Would trans people exist if...
Scroll to see replies
@Dandaman1 To challenge what you said the other day (can't remember exactly what, but about me making the distinction between gender dysphoria and the quality of being trans-gender, and that someone could be trans-gender without having gender dysphoria, therefore not having a mental disorder.)
psychologytoday.com says a mental disorder is “A mental disorder is a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress or disability or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-psychology/201307/the-new-definition-mental-disorder Other definitions I found on the Internet agree with this one.
So now, if someone transitioned, and the person no longer felt distress over the misalignment of their "sense of self" and sex, that means they no longer satisfy this definition because they no longer have distress or a disability.
So now, if you just consider them having a mental disorder because they deviate from the norm, then then you must disagree with everything else that deviates from the norm to be consistent morally, otherwise you'd be hypocritical. (An immediate example that comes to mind would be homosexuality, simply because I have debated that often.)
And if you consider them having a mental disorder because you think it's "unnatural" (whether it is or not is to be debated), then you probably/presumably appeal to nature. And if you appeal to nature, you must also believe that things like cannibalism and rape can be good, because they occur without human interference and they occur within nature, and that hospitals for example are bad, because I'm pretty sure they are a direct result of human intervention and interference, they don't occur within nature, therefore they are "unnatural". To think otherwise would be morally inconsistent, and therefore hypocritical.
I don't have these views because I'm some sort of "raging left" or "raging liberal"; I'm not. I only have these views because I like to have a consistent set of view on things, and I like not to be hypocritical.
psychologytoday.com says a mental disorder is “A mental disorder is a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress or disability or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-psychology/201307/the-new-definition-mental-disorder Other definitions I found on the Internet agree with this one.
So now, if someone transitioned, and the person no longer felt distress over the misalignment of their "sense of self" and sex, that means they no longer satisfy this definition because they no longer have distress or a disability.
So now, if you just consider them having a mental disorder because they deviate from the norm, then then you must disagree with everything else that deviates from the norm to be consistent morally, otherwise you'd be hypocritical. (An immediate example that comes to mind would be homosexuality, simply because I have debated that often.)
And if you consider them having a mental disorder because you think it's "unnatural" (whether it is or not is to be debated), then you probably/presumably appeal to nature. And if you appeal to nature, you must also believe that things like cannibalism and rape can be good, because they occur without human interference and they occur within nature, and that hospitals for example are bad, because I'm pretty sure they are a direct result of human intervention and interference, they don't occur within nature, therefore they are "unnatural". To think otherwise would be morally inconsistent, and therefore hypocritical.
I don't have these views because I'm some sort of "raging left" or "raging liberal"; I'm not. I only have these views because I like to have a consistent set of view on things, and I like not to be hypocritical.
Original post by Dheorl
Plenty of people feel uncomfortable in the body they're born in for more reasons than I'm willing to list. If there was no societal construct to go with what junk you had in your pants then there would be nothing differentiating such discomfort from any other sort of body issue.
Read the quote below; it was a part of another post I made.
Original post by Rorschach II
Gender isn't only a social construct; gender has biological bases, and these biological bases give rise to certain social constructs, which are perhaps then unfairly capitalised and built on.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
Original post by Dheorl
Why would it? I'm not aware of any term for "person who doesn't like the fact they have small boobs" or "person who doesn't like that they have dark skin" but these are both things people are willing to undergo surgery for so they feel more comfortable in their body. Should we start calling people who change the size of their breasts "transmammary"?
There isn't a binary to boob size I don't think.
That'd just be body dysphoria (body dysmorphic disorder) or feelings of inadequacy about their boob size, so body dysphoria (body dysmorphic disorder)?
And the skin colour one is also body dysphoria (body dysmorphic disorder.)
I suppose if they felt a dissonance with their black skin colour, and identified as white in their mind/psyche, they could be called transracial? (Already a label out there.)
