Transexuals

[Mister Agenda]

[Crossless2.0]

Again according to the Mayo Clinic it is a disorder according to the term "Gender Identity Disorder"/GID it is a DISORDER!!!

You can be a transsexual without having this disorder. For example, many transsexuals find being able to identify and dress as the sex they prefer quite sufficient to make them comfortable, no hormone treatments or surgery. They don't have GID, as a rule.

Don't confuse him with the facts. Even after the Mayo Clinic adopts the DSM-5 revised terminology (as they and every other reputable medical and psychological establishment doubtless will), I suspect he'll cling to the outdated scheme because he thinks it bolsters his case. The change DSM-5 will introduce was pointed out to him dozens of pages ago, yet he's no closer to acknowledging that his terminology is now moot. You know, his intellectual scruples and carefully considered research being what it is.

[Mister Agenda]

Perhaps the answer is for us all to stop having hang ups about our bodies and have a more European attitude. I went swimming at a pool in France, there was only one changing room and no booths. the French people just whipped their clothes off, while me and the future Mrs Plumb struggled to keep our English reserve with copious use of towels. Apparently she saw it as an ordeal but I think the French had the better attitude.

As I remember the french were also keen on having open boarders and invited a butt load of unvetted refugees in their country, and we can see how that worked out..

Just because it is done here or there does not mean it is a sound or even a culturally adaptable thing to do.

Counting terrorism, France has about 1/3 the murder rate of the USA. And they're terrible at assimilating immigrants compared to us.

[Mister Agenda]

[Mister Agenda]

[Mister Agenda]

Excellent. I am glad that you have admitted this. Now will you please answer the following question with this in mind:

Because accomplishing 'great things' and contentment have nothing to do with identifying mental illness in a person.

They have a lot to do with it. Being content and competent alone doesn't mean you're not mentally ill, but at least you're not suffering from clinically significant distress. And clinically significant distress is the key factor in meeting the diagnostic criteria for GID. It is defined by the stress it causes. Schizophrenia is not defined primarily by the stress it causes the person who has it. GID is.

[Mister Agenda]

Okay...let's try another angle here.  Open-ended question:  Drich, do you think that transgendered individuals should be allowed to use which ever bathroom they feel most comfortable in?  Why or why not?  Please, no answers about politics or law-making.  I want you to express how you PERSONALLY feel...and why.

No. People should be made to use the bathroom the are 'plumbed' to use. If a transsexual had a sex change then he/she can not use the bathroom of their previous sex.

why? because it opens the door to sexual predators looking to exploit those of the opposite sex via rape or recording devise.

How does it open the door when those things are already illegal? And how should the logistics of determining people's 'plumbing' be handled?

[Edwardo Piet]

And if it does not cause clinically significant distress, it does mot meet the criteria for diagnosis.

[Edwardo Piet]

[about Drich]Don't confuse him with the facts. Even after the Mayo Clinic adopts the DSM-5 revised terminology (as they and every other reputable medical and psychological establishment doubtless will), I suspect he'll cling to the outdated scheme because he thinks it bolsters his case. The change DSM-5 will introduce was pointed out to him [Drich] dozens of pages ago, yet he's no closer to acknowledging that his terminology is now moot. You know, his intellectual scruples and carefully considered research being what it is.

(My bolding)

[Mister Agenda]

It's your precious science too, Drich. Or have you gone full 18th Century in your living arrangements?

And if you don't blame the lawmakers, then who do you blame? The corporations? They are legitimate stakeholders in our society and government, just like individual citizens, and are free to move their operations where they wish. If that results in a loss of revenue for a state or locale, from the point of view of the corporation trying to effect some change, tough shit. Yes, the 'will of the people' was circumvented in this case . . . by the elected representatives who rolled over rather than dig in their heels to defend their 'principles'. Telling the film industry to fuck off was always an option. They didn't do that. Not the film industry's fault. That's on the elected representatives of the people.

Thanks to gerrymandering, our government is often at odds with the actual will of the people. 32% for Americans identify as Democrats while 23% identify as Republicans, yet Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate. This discrepancy is also found at the state level in many cases; with thousands of legislators running unopposed in districts drawn decades ago to ensure the other Party doesn't have a chance of winning it. Our government is literally a generation behind most of America.