Aurani wrote:

What the fuck are you talking about, I'm mentally ill and I assure you I'm enjoying it with every fiber of my being. The world would be a much duller place without them.

Same! I mean, i'm autistic and i'm happy about that! I mean I also love stimming and I don't even care if people tell me to stop.

Gabe wrote:

that is a cute thread. if any of you need someone to talk to, hit me up!

I agree lol. And fyi, I wasn't offended by you calling it cute.
-
also open to talking if any of you need it also just gonna throw it out there that a lot of forums i've been to that have threads like this close the threads if it goes into too much depth on the topic and instead post a stickied thread with hotline links all across the world
could be a good idea in the future since most of these threads often derail pretty hard.

I'm gay

Railey2 wrote:

Aurani wrote:

I really think that it's more of the latter than the former. "Transgenderism", as you so aptly named it, existed for almost as long as the concept of society itself, but only now do they really get to voice their opinions due to all the social, technological and political advances in the last 80 years. I really don't think it's some kind of "fucked up social climate" that's causing them to appear "out of nowhere".

i would agree. Transgender people have been around for a long, long time. They were more common in many societies than one might suspect.

Personally, i think western society now undergoes a change similar to the change that occurred when the stigma around homosexuality slowly disappeared. People said the exact same back then: ''it's just a phase, he's just calling himself gay because other people do it'' etc.

to some people that might actually apply, but i expect the ratio between real transgender and wrongly proclaimed transgender people to be tilted in strong favor of the real transgender people.

[citation needed]

Nice historic revisionism. I guarantee that anyone who has had greater concerns about their life than what gender identity to assume hasn't been "born" transgender.

B1rd wrote:

[citation needed]
I guarantee that anyone who has had greater concerns about their life than what gender identity to assume hasn't been "born" transgender.

There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibilty and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.

You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You have to understand that Birdman is extremely biased, but otherwise a very lovely person.

Railey2 wrote:

There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibilty and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.

You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Your problem is that every time I don't agree with you, you go straight to the pejoratives. Yet when I happen to think the same thing as you I am rationality incarnate. Does being patronising boost your self-esteem?

Aurani wrote:

You have to understand that Birdman is extremely biased, but otherwise a very lovely person.

Definitely the first time I've been described in that way.

You know I love you. Definitely worth having a beer with.

B1rd wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibilty and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.

You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Your problem is that every time I don't agree with you, you go straight to the pejoratives. Yet when I happen to think the same thing as you I am rationality incarnate. Does being patronising boost your self-esteem?

You could have said that you believe both to be factors, but expect the balance to be tilted the other way. That would be a fair disagreement.

As i said before: Why can't it be both?
There is no reason to deny either the ''fucked up social climate'' or the ''disappearance of stigma'' as factors that play a role in the rise of transgenderism. The statement i made about the balance of the two certainly isn't set in stone, as it was just a hunch - unsupported by historical evidence, any sort of data or clear cut reasoning. A guess if you will. Disagreement in that department would be more than welcome.

But the statement about the two factors existing and playing a significant role wasn't just a hunch.

i don't have anything against disagreement as such, but it has to be either well founded or it has to be in areas where it doesn't make you look like an extremist tool.



Sure, talking down to others boosts peoples self-esteem. That isn't exactly news to you, isn't it? You've done it before as well, everyone has.



You're not rationality incarnate, you're an extremist who happens to be a moderately good thinker, but turns utterly useless as soon as there is even the tiniest overlap with any of your extreme views. Some of the views you hold are rational, some are not. Sometimes you arrived there by critical inquiry, sometimes you didn't. As a whole, you're certainly not a rational person.

I think there is a confirmation bias towards transgender people. I think they aren't actually that common, it's just that they are mostly centered around 1 place (tumblr, and even there they are a minority) so it seems like there are a lot of them. As i said somewhere else a while ago, i've never actually met one irl.

silmarilen wrote:

I think there is a confirmation bias towards transgender people. I think they aren't actually that common, it's just that they are mostly centered around 1 place (tumblr, and even there they are a minority) so it seems like there are a lot of them. As i said somewhere else a while ago, i've never actually met one irl.

If you knew someone is a transgender irl
They are not a good transgender
Most poeple don't realise till 30years into marriage

anxiety, depression, multiple personality disorder (?)

It depends where you live really. It's common here.