Original post by Farlan
I know that but what I'm saying is there would probably still be a term for "person who didn't like the fact that they had a penis so now they have a vagina"
we as a species invent terms for everything so while it wouldn't be referred to as transgender it'd still have a specific term beyond just body image issues and it'd probably still be trans-something since the trans part just means 'changed'
we as a species invent terms for everything so while it wouldn't be referred to as transgender it'd still have a specific term beyond just body image issues and it'd probably still be trans-something since the trans part just means 'changed'
Perhaps in this scenario/case there would simply be a different definition to the word "transsexual", to mean that the person who is transsexual crosses the male-female sex binary within their mind/psyche?
Also Farlan, read the quote below; it was a part of another post I made, and I think it's quite relevant.
Original post by Rorschach II
Gender isn't only a social construct; gender has biological bases, and these biological bases give rise to certain social constructs, which are perhaps then unfairly capitalised and built on.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
Original post by Farlan
probably not the breasts part but for the skin colour part you're looking either internalised racism or internalised colourism depending on the scenario, for example a black person who sees white people as superior and wishes they were white is internalised racism. An east asian person with darker skin than what western audiences would consider attractive, wishing they had lighter skin to appeal to said audience, would be internalised colourism.
Also breast surgery could fall under the blanket of transgender for obvious reasons but you're missing the point, there doesn't HAVE to be a term for every specific thing, but society the way it is WILL make a term for the larger demographics because believe it or not "person who wanted to change their genitalia because of body dysmorphia" doesn't really have much of a ring to it
Also breast surgery could fall under the blanket of transgender for obvious reasons but you're missing the point, there doesn't HAVE to be a term for every specific thing, but society the way it is WILL make a term for the larger demographics because believe it or not "person who wanted to change their genitalia because of body dysmorphia" doesn't really have much of a ring to it
I wouldn't consider that internalised colourism, by either the East Asian person or the Western audiences.
1) The East Asian person might want to have a darker skin colour, but doesn't necessarily hold prejudice views towards himself for having a lighter skin colour than desired. Wanting more candidates for potential relationships isn't discriminatory towards himself.
2) The Western audiences aren't necessarily colourist, because I wouldn't consider who you are attracted to a conscious choice; it would be "colourist" if they chose not to have a potential relationship with him because of prejudice, and it's therefore discriminatory. But even in this case it would be wrong to force people to have potential relationships with people they didn't want to; it's kind of like not pro-conscience.
There would still be the general male-female sex binary (bar where the lines are blurred when there's an inter-sex person, but they are in a really small minority.)
Original post by Ladymusiclover
I don't think so.
Read the quote below; it was a part of another post I made.
Original post by Rorschach II
Gender isn't only a social construct; gender has biological bases, and these biological bases give rise to certain social constructs, which are perhaps then unfairly capitalised and built on.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be genetic factors to being trans-gender or having gender dysphoria, therefore continuing the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
There might also be epigenetic factors; factors relating to gene expression. People often confuse the social aspect and the environment, when the social aspect is a sub-category of the environment. There is also epigenetics, gene expression, to account for. Just because there might be no gender roles in society so to speak, the environment (including the social aspect) in which we live would still affect gene expression, epigenetics, which might be a factor to being trans-gender or to gender dysphoria. This would be a largely a non-genetic factor. This would continue the existence of trans-gender people in this scenario.
Original post by Dheorl
Neithet does "person who wanted bigger boobs so they could feel comfortable with themselves" but I've yet to hear a catchy buzzword for that, and I'd bet there's more of those than transgender people.
That's called body dysphoria (body dysmorphic disorder.)
I think they would suffer a lot less. But I'm familiar with transgendered women, and they're always talking about frustration with male social roles a lot more than they're talking about their genitalia feeling wrong. There are a few for whom it's actually a physical sensation of wrongness, but quite a few of them talk in their blogs about what it means to be a man, and how much pressure they feel trying to live up to it. There are cases where they've overcompensated significantly and tried to become wrestlers or join the military.
Original post by jeremy1988
I think they would suffer a lot less. But I'm familiar with transgendered women, and they're always talking about frustration with male social roles a lot more than they're talking about their genitalia feeling wrong. There are a few for whom it's actually a physical sensation of wrongness, but quite a few of them talk in their blogs about what it means to be a man, and how much pressure they feel trying to live up to it. There are cases where they've overcompensated significantly and tried to become wrestlers or join the military.
