How to respond...

[Bernice]

It's not like me to start a new topic here. I've been spending way too much time on Facebook lately. From time to time I come across repugnant or bigoted viewpoints on the whole LGBTQ civil rights aspect, and I can usually make powerful arguments.

Today I came across this article, and I find myself flummoxed about how to respond. It seems to me that there's something wrong with the author's perspective.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/27/why ... -disorder/

So, I figured I needed to come here and find out!

Please forgive me if I've posted this inquiry in the wrong place.

Hugs,

Bernice

[DonnaT]

Obviously the author does not have gender dysphoria, but instead has body dysphoria (body dysmorphic disorder (BDD)), not the same thing.

Her argument is like the argument regarding GID as compared to BIID (Body integrity identity disorder) where people want some part of their body amputated.

Just because there are similarities (all in head), they are not the same.

Since she's never experienced GID, she has no right to argue against reassignment/alignment surgery, and she has no right saying that they should all be treated the same, via mental therapy.

You can't argue with such people, they are close minded.

[Anthony Simon]

At the end of the article she says one of her interests is "absolute truth". Which I guess is a kind of joke. But she does come across as incredibly certain about what TG is - as though, indeed, she does have access to the absolute truth about it.

It's a new schtick, to accuse TGs of just being anorexics in drag, as it were. But, as I've implied, it's just actually an updating of the old schtick, of saying they're men in drag - rather than some other category, hitherto without honour in our society.

[Davita]

This is why we have the DSM-5. Start here for the body dysphoria, https://bdd.iocdf.org/professionals/diagnosis/.

Here's a piece for us, http://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs ... 5596.dsm14.

I dunno nuthin bout condition vs disorder; them ain't science words.

[Bernice]

You can't argue with such people, they are close minded.

I think you are absolutely correct. Well... OK... perhaps you can argue, but you cannot persuade.

A mind is like a parachute... you know the rest.

This is why we have the DSM-5.

True enough, but honestly, I think the DSM is terribly politicized, and controversial, not to mention very tedious reading. I'm not sure how I would quote the DSM in a way that expresses my discomfort with conflating anorexia and transgenderism. If Donna is right, (and she usually is) , I may be better off to drop it.


Hugs,

Bernice

[Eileen (SO)]

Transgenderism won't kill you. Anorexia will, therefore a disorder.

Don't over think the argument.

Eileen

[Bernice]

Transgenderism won't kill you. Anorexia will, therefore a disorder.

Don't over think the argument.

Eileen

That is brilliant! Thank you! You made my day!

Hugs,

Bernice

[Anita]

There is also a satisfaction ratio, where x percentage of trans people report that the quality of their life has improved by transitioning, whether or not they have surgeries.

Anorexics, by the writer's own admission, are seldom if ever satisfied with their results. Their satisfaction percentage, if they were surveyed, would probably be significantly less than trans folk.

I think the writer is trying to make the comparison apples-to-apples, by saying that anorexics can "never" be thin enough, just like a man can "never" become a woman.

And that isn't an analogous situation.

[Bernice]

Hugs,

Bernice

[Wesley]

Interesting topic. . .

I took a few moments to look into the article and Moira Fleming, who the internet publisher asserts is:

"is a writer and social worker currently pursuing her MSW at West Chester University. Her areas of interest include absolute truth, social policy, and crossword puzzles."

The article in question was published June 26,2016. She has no other articles published to the Federalist, however the article is repeated on at least one other site.

There is an interesting rebuttal on another site:

http://vandybethglenn.com/gender-dyspho ... -anorexia/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I smell a rat!

[Ralitsa]

Actually I think the author has some valid points. And I don't read this article as saying "crossdressing is just as bad as anorexia", I understand her point to be that there are some similarities, and maybe that both issues arise from some similar feelings of wanting to be what one is not. I think it's an interesting point and worth consideration. She makes the point herself that anorexia can kill her, whereas ones choice in clothing is pretty harmless. At least at this point in time in western culture - but examples abound of people being killed over it. One can argue that it wasn't the crossdressing that killed them, it was crazy people, but that just shifts the question to ask why they were compelled to do something when they knew people would beat them up or kill them for it.
I think it's safe to say that all of us here have struggled with the question of "why am I like this?" So hearing her comparison to her similar struggle, and feeling compelled to do something that is clearly dangerous to her health, I find informative and an interesting perspective. We have the luxury of blaming our problems on society and claiming that it's everyone else's fault for not being accepting of us, but is there a real fundamental difference between someone starving themselves to be skinny and someone playing chemistry lab with their endocrine system to grow real breasts?
I don't pretend to have any answers, I just thing they are very interesting questions to discuss and I wouldn't dismiss her theory just because we don't like it. In some earlier posts here the majority of respondents said they would "take the pill" to make it all go away. So I'm not buying the claim that we are all perfectly happy with who we are and how we look.
So my response to her post would be to ask more questions about her struggles, and to compare notes, and share my own experiences, and find out where the similarities and differences are.