Railey2 wrote:

There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibility and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.

You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Let's be real, this is the theory that most (maybe most?) ppl come up with given some time for thought and is the most logical when you weigh everything else up

Railey2 wrote:

You could have said that you believe both to be factors, but expect the balance to be tilted the other way. That would be a fair disagreement.

As i said before: Why can't it be both?
There is no reason to deny either the ''fucked up social climate'' or the ''disappearance of stigma'' as factors that play a role in the rise of transgenderism. The statement i made about the balance of the two certainly isn't set in stone, as it was just a hunch - unsupported by historical evidence, any sort of data or clear cut reasoning. A guess if you will. Disagreement in that department would be more than welcome.

But the statement about the two factors existing and playing a significant role wasn't just a hunch.

i don't have anything against disagreement as such, but it has to be either well founded or it has to be in areas where it doesn't make you look like an extremist tool.



Sure, talking down to others boosts peoples self-esteem. That isn't exactly news to you, isn't it? You've done it before as well, everyone has.



You're not rationality incarnate, you're an extremist who happens to be a moderately good thinker, but turns utterly useless as soon as there is even the tiniest overlap with any of your extreme views. Some of the views you hold are rational, some are not. Sometimes you arrived there by critical inquiry, sometimes you didn't. As a whole, you're certainly not a rational person.

Thank you, O omniscient one, for giving a comprehensive analysis of my thoughts, how I arrived at them, and how they compare to objective reality which you have a perfect understanding of.

The buzzword of "extremist" has no impact on me. Social consensus shifts radically from one century to the next, unless you think that society is at a philosophical zenith then accusing me of "extremism" does nothing but show you use the bandwagon fallacy as the premise for your correctness.

There is no reason why I should accept the premise that transgenderism is grounded in biological reality rather than being a social phenomenon. You call me an "extremist" because I don't accept something you admit you have no evidence for. Considering there has been no significant presence of transgender people throughout history, even as a "repressed minority group", it leads me to believe that it's just a social phenomenon created by progressivism.

Kisses wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibility and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.

You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Let's be real, this is the theory that most (maybe most?) ppl come up with given some time for thought and is the most logical when you weigh everything else up

most people are idiots, whats new.


the best theory is the one that encompasses all thinkable factors and proposes that the observed result is a combination of everything, with a ratio tilted one way or the other. Reality isn't black and white most of the time. People who deny every factor but one are making the issue out to be much simpler than it is, one of the hallmarks of extremism.

B1rd is a textbook extremist, he's made that abundandly clear many times and he does it here again. Extremists like him will hold very black-and-white opinions.

Look at this for example:

B1rd wrote:

Considering there has been no significant presence of transgender people throughout history, even as a "repressed minority group", it leads me to believe that it's just a social phenomenon created by progressivism.

Here we have a very extreme opinion. He claims that transgender people never had a significant presence, in no society before ours, not even as a repressed minority group.

just one quick google search can convince any rational person of the opposite, but that isn't be the main focus here. Just think about how he worded his opinion and about what he's saying. Can you see the extremism?

To expand on this: The other extremist side would be that there are no social factors at all, that it's all biological and that everyone who claims to be transgender is transgender.
That would be equally stupid and people who spew bullshit like that are usually just wasting everyones time.
in that sense B1rd is not so different from Mahogany, an extremist that's on the opposite side of the spectrum.



When it comes to anything that is even remotely complicated, you'll always have a variety of factors playing into it. When you see someone denying a complete set of factors entirely, it should always raise your suspicions. Especially when its B1rd, lel.

B1rd wrote:

There is no reason why I should accept the premise that transgenderism is grounded in biological reality rather than being a social phenomenon. You call me an "extremist" because I don't accept something you admit you have no evidence for. Considering there has been no significant presence of transgender people throughout history, even as a "repressed minority group", it leads me to believe that it's just a social phenomenon created by progressivism.

i have no evidence for my hunch on the ratio between transgender people that aren't actually transgender (misled by a wide array of social and psychological factors) and transgender people that are actually transgender (biological basis).
i have very good reason to believe that both exist, though.

But honestly, i'd rather end this conversation here. As i said before, talking to you about anything that is even remotely connected to your extremist beliefs is a complete waste of time.

B1rd wrote:

Thank you, O omniscient one, for giving a comprehensive analysis of my thoughts, how I arrived at them, and how they compare to objective reality which you have a perfect understanding of.

