Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

A big "Whoops" moment if I've ever seen one.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Adrift View Post
    Gender dysphoria is still considered a disorder (that's why an entry remains in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). All they really did was change the name. There is a push by both transgendered people as well as psychiatrists to declassify it as a disorder altogether. The main argument for opposing declassification seems to be that insurance covers mental illness, and most transgendered people can't afford a sex change without insurance covering the cost.
    Disorders are considered pathologies while dysphorias are not; that is the distinction in terms, I believe. DSM-V seeks to remove the stigma of transsexual or transgender persons being mentally ill because of their gender disassociation. It's the dysphoria, or mental discomfort, that's the problem according to the language of DSM-V, not the gender identification.

    Dysphoria allows for transsexual or transgender persons to still receive insurance coverage for needs related to mental health or gender reassignment, yes.
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Sam View Post
      The political implications don't impact the psychology, which is what I'm interested in.
      Of course it does.

      And, no, they don't show the "flip side" of my argument, which already acknowledges that gender reassignment isn't a one-size-fits-all solution for gender dysphoria.
      It does show the flip side by showing that, while sex reassignment may hide the symptoms (for some people), it does not cure the disease (in a manner of speaking).

      I don't think there's any scientific disagreement that addiction has a very strong, even primary, biological component. That's not to say biology is at all the sole cause of addiction but it does seem to be a primary component — a person predisposed to alcoholism and I could have the same life experiences and suffer very different effects of that first drink. I don't have any problem with people who treat mental disorders as a spiritual issue (and, hey, we've all got ourselves some mental disorders) but I believe it's a dangerous error to refuse to see them as material or biological disorders and dismiss material or biological solutions in favor of spiritual ones.
      From what I can gather from your posts here, so far, you're treating the spiritual condition as though it were an afterthought, or as if it had little to no relevance. It's an odd position to see a Christian taking. I'm not advocating that Christian simply pray the transgender out of people, but treating this issue, which is rooted in something obviously spiritually off, as though it were entirely biological is simply wrong-headed. People who suffer gender dysphoria need spiritual guidance and counseling, and perhaps even medication to control their depression. What they do not need is sex reassignment anymore than the transabled man or woman needs to start lopping off arms and legs. You don't heal people by allowing them to give into their disordered mental states.

      To say that the bodies of transgender individuals are "perfectly functional" or that their bodies' chemistry is healthy is to divorce the brain's function and chemistry from the rest of the body. That, in my opinion, is a pretty obvious mistake.
      I suggest you look at the work of neurologists like Jeffrey Schwartz, and his treatment of patients who suffer from OCD. It is possible for the mind to change the function of the brain. Read You Are Not Your Brain. I think you'll find it enlightening.


      There are differences between "hard" and "soft" sciences, yes, but you're not advocating that we approach gender dysphoria with a more rigorous or "harder" science; you're opting to use even less science to deal with gender dysphoria by reducing it to a purely or primarily spiritual issue.
      Exactly. Because I believe it's rooted in a spiritual issue.

      And neither psychology nor sociology treats gender dysphoria as normative. The question is whether it is a pathological disorder and the irony is that you're complaining about the relevant science becoming more rigorous and disciplined in its structure, thereby becoming "harder"!
      I can't make heads or tails out of this last sentence. I'm complaining about the relevant science becoming more rigorous? Where do you see that? I'm stating that it's impossible for the softer sciences, like psychology and sociology, to work in the same way as the harder sciences. It's not a matter of becoming more disciplined, it's a matter of not having the tools to investigate the spiritual.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        It does show the flip side by showing that, while sex reassignment may hide the symptoms (for some people), it does not cure the disease (in a manner of speaking).



        From what I can gather from your posts here, so far, you're treating the spiritual condition as though it were an afterthought, or as if it had little to no relevance. It's an odd position to see a Christian taking. I'm not advocating that Christian simply pray the transgender out of people, but treating this issue, which is rooted in something obviously spiritually off, as though it were entirely biological is simply wrong-headed. People who suffer gender dysphoria need spiritual guidance and counseling, and perhaps even medication to control their depression. What they do not need is sex reassignment anymore than the transabled man or woman needs to start lopping off arms and legs. You don't heal people by allowing them to give into their disordered mental states.
        Reading back over my past few posts, I think it's very clear that I am not treating gender dysphoria "as though it were entirely biological" ... so there's no argument that people who suffer from gender dysphoria may well need spiritual guidance, counseling and medication. Reading back over the thread, I've made it clear that gender reassignment isn't a one-size-fits-all solution or even a sufficient solution for many people.

        The difference here is that I'm allowing for gender reassignment as a legitimate solution in addition to those other things while you are rejecting it a priori. You might as well argue that depression is primarily a spiritual condition and you don't "give into" the disordered mental state by medicating it away.