True I've also mostly heard of trans people having a problem with social roles and have heard less emphasis on biological factors like genetalia. It's always like ...from a young age I didn't fit in with other males/ females I wanted to paint my nails as a boy/ play football as a girl, etc.. When Bruce Jenner transitioned into Caitlin for example, I watched a few interviews on TVs and it looked as if she was more concerned with wearing dresses/doing her hair/ painting nails, all stereotypes/ gender roles associated with women. I haven't heard her address the fact that she felt uncomfortable with her genetalia When she was a man ( or maybe I missed it??). This is the same with a lot of trans stories I've hear of, maybe the biological aspect is just less talked about which led me to question the idea that if gender didn't exist, would trans people cease to exist.
Yo, trans person here to offer their perspective!
Gender dysphoria is (at least in my opinion) the most significant part of being trans. We don't transition just so society will look at us differently (although there's nothing wrong with that being a contributing factor for some) but so we can actually live happily with our bodies. Gender dysphoria can cause suicidal thoughts, desire to self harm, and depression, which aren't exactly symptoms of a healthy person. So as long as your scenario contains (biologically) different sexes there can still be trans people, as people will still be able to feel their body has the wrong sexual features which would lead to symptoms like the ones mentioned above.
However I think the lack of gender roles would cause a large shift in how trans people act and are treated. Some trans people who feel they've had to conform to gender roles in reality wouldn't in your scenario as such restrictions don't exist. The experience of other trans people change much, since we don't all feel restricted by gender roles (for various reasons, such as being indifferent to society's opinion). People may also be more accepting of trans people as they will stop focusing on the breaking gender roles part (which can make many uncomfortable) and instead more on the gender dysphoria part. Although trans people may lose some of their support from people who only care about breaking societal roles and not mental issues.
Overall trans people would still exist, and for the same fundamental reasons, but social aspects would obviously change. Thanks for the interesting scenario to consider!
Gender dysphoria is (at least in my opinion) the most significant part of being trans. We don't transition just so society will look at us differently (although there's nothing wrong with that being a contributing factor for some) but so we can actually live happily with our bodies. Gender dysphoria can cause suicidal thoughts, desire to self harm, and depression, which aren't exactly symptoms of a healthy person. So as long as your scenario contains (biologically) different sexes there can still be trans people, as people will still be able to feel their body has the wrong sexual features which would lead to symptoms like the ones mentioned above.
However I think the lack of gender roles would cause a large shift in how trans people act and are treated. Some trans people who feel they've had to conform to gender roles in reality wouldn't in your scenario as such restrictions don't exist. The experience of other trans people change much, since we don't all feel restricted by gender roles (for various reasons, such as being indifferent to society's opinion). People may also be more accepting of trans people as they will stop focusing on the breaking gender roles part (which can make many uncomfortable) and instead more on the gender dysphoria part. Although trans people may lose some of their support from people who only care about breaking societal roles and not mental issues.
Overall trans people would still exist, and for the same fundamental reasons, but social aspects would obviously change. Thanks for the interesting scenario to consider!
I think there is both gender and sex dysphoria. We blend them because in the current world we experience them as blended. But if gender disappeared, sex dysphoria would still exist. Trans people have different amounts of different types of dysphoria- different things bother different individuals. So I think there'd be less trans people, less people feeling the need to medically transition but still trans people.
Personally, I feel as sure as possible I still would be trans and would have need to medically transition. I don't have an explanation for it (nobody does) but the best way I can explain it is it feels like I have this map of my body in my head. Like a mind vs body intersex condition. Somehow, having a body that doesn't fit my mental map was very distressing. People reading me as and treating me as female never bothered me that much but the existence of my body as it was felt awful. Even if you took away gender, I can't see how I could have had any decent quality of life without medical transition.