But you complain about me being condescending, haha

Did it feel good to talk down to me? Hypocrite, lol.

Railey2 wrote:

But you complain about me being condescending, haha

Did it feel good to talk down to me? Hypocrite, lol.

I made a mockery of your statements, not of you.

You however, have written many paragraphs of text doing nothing but attacking my character, and my very ability to think and reason. You've insinuated that I'm an idiot and an extremist, that everything that I've said is bulshit. You've spent all that text not addressing me, but talking about me in a third person manner as if I'm just a lab specimen of incompatible inferiority compared to you. Don't worry about wasting any more time your time on me, I don't engage with people who demonstrate such profoundly disrespect over nothing but difference in opinion. I was not aware of such an extensive history of transgender people even though I googled it - I see that I stand corrected - but I'm not gonna bother continuing this or any conversation with you unless you apologise for your behaviour.

>when OT migrates to GD

B1rd wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

But you complain about me being condescending, haha

Did it feel good to talk down to me? Hypocrite, lol.

I made a mockery of your statements, not of you.

You however, have written many paragraphs of text doing nothing but attacking my character, and my very ability to think and reason. You've insinuated that I'm an idiot and an extremist, that everything that I've said is bulshit. You've spent all that text not addressing me, but talking about me in a third person manner as if I'm just a lab specimen of incompatible inferiority compared to you. Don't worry about wasting any more time your time on me, I don't engage with people who demonstrate such profoundly disrespect over nothing but difference in opinion. I was not aware of such an extensive history of transgender people even though I googled it - I see that I stand corrected - but I'm not gonna bother continuing this or any conversation with you unless you apologise for your behaviour.

oooh you so you just mocked my statements, but not me, i understand. Well i just talked about how you form your beliefs and how you argue against others, i wasn't being condescending against you as a person.

i addressed you in third person because i responded to Kisses, not you.

i don't think that you're an idiot (far from it actually), and i even said in this thread that you're a moderately good thinker. That's a compliment. But i do think that you're an extremist. An extremist with extreme opinions. No insinuation or 3rd person. You're an extremist.
You already said that you don't mind being called an extremist, so whats your problem? We're good.


Also don't even try to present yourself as the victim here. We've been around each other for the better of two years, you know just as well as me that everything we said in this conversation still falls under the normal sort of neutral aggressiveness that you'd expect to see in any other thread we frequent.
i don't care if you cry about me being a bully and hurting your feelings, you don't have the moral highground here. You rile people up frequently and enjoy it.

i will apologize for calling you an extremist as soon as you figure out how to consistently make balanced arguments. Deal?

Railey stop derailing threads ffs

Tae wrote:

Anxiety and depression...ha...ha...

Second.

I've never visited the doctor but I've been having suicidal thoughts for who knows how long lol.
I've never tried but I have thoughts now and then.
Maybe after I graduate highschool I'll be fine for a while. If uni starts I might actually have to visit a doc

well this thread is 6 pages long and I was reading the first page LOL

This thread isn't about transgenderism. It's about actual mental health issues. Just migrate to pms pls it's not fair to people who don't care about what you both are saying.

my little quarrel with B1rd was definitely off-topic. My apologies.


To make up for that, i think we can find a topical link between our argument and this thread's intended content..


there are many people who see transgenderism as a mental health issue and discriminate against trans people so i guess it's at least a bit topical?

There are basically 3 categories to sort people into, pertaining to their ''condition''. You can see the condition as a

1. character flaw (how B1rd supposedly sees trans people)
2. normal variation of behavior (how the LGBTQ community sees trans people)
3. disease (how the mental health community wants everyone to view mental health issues)

when you're viewed as having a character flaw, you won't receive any sympathy for it and are often treated very negatively - We could see that in Reunilu's case where she was told to grow up and get over it.

when you're viewed as being normal, you will just be treated normally - This is the reality of homosexual people in a modern environment

when you're viewed as having a disease, you will be treated with sympathy - This is the reality of people with schizophrenia or say depression in an environment where their disease is understood and accepted as something that deserves treatment.



When people put you in the wrong category, things can get very messy.


Viewing a disease as a normal variation of behavior
''Ah, you're just sad that happens to everyone''
And the depressed person won't receive anything neither sympathy nor hate - they'll simply be treated normally, which means their issue will be ignored.

