenders (with only later-life biological correlates due to neuroplasticity).
    That is a biased conclusion, not supported by the facts. You're talking an obviously cherry-picked example (10 to 20 times more likely to identify as their genetic sex) and generalizing it to the control population it is contrasted with. That is about as backasswards as you can get.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    That doesn't account for the change.
    But as we see, that is not enough to set the gender of the brain of even a young child, let alone an adult after puberty. Hence the thread topic.
    1) Some behaviors and their effects on the brain are biological rather than psychological.
    2) More factors than behavior change the brain.

    So your apparent claim that neuroplasticity is "all psychological" is so clearly false as to imply you overlooked it.
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Actually, the repercussions of forcing transgender girls to do things like shower with adolescent boys have been among the issues front and center in this entire matter, for everybody involved. Suicide rates from bullying, for example, have not been overlooked.
  15. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Although there are statistical correlations of brain structure with gender identification, there is no such thing as a "normal" brain for a particular gender.

    Scans prove there’s no such thing as a ‘male’ or ‘female’ brain
  16. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    That's a sad equivocation. I used "accounts for":
    account (verb) - to furnish a justifying analysis or explanation —used with for couldn't account for the loss
    As opposed to the noun:
    account (noun) - a statement or exposition of reasons, causes, or motives​
    You cannot deny neuroplasticity is necessary to the explanation of such brain structure changes, and since I listed specific causes ("behavior, experience, or environment"), it's clear I differentiated between cause (account as a noun) and explanation (account as a verb). You're obviously just equivocating definitions because you have no argument left.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You're simply ignoring neuroplasticity changes since birth...and the actual science.
    1) And?
    2) And?
    Where have either of those been disputed?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You're a liar. Show me where I said neuroplasticity is "all psychological". Saying transgenderism "sounds all psychological" says nothing about neuroplasticity in general, because neuroplasticity accounts for more than transgenderism. You're basic reasoning skills just really aren't up to the task.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Suicide rates among transgenders far surpass those of any similarly bullied, socially rejected, or even actively oppressed group. So bullying alone does not account for it.
    From that article:
    "The team looked for variations in the size of brain regions as well as the connections between them. In total, the group identified 29 brain regions that generally seem to be different sizes in self-identified males and females."​
    Self-identified means there were no controls for genetic sex. And if you look at the actual study, they don't mention any methodology for determining the genetic gender of the subjects in their datasets. Just sloppy, agenda-driven science.
    And remember, one study is only a finding. It takes many verifying studies to establish a conclusion. But you don't even have to take my word for it:
    In their widely publicized paper, Joel et al. (1) make
    two empirical claims about sex differences in features
    of the human brain: (i)“...internal consistency [in in-
    dividuals’sex-differentiated brain features] is rare”
    (p. 15472) and (ii)theamountofoverlapinsex-differen-
    tiated features of male and female brains “undermines
    any attempt to distinguish between a ‘male’and a
    ‘female’form for specific brain features”

    We argue that claim iis based on faulty methodology,
    and claim ii is misleading if extended to overall sex
    differences in brain structure.

    In regard to claim ii, Joel et al. (1) did not conduct
    analyses (e.g., discriminant analyses) designed to test
    how well various brain features predicted participants’
    Performing such analyses on the data of Joel et al.
    (1), we found that brain features correctly predicted
    subjects’sex about 69–77% of the time (2). Moreover,
    the multivariate overlap of female and male distribu-
    tions based on the same variables was moderate (42%
    on average), and certainly not so large as to invalidate
    the idea of overall sex differences in brain structure.

    As for claim i, the definition of “internal consis-
    tency”Joel et al. (1) use is so extreme that, in realistic
    conditions, it can only generate results consistent with
    their hypothesis.

    Or debunking the "spin":
    And those are just on the first page of Google results.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Where you said it was "all psychological". I quoted you.
    I am specifically pointing to both, to illustrate the falsity of your contention that people are born with clearly gendered brains that match their sex organs. They aren't.
    As is somatoplasticity. And organic chemicoplasticity in general. So?
    Quoted for elegance - it's the comment about reasoning skills that makes it art.
  18. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Trying to ignore facts again?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Not about neuroplasticity. So you lied.
    Science denier.
    Then show science demonstrating comparable changes due to these.
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    The question was: "So?". The context was your sequential claims that
    1) others have been ignoring the problems of trans women showering with people {false, as noted}
    2) bullying does not account for all of the large extra suicide risk run by trans folk {So?}

    Try answering it.
    Yes, about neuroplasticity . That's what you were talking about, or trying to (you still seem to have no idea what it is), and I quoted you.
    You're the guy trying to show changes "due to" (earlier: "accounted for", "caused by", etc) such factors as somatoplasticity, neuroplasticity, chemicoplasticity, and the like - not me. I think you're using big words you don't understand.
  20. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Apparently, the science is inconclusive and/or not universally understood. And,
    as Pascal isn't here to defend himself, I propose a new wager:
    Suppose all or most or some of the people who claim to be other than the gender they appear to be are either telling the truth or deluded - then -
    - accepting them as they claim to be would be an act of tolerance and kindness, prevent some injustice, and do no harm, while
    - denying everyone the freedom to designate their own gender/sex/orientation/self-presentation would be unkind, unfair, bigoted and potentially harmful.
    So, why not just pretend you're okay with it, until you are okay with it?
  21. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Fake it til you make it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Because that would prevent Syne and his wingnut pals from enforcing God's will. Can you imagine? What a travesty it would be - how do you expect the fundies to have equality without superiority?

    Really now...
  22. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Uh, sorry; what was I thinking .... ?

    On the other hand, though, how sure are we that God isn't responsible for all those equivocal gender identities? Or that He can't manage the bathroom question without help?
  23. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Does accepting the delusions of a schizophrenic help them? Is it a kindness?
    Is it kind to enable a lifestyle that overwhelmingly has the highest suicide rate, well beyond that of any other bullied/oppressed group?
    And who is denying their freedom of self-presentation? I've said, repeatedly, that they have always used the facilities of the sex they can pass as, without anyone batting an eye.

    So your "wager" is a false dilemma. We don't have to enable potential mental illness, nor do we have to deny them their free expression.
    Neither of which really inform basically mandating unisex facilities by law.
    Has nothing to do with god and everything to do with rational examination of the available evidence. But I can see why you'd feel the need to stereotype and demonize anyone who might risk putting a crack in your little bubble. The bubble where feelings are more important than facts.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page