Transexuals

[Drich]

This post is a good example of what is wrong with your argument; I'm going to go point-by-point just for my own organization (it helps me think rationally )

We shall see, we shall see.

1. The definition of mental illness/disorder is slippery.  Your definition of "behavioral disorder that affects cognitive thought" is probably not a good one; first, it uses the term "disorder" recursively, second, it refers to "behavior", which I don't believe to be a component of all mental illness, and third, "affects cognitive thought" is far too broad.  That's literally everything. 

Maybe you missed where I sourced that definition. It was from the mayo clinic.. Are you familiar with who they are?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayo_Clinic
So whether you find it difficult to arrange a cohesive argument against the definition they provided or not.. I will be sticking with what the Largest non profit medical research center in the world has to say on the topic, rather than what some douche on a forum thinks 'my definition should be, because it would make it easier for him to formulate a rebuttal.'

2. A better definition is "a series of abnormal psychological symptoms that causes distress or dysfunction."  Something like that.

All you need is a primary source citation that refutes the mayo clinic defination.

Otherwise again we in this thread when speaking to me will be using this defination:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-condi...n-20033813

3. You can "set the bar" of mental stability and help people reach that bar.  Absolutely; that's where the "abnormal" part of the definition comes in (for instance, crippling grief over the loss of a loved one is not "abnormal" and is thus not considered mental illness unless it extends far beyond the "normal" course of grief).

And that's why we use clinical definations.

4. It is where you (Drich) choose to "set the bar" that is both arbitrary and highly demonstrative of your bias. 

Ahh.. No.
I did not set the bar, the bar is set with terms defined in the diagnosis of a Gender Identity Disorder case. Again I did not make up the term GID it is a term the medical community uses to classify the behaivors of those who are experiencing GID.

All I did was ask if the medical community says people of the Transsexual community can all be diagnosed with this disorder and it is indeed a mental illness then why are we making laws that enable this disorder?

You are setting the bar at "comfortable with one's birth gender" (which isn't always well-defined).  A far more reasonable, therapeutic bar would be "comfortable with one's self."  The only reason one would choose to set the bar based on "birth gender", which is a single characteristic that is not always well-defined, instead of "one's self", which is synonymous with a person's holistic well-being, is because political or religious reasons color your thinking.

This is the dumbest thing anyone has ever said...
if you need me to explain how I will, otherwise I know your trying to come off as a 'smart guy' so to honor that effort I'm willing to let it go.

5. If a person is uncomfortable in their body - that is, suffers from gender dysphoria - you can either a) try to make them comfortable in their body by changing their mental state or b) try to make them comfortable in their body by changing their body.
6. The first is something that needs to take place over a lifetime, would involve trying to change the person's sense of who they are; most importantly, there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates that it is possible; in fact, all evidence points at it being extremely harmful (perhaps you "reduce" gender dysphoria but add depression and anxiety and anger and greatly increase the likelihood of suicide).

7. The second is admittedly a complicated process that involves surgery and hormone therapy. But it does not try to alter who the person believes they are (and there is no medical problem, only a social problem, with who the person believes they are) and leads to far better results. 

didn't read the case study examples I left did you?
They all centered around with what the individual wanted to do, yes some wanted a change of mental state while others wanted physical change while other's still simply struggled to 'sexually neutral life.' For those who wanted to learn to associate with their birth gender an effort is made to possibly find a hormonal, chemical or even a psychological imbalance and correct it. Which in the posted case studies did show a favorable success rate.

Bottom line sport the course of treatment is based on what the individual wants for themselves. Which AGAIN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OP.

Because no matter How they receive treatment or if they do not get treatment at all they will always struggle with GID on some level.

8. Ultimately, someone who transitions only remains "mentally ill" if you characterize the illness as "discomfort with birth gender".  However, the transitioned person no longer has the same extent of problems with their body, and so the "disabling" and "distressing" criteria of mental illness greatly diminish; it only remains a mental illness if you substitute "violation of social norms" for "personal distress", which is a really dishonest/biased thing to do.  If the criteria is "does the person feel happy with themselves, that is, in their body", after the transition, the answer is "yes".  If you're really interested in aiding people with gender dysphoria, you would recognize that transitioning is the treatment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_asNhzXq72w
Sorry but no again.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-profes...-dysphoria

To be short, most with GID never even seek treatment, so you speaking of a fraction of a minority of the 1% with GID, yet you wish to up hold the even smaller fraction who successfully get help under proper medical conditions as being the standard of the transexual community?

Plueeze, try that some place else.

To summarize, you're implicitly assuming social norms, and using violation of these norms to bootstrap a behavior into mental illness when it would be far better to ground the criteria for mental illness in the particular person's life rather than whatever social norms you feel like assuming.

*Note: please forgive me if I've used any offensive language or "cisplained" (as in, like mansplaining or all that).

Seriously?!?!?

Between the two of us I'm the only one who has vetted and cited the information I have provided.

IDK maybe "rational thinking" means something totally different where you come from.. Because to me it means to base my thoughts on vetted facts, and sound definitions that are established in the field of study I am 'rationally thinking' about. Your thoughts seem to all come from deep down from feeling and foolish, but well meaning compassion and other 'wooo' nonsense that can be manipulated.

If you want to have a topical conversation try researching a little and post some proper source material to support your claims. otherwise know I will trivialize and sweep you under the rug in the same way you tried to discredit and trivialize my work.