        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        I suggest you look at the work of neurologists like Jeffrey Schwartz, and his treatment of patients who suffer from OCD. It is possible for the mind to change the function of the brain. Read You Are Not Your Brain. I think you'll find it enlightening.
        If a transgendered person wants to change their mentality or brain chemistry such that they identify with their biological sex, I'm completely open to that. I don't care at all which direction a person goes to alleviate gender dysphoria, so long as it's effective and healthy. You, however, are arguing that the only legitimate pathway to a better quality of life is one that involves "changing the brain chemistry." Why?


        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        Exactly. Because I believe it's rooted in a spiritual issue.
        And I believe that it's rooted in a biological issue. So there shouldn't be any confusion over how I'm addressing the situation, even as a Christian. We disagree on the fundamental nature of the problem, just as we might disagree over whether a particular individual is oppressed by demons or suffering from schizophrenia.


        Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        I can't make heads or tails out of this last sentence. I'm complaining about the relevant science becoming more rigorous? Where do you see that? I'm stating that it's impossible for the softer sciences, like psychology and sociology, to work in the same way as the harder sciences. It's not a matter of becoming more disciplined, it's a matter of not having the tools to investigate the spiritual.
        You were complaining about the change from GID to a more rigorous diagnostic method that separates dysphoria from pathology.

        If you consider this to be a spiritual issue, your problem isn't with "hard" vs. "soft" science at all — YECs believe the Earth to be < 10,000 years old and they likewise argue that the sciences (even the "hard" ones!) don't have the "tools" to investigate the true spiritual origins of the planet. Baumgardner, for example, argued over in Nat Sci that accelerated radioactive decay explains current conditions in a young-earth framework. When challenged that that much decay in that short of time would turn the surface of the earth into lava, Baumgardner simply argued that the excess heat was miraculously siphoned away. He didn't believe that the "harder sciences" could accurately investigate nature.

        If you've pre-determined that gender dysphoria is a spiritual problem rather than a material problem then of course you might not accept material solutions as sufficient or even necessary. I think this is a mistake, however, and would not de-legitimize material solutions that have been shown to alleviate suffering.
        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          One of many.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Sam View Post
            You understand that this is the same thing as saying that modern medicine is quackery because Washington's doctors bled him to death, right?
            This is sort of dumb, Sam. Just because people trying to help may do the wrong thing just means they are doing the wrong thing. It may or may not be quackery depending on the state of the art. It is my opinion that sexual reassignment surgery is equal to bleeding patients. Not sure it is quackery, it is more likely that these people are trying to help, just as the doctors bleeding Washington were trying to help. That does not mean that all of them are quacks. Some I suspect actually are, and are just making money on the suffering of innocents.
            Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Sam View Post
              I'm not sure what the meaning of bringing in lobotomy was, in that case.

              To be clear, Jed is either saying that psychologists are wrong in this case because the science has promoted "stupid stuff" in the past or he's saying that psychologists are wrong in this case because the science is, in general, about promoting "stupid stuff". Neither implication is warranted.
              You missed a third option. I think the psychologists are wrong because their so called science is just wrong. I believe psychology is often promoting stupid stuff, but that does not mean that psychology is ", in general, about promoting 'stupid stuff'." You seem to be going a bit off the deep end here attributing false motives.
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                It was, at one time, highly celebrated, but has fallen out of favor, being done only rarely, and in a totally different form than was, for several decades, considered "good".

                Despite opposition from some doctors - especially psychoanalysts - it became a mainstream part of psychiatry with more than 1,000 operations a year in the UK at its peak. It was used to treat a range of illnesses, from schizophrenia to depression and compulsive disorders.

                ....

                Psychiatrist Dr John Pippard followed up several hundred of McKissock's patients. He found that around a third benefited, a third were unaffected and a third were worse off afterwards.

                ....

                Decades later, when working as a psychiatric nurse in a long-stay institution, Henry Marsh used to see former lobotomy patients.

                "They had been lobectimised 30-40 years ago, they were chronic schizophrenics and they were often the ones were some of the most apathetic, slow, knocked-off patients," he says.

                Mr Marsh, who is now one of Britain's most eminent neurosurgeons, says the operation was simply bad science. "It reflected very bad medicine, bad science, because it was clear the patients who were subjected to this procedure were never followed up properly.

                "If you saw the patient after the operation they'd seem alright, they'd walk and talk and say thank you doctor," he observes. "The fact they were totally ruined as social human beings probably didn't count."
                Very much like sexual reassignment surgery patients. Hmmm
                Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                  Very much like sexual reassignment surgery patients. Hmmm
                  EGGzackly! Sam wants "datasets", so what if, 40 years down the road, we discover we ruined a bunch of lives, just like the lobotomy did. What good do the "datasets" do for those people?

                  I actually envisioned, last night when I went to bed, somebody standing before the Lord on judgement day with a bunch of charts and graphs, and proclaiming, "but.. but... but... I have DATASETS!"