Viewing normal variations as character flaws
Discrimination against gay people.

Viewing normal variations as disease
You'll get the fundamental christians that want to cure homosexuality. The homosexuals will often even receive sympathy for their condition, but of course the whole process is still very detrimental because treatment for homosexuality is just a horrible idea for many reasons.


Personally i really like this threefold model, as it enables me to think much more clearly about all the conflict and debate surrounding mental health.

Good thing I am healthy.

Hika wrote:

This thread isn't about transgenderism. It's about actual mental health issues. Just migrate to pms pls it's not fair to people who don't care about what you both are saying.

Yeah, let's return to spamming memes and joking about serious illnesses instead of actually discussing anything. Trans is in the no man's land of illnesses, since it has yet to be officially confirmed as one, so I don't see a problem of discussing it here.

I'd rather listen to them being mongrels than some pseudo-suicidal child. :V

Well then you're gonna get shit from me because I don't think transgenderism is a fucking mental illness

Homosexuality was regarded as a mental illness until public opinion changed and they spontaneously decided it wasn't.

Your opinion doesn't matter, since this thread isn't based on your sole opinion. If two people think it's an illness, what YOU think can't stop them from discussing it, and I have no idea why you'd be so opposed to them doing what they're doing. They aren't ruining the thread, they aren't joking about anything, they aren't insulting anyone, so why not just let them discuss it? I'm not reading what they're writing either, but I'd never tell them to fuck off if they have a valid reason to do what they're doing.

Railey actually offered to move to PMs. But I was complaining about it because it probably didn't seem right to OP but it's whatever, it does mean something when I'm trying to read actual posts here though. I'm more interested in scientifically classified mental illnesses rather than self identity tbh. So I expressed my displeasure.

And actually railey made a full circle and connected it to transgenderism so I'm not really mad about it :p

That's my entire point - you're focusing on what your own opinion is. :p

Stfu narcissist. Contribute to thread loser.

Man you're so bitchy lately.

B1rd wrote:

Homosexuality was regarded as a mental illness until public opinion changed and they spontaneously decided it wasn't.

note that the perception of a mental illness back then and today aren't even close to being the same thing.

The mental disease category back then was closer to the character flaw category from my model (in fact, it way more extreme). Only because they called it a disease doesn't mean that they saw it like we see it.

if you suffered from a mental illness back then you couldn't expect any sympathy and the ''treatment'' would often consist of being locked up in a dank cellar. So much for that.

These practices are still widespread in the 3rd world today. Africa, the middle east, wide parts of india and neighboring countries etc.

Aurani wrote:

Yeah, let's return to spamming memes and joking about serious illnesses instead of actually discussing anything. Trans is in the no man's land of illnesses, since it has yet to be officially confirmed as one, so I don't see a problem of discussing it here.

Dual role transvestism is actually an official diagnosis, it falls in the category of Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental disorders

http://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/ ... F64-/F64.1

Can't really fall to that argument since ICD is under intense pressure for that classification and is currently under revision, so my statement that it's in no man's land holds.

i want to put emphasis on what this thread's purpose was to begin with:

Sentencings wrote:

I wanted to make a thread where people talk here about their mental/behavioral disorders.

Well, I actually do have High-Functioning Autism and Dermatillomania, and heck, I can't even stop talking to myself, either can I even stop scratching my skin.

the icd is always under revision, that's its nature as the official classification manual.

But i don't think that this is an important point to argue. To me it's not no man's land exactly because there is an official statement. Doesn't really matter if its controversial or not.

We can both agree that it belongs in this thread, that's the important part :v

picky picky wrote:

i want to put emphasis on what this thread's purpose was to begin with:

Sentencings wrote:

I wanted to make a thread where people talk here about their mental/behavioral disorders.

Well, I actually do have High-Functioning Autism and Dermatillomania, and heck, I can't even stop talking to myself, either can I even stop scratching my skin.

oh crap, uuh uuuuuuh

g-guys i'm totally .. trans.
You can't prove the opposite!

I don't mean ICD itself, I mean that very classification is under revision.
The reason I hold onto my initial statement is because we could sit here and argue about the validity of an official statement when compared to actual practices "on the field" for years and still be no closer to resolving the situation.

Either way, it belongs here and here it will stay. :p

I just wanna say:

Before you diagnose yourself with depression
Check if everyone around you is an asshole


I'm not joking