[Amanda R]

Transgenderism won't kill you. Anorexia will, therefore a disorder.

Don't over think the argument.

Eileen

Only partially correct. The suicide rate in the transgendered community is 4 to 7 times the rate of the general public depending on the study you ascribe to. The rate is even higher with transgendered youth.

Anorexia and other eating disorders as well as disorders such as alcoholism, drug addiction and other addictions are learned behaviors. One has the right to make a choice by free will to participate or not. While none of these are curable the behavior can be modified through behavioral modification therapy and the afflicted individual can lead a "normal" healthy life. Of course once one is an anorexic or alcoholic or whatever they are always that and can lapse back to the previous behavior and some do.

Being transgendered, a crossdresser, or for that matter gay is not a learned behavior but rather something you are born. You do not learn this! It is something you are born and part of who you are. Yes one can opt to abstain however that does not change the fact of what you are. This is why being transgendered is an identity and not a disorder.

[Estefania]

Being transgendered, a crossdresser, or for that matter gay is not a learned behavior but rather something you are born. You do not learn this! It is something you are born and part of who you are. Yes one can opt to abstain however that does not change the fact of what you are. This is why being transgendered is an identity and not a disorder.

Hi Amanda.

I would like to focus only on the crossdressing part of your statement. While I do believe that being transgendered may indeed be innate, I don't believe that crossdressing is. At least not all crossdressing. True, it is kind of muddy to differentiate since way too many crossdressers are so or identify as such while they are in the process of accepting and assuming themselves to be transgendered. But crossdressing can have different origins and motivations. And many of the differences may be a matter of semantics, I know. As in how some people believe that all crossdressers fit under the transgender umbrella (and if that is the inclusion in your statement, well, there goes my argument! )

Personally, while I see that it is really hard to set any "borders" between being "only" a crossdresser and being transgendered, I still think that crossdressing is more environmental based than nature based. Crossdressing is a behavoir, not a biological need. Can it cause a dependency? Sure can!

Gaby

[Amanda R]

Interesting observation Gaby. I am going to try not to get too technical here but practically every study and therapist would disagree with you. You are born a crossdresser although some never act on it for whatever reason. Still the tendency is there. The desire to crossdress is generally triggered by an event in an individual's life. It may be just simple curiosity or the desire to feel closer to one's mother or sibling or it may come from a more life changing event but there is a trigger. Many males will anonymously admit to having worn at least a piece of women's clothes at one time or another. It can be as simple as a pair of the wife's panties as a joke or her sweat shirt because his was in the wash or whatever. The difference is for most it is a one time thing where with most crossdressers it triggers the inner desire to go further. Most crossdressers start as children and it is generally fully manifested by puberty where it becomes a sexual event, however again there is no true "normal."

One of the issues with trying to truly understand the transgendered community, particularly the heterosexual crossdresser, is that many remain closeted their entire life or even those who are "out" to a select few are reluctant to discuss the situation fearing being outed to the world. As the community comes into the light through support groups, organizations, and even being in the public more will be learned about it. Hopefully that learning process will bring more tolerance and acceptance this the freedom to express one's true inner self.

[Estefania]

Amanda,

I guess that until it is possible to probe the existence of a "pink gene " (to call it something) this predisposition can't be confirmed or denied 100% can it? Because as it is, we can think that everybody, 100% of men have this predisposition, right? Because the only way to probe you don't have it is if you die without ever being attracted to the idea of cross dressing.
Sounds a bit like the Spanish Inquisition... if you were burned at the stake but survived then you had a pact with Satan. If you died then you may still had a pact with Satan but repented at the last minute. Or just may have been that you were innocent.
A 90 yo guy who never crossdressed even having the chance to do it all of his life and then happens to get curious validates the "ever present tendency" as much as a 4 yo boy who, out of the blue, feels the need to wear a skirt. And then anybody who may have worn a dress for Halloween but said he didn't like it will be one who doesn't have that tendency at all... unless he does it 50 years later and then he goes from the "no tendency" tally to the "tendency but was on denial".
In any case, not looking for an argument. Right or wrong, I'm a firm believer that people has choices, even going against their natural tendencies. And repressing those tendencies doesn't have to be a bad thing, it will all depend on their personal circumstances.