Personally, I feel as sure as possible I still would be trans and would have need to medically transition. I don't have an explanation for it (nobody does) but the best way I can explain it is it feels like I have this map of my body in my head. Like a mind vs body intersex condition. Somehow, having a body that doesn't fit my mental map was very distressing. People reading me as and treating me as female never bothered me that much but the existence of my body as it was felt awful. Even if you took away gender, I can't see how I could have had any decent quality of life without medical transition.
Original post by BKS
I think there is both gender and sex dysphoria. We blend them because in the current world we experience them as blended. But if gender disappeared, sex dysphoria would still exist. Trans people have different amounts of different types of dysphoria- different things bother different individuals. So I think there'd be less trans people, less people feeling the need to medically transition but still trans people.
Personally, I feel as sure as possible I still would be trans and would have need to medically transition. I don't have an explanation for it (nobody does) but the best way I can explain it is it feels like I have this map of my body in my head. Like a mind vs body intersex condition. Somehow, having a body that doesn't fit my mental map was very distressing. People reading me as and treating me as female never bothered me that much but the existence of my body as it was felt awful. Even if you took away gender, I can't see how I could have had any decent quality of life without medical transition.
Personally, I feel as sure as possible I still would be trans and would have need to medically transition. I don't have an explanation for it (nobody does) but the best way I can explain it is it feels like I have this map of my body in my head. Like a mind vs body intersex condition. Somehow, having a body that doesn't fit my mental map was very distressing. People reading me as and treating me as female never bothered me that much but the existence of my body as it was felt awful. Even if you took away gender, I can't see how I could have had any decent quality of life without medical transition.
People treating me as female mainly bothers me because it reminds me I am of the female sex, and how much that feels wrong. I wonder if that would still be an issue in the scenario? Even if there are no gender roles they may still distinguish between men and women to some extent, such as different pronouns?
Anyways, you explained it well!
I don't have anything against trans people, because everyone's entitled to make their own choices and so I will always respect their decision and refer to them by the desired pronouns. However the whole concept will NEVER make sense to me as I feel as though it's almost paradoxical. They argue that gender and sex are different and gender is a social construct, which I agree with. But then they go on to say they identify as the same sex (because it's biological) but a different gender yet try and change their sex through hormone therapy etc?!?? Why not change your gender and that's it.
And if gender is a social construct, surely they don't need to conform to it. It seems many trans people go out of their way to bash the whole concept of gender construction yet desperately cling and conform to the stereotype of their desired gender. I knew two trans kids at school and their behaviour was so predictable because they ALWAYS acted out the stereotypes of their desired gender.
I tried my best to explain what confuses me but to go onto the whole thing is way to complex to write out here.
But OP I think there would still be trans people. Because as much as they argue that it's their gender and social roles that they're wanting to change, I feel they really want to change their biological/physical aspects just as much and without gender roles that's all it'll be about changing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
And if gender is a social construct, surely they don't need to conform to it. It seems many trans people go out of their way to bash the whole concept of gender construction yet desperately cling and conform to the stereotype of their desired gender. I knew two trans kids at school and their behaviour was so predictable because they ALWAYS acted out the stereotypes of their desired gender.
I tried my best to explain what confuses me but to go onto the whole thing is way to complex to write out here.
But OP I think there would still be trans people. Because as much as they argue that it's their gender and social roles that they're wanting to change, I feel they really want to change their biological/physical aspects just as much and without gender roles that's all it'll be about changing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by TheBlueBiro
I don't have anything against trans people, because everyone's entitled to make their own choices and so I will always respect their decision and refer to them by the desired pronouns. However the whole concept will NEVER make sense to me as I feel as though it's almost paradoxical. They argue that gender and sex are different and gender is a social construct, which I agree with. But then they go on to say they identify as the same sex (because it's biological) but a different gender yet try and change their sex through hormone therapy etc?!?? Why not change your gender and that's it.
And if gender is a social construct, surely they don't need to conform to it. It seems many trans people go out of their way to bash the whole concept of gender construction yet desperately cling and conform to the stereotype of their desired gender. I knew two trans kids at school and their behaviour was so predictable because they ALWAYS acted out the stereotypes of their desired gender.