                  I'd rather have Jesus.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    This is sort of dumb, Sam. Just because people trying to help may do the wrong thing just means they are doing the wrong thing. It may or may not be quackery depending on the state of the art. It is my opinion that sexual reassignment surgery is equal to bleeding patients. Not sure it is quackery, it is more likely that these people are trying to help, just as the doctors bleeding Washington were trying to help. That does not mean that all of them are quacks. Some I suspect actually are, and are just making money on the suffering of innocents.
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    You missed a third option. I think the psychologists are wrong because their so called science is just wrong. I believe psychology is often promoting stupid stuff, but that does not mean that psychology is ", in general, about promoting 'stupid stuff'." You seem to be going a bit off the deep end here attributing false motives.
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    Very much like sexual reassignment surgery patients. Hmmm
                    This is bordering on incoherent. On the one hand, you try to equate antiquated methods with little or no foundation in medicine with modern methods of psychological diagnosis, essentially arguing that modern psychology is in the same state as 18th-century or 19th-century medicine.

                    Then you go on to protest that the "so-called science is just wrong" but that you're not arguing that psychology, in general, "is about promoting stupid stuff." So either psychology is promoting "so-called science" that is "just wrong" (AKA "promoting stupid stuff") or it's just promoting "stupid stuff" when you disagree with the legitimacy of the diagnoses.

                    In any event, there's no thread of a discernible method with which one could separate out a legitimate psychological issue from a "so-called" psychological issue from your posts. If you want to dismiss gender dysphoria as a legitimate psychological issue or dismiss gender reassignment as a legitimate treatment, you've got to bring more to the table than personal disapproval.
                    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      EGGzackly! Sam wants "datasets", so what if, 40 years down the road, we discover we ruined a bunch of lives, just like the lobotomy did. What good do the "datasets" do for those people?

                      I actually envisioned, last night when I went to bed, somebody standing before the Lord on judgement day with a bunch of charts and graphs, and proclaiming, "but.. but... but... I have DATASETS!"

                      I'd rather have Jesus.
                      I'd rather have Jesus and, standing before Him one day, say honestly that I challenged my human and personal biases to the best of my ability in order to promote the welfare of others. How much worse, in my mind, to stand in judgment and proclaim that I already knew the truth and so didn't need to look at the evidence.
                      "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Sam: I'm not able to take a detailed look at the study you brought up now but I'd agree that so far it appears that zome suffering can be relieved in many instances within the medium term.

                        But that to me is insufficient justification alone as other considerations need to be addressed such as side-effects and inhibiting of flourishing just as using alcohol or other drugs to dull the pain would do (kindly excuse me if you've already addresssed this point).

                        Also, I'm interested in your views on my case (made in another recent thread) that since the distress arises between disharmony between the biology and the inner perception, and the biology cannot truly be changed so that only the appearances of change can be made such treatment would constitute self-deception which for obvious reasons can't take in the long term for many instances, the obvious and only path that can truly possibly solve the conflict is to treat the perception which also has the benefit of not involving surgery.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Sam View Post
                          I'd rather have Jesus and, standing before Him one day, say honestly that I challenged my human and personal biases to the best of my ability in order to promote the welfare of others.
                          Yeah, that's MUCH better than actually DOING stuff.

                          How much worse, in my mind, to stand in judgment and proclaim that I already knew the truth and so didn't need to look at the evidence.
                          You just seem to pick such dumb causes. What good is it for people to be relieved of gender discomfort (if that's even possible through your means) if they don't know Jesus as Savior?
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                            Sam: I'm not able to take a detailed look at the study you brought up now but I'd agree that so far it appears that zome suffering can be relieved in many instances within the medium term.

                            But that to me is insufficient justification alone as other considerations need to be addressed such as side-effects and inhibiting of flourishing just as using alcohol or other drugs to dull the pain would do (kindly excuse me if you've already addresssed this point).

                            Also, I'm interested in your views on my case (made in another recent thread) that since the distress arises between disharmony between the biology and the inner perception, and the biology cannot truly be changed so that only the appearances of change can be made such treatment would constitute self-deception which for obvious reasons can't take in the long term for many instances, the obvious and only path that can truly possibly solve the conflict is to treat the perception which also has the benefit of not involving surgery.
                            If gender dysphoria could be effectively treated such that the individual affected could identify with their biological sex, I would agree that mental health solutions would be far preferable. If, however, such treatments were more like reparative therapy and did not provide real relief for most individuals then alternate means of alleviating the dysphoria should be considered and used.

                            I would not, of course, advocate forcing a person with gender dysphoria into a mental health treatment to align their gender to their sex without that person's consent. If the individual does not consent to such mental realignment, alternative treatments should still be open to them.
                            "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Yeah, that's MUCH better than actually DOING stuff.

                              You just seem to pick such dumb causes. What good is it for people to be relieved of gender discomfort (if that's even possible through your means) if they don't know Jesus as Savior?
                              I've never indicated that the two are mutually exclusive. Why are you?
                              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Sam View Post
                                I've never indicated that the two are mutually exclusive. Why are you?
                                You seem to bypass the spiritual aspect in favor of the psychobabble. And don't claim you're not.

                                Please show me where you have ever indicated the need for spiritual counsel.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                101 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                300 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                109 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                195 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                357 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X