I tried my best to explain what confuses me but to go onto the whole thing is way to complex to write out here.
But OP I think there would still be trans people. Because as much as they argue that it's their gender and social roles that they're wanting to change, I feel they really want to change their biological/physical aspects just as much and without gender roles that's all it'll be about changing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
And if gender is a social construct, surely they don't need to conform to it. It seems many trans people go out of their way to bash the whole concept of gender construction yet desperately cling and conform to the stereotype of their desired gender. I knew two trans kids at school and their behaviour was so predictable because they ALWAYS acted out the stereotypes of their desired gender.
I tried my best to explain what confuses me but to go onto the whole thing is way to complex to write out here.
But OP I think there would still be trans people. Because as much as they argue that it's their gender and social roles that they're wanting to change, I feel they really want to change their biological/physical aspects just as much and without gender roles that's all it'll be about changing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I don't know what trans people you've spoken to, but it's worth keeping in mind we don't all have the same views, in fact many of us disagree. In my opinion sex is what sexual characteristics you have, such as chromosomes and genitalia, while gender is how you psychologically relate to your sex and how you identify. I suppose gender is constructed in the way it's psychological, but that doesn't make it non-existent: language is a social construct, but that's pretty real. The reason trans people want to 'change' their sex (although that's actually impossible, currently one you cannot truly transition to the other sex, although you can change your body to be closer to the other sex) is to lessen "gender dysphoria". Gender dysphoria is when you feel your sex just feels wrong- often knowing it's illogical, but one can't help but just look down at their sexual features and feel they're wrong- which can lead to symptoms like suicidal thoughts, depression, and self harm. Social transition can be done for a variety of reasons: it helps society accept you changing your body; pronouns and name for your birth sex remind you of the body you hate; you don't enjoy the gender role that corresponds to your sex (although you can defy gender roles without transitioning). As for those who cling to stereotypes for their desired gender, I have no experience with that but I can guess a few explanations: they may be so desperate for societal acceptance that they go to extremes; rigid gender roles may offer security and straightforwardness in times of gender confusion; they might just be idiots. I hope this has helped you understand, feel free to ask me questions.
Gender roles.... well it depends on how deep you think gender roles are created via society. Obviously you have the historic separation of work via gender, however certain things such as young childcaring undertaken by the mother is a natural thing and an advantage. It's still a gender role, albeit one shared by almost all primates.
You could never completely get rid of gender, however Gender Role theory and Transgendered legitimization theories, are in reality, completely incompatible.
You could never completely get rid of gender, however Gender Role theory and Transgendered legitimization theories, are in reality, completely incompatible.
Original post by Tsrsarahhhh
This is something I've been thinking about for a while now, I don't really bring it up in conversations tho in fear of being judged as ignorant so I'll talk about it here. Imagine if we lived in a society with no gender, just the two sexes male and female. There are no gender roles, eg certain clothing associated with a gender or different hair styles or roles associated with a gender, both have the exact same roles and act in the same way, nothing is expected of a person just because of their sex. Males and females are the same apart from biological differences like genetalia etc. Would we still have trans gender people? I know that this type of society is impossible but if it did exist what are your thoughts?
Well by definition no, as if there is no difference on how the external world treats you based on your gender, then there is no reason to be transgender.
Also, all those transgender people always say they changed sex because growing they felt like a girl in a boy;s body, but in this world girls and boys would feel exactly the same, so there'd be no impetus to change sex.
All of this stuff is so stupid. Why can't people just be normal and not do this weird trans stuff?
Original post by swervybang
All of this stuff is so stupid. Why can't people just be normal and not do this weird trans stuff?
I get that you're busy with your GCSEs right now but if you pay attention to the world you'll see it's been getting more progressive and accepting outside of your bigoted mind
Original post by Farlan
I get that you're busy with your GCSEs right now but if you pay attention to the world you'll see it's been getting more progressive and accepting outside of your bigoted mind
I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one
Original post by swervybang
I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one
thinking that trans people are weird is not disagreeing you're just an *******
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
