Let’s start with a serious question: how in the world can TheOnion.com stay in business? Their often quite humorous fake news stories have been overtaken by “real” news stories. Here are two examples:
Now is a good time to warn readers that we’re not going to have time for our extremely popular end-of-article questions — there is just too much ground to cover explaining what transgenderism is. I hope the devoted fans of this series will forgive this decision. If you can’t do without them, visit the series here, click on one, and read through the questions filling in the blanks using today’s paraphilia.
You may have noticed that today’s paraphilia is one of the “big four”:
Okay, ready to go on a very strange journey? Here’s Wikipedia:
Transgenderism may refer to:
- Transgender, an umbrella term for the state of one’s gender identity not matching one’s assigned sex
- Transgenderism (social movement), a social movement seeking transgender rights and affirming transgender pride
- Transsexualism, the condition in which a transgender individual identifies with a gender inconsistent or not culturally associated with their assigned sex
- Postgenderism, a movement whose adherents affirm the voluntary elimination of gender in the human species
Got that? If we’re to take that seriously, I think this, by Matt Barber, should also be taken seriously:
[T]here remains a larger question still. If a person’s “actual sex” needn’t be rooted in biological reality, then why should anything be rooted in biological reality? […] As long as we’re tinkering with scientific and moral truth, why stop at a person’s biologically determined and fixed sex? Why stop at “gender identity”?
I’ll wager that next year Reuters scores a 150 percent on HRC’s “equality index” if it offers a category for “species identity.” If “a person’s innate, deeply felt psychological identification” is all that matters, then who is Reuters – who are any of us – to discriminate if an employee wants to get in touch with his inner horse and run the Kentucky Derby?
For that matter, what about “racial identity?” Again, why the intolerant and arbitrary “gender-identity” narrow-mindedness? Roseanne Barr is a short, obnoxious white woman today, but who’s to say that tomorrow she won’t develop an “innate, deeply felt psychological identification” as a seven-foot black man? Watch out, NBA.
Let’s dial down further. Again, from Wikipedia:
Transgender is the state of one’s gender identity (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) or gender expression not matching one’s assigned sex (identification by others as male, female or intersex based on physical/genetic sex). Transgender is independent of sexual orientation; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, polysexual, or asexual; some may consider conventional sexual orientation labels inadequate or inapplicable to them. The precise definition for transgender is changing but nevertheless includes:
- “Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these.”
- “People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves.”
- “Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth.”
A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as other, agender, genderqueer, or third gender. Transgender people may also identify as bigender or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum or the more encompassing continuums that have been developed in response to recent, significantly more detailed studies. Furthermore, many transgender people experience a period of identity development that includes better understanding one’s self-image, self-reflection, and self-expression. More specifically, the degree to which individuals feel genuine, authentic, and comfortable within their external appearance and accept their genuine identity is referred to as transgender congruence.
There’s a great deal more I could excerpt but I’ll let you decide how much time you want to spend reading things that, in an earlier more common sense based era, would’ve been laughed out of the public square. Good luck trying to keep it all straight — in fact, even the lefties squabble big time among themselves regarding at what point a man thinking he’s a woman (or whatever) becomes a cause for concern.
Back to Wikipedia — and no, I’m not changing the subject:
Gender identity disorder (GID) or gender dysphoria is the formal diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant dysphoria (discontent) with the sex they were assigned at birth and/or the gender roles associated with that sex. Evidence suggests that people who identify with a gender different than the one they were assigned at birth may do so not just due to psychological or behavioral causes, but also biological ones related to their genetics, the makeup of their brains, or prenatal exposure to hormones.
Estimates of the prevalence of gender identity disorder range from a lower bound of 1:2000 (or about 0.05%) in the Netherlands and Belgium to 0.5% in Massachusetts to 1.2% in New Zealand. Research indicates people who transition in adulthood are up to three times more likely to be male assigned at birth, but that among people transitioning in childhood the sex ratio is close to 1:1.
Gender identity disorder is classified as a medical disorder by the ICD-10 CM and DSM-5 (called gender dysphoria). Many transgender people and researchers support declassification of GID because they say the diagnosis pathologizes gender variance, reinforces the binary model of gender, and can result in stigmatization of transgender individuals. The official classification of gender dysphoria as a disorder in the DSM-5 may help resolve some of these issues because gender dysphoria only pathologizes the discontent experienced as a result of gender identity issues.
The current medical approach to treatment for people diagnosed with gender identity disorder is to support them in physically modifying their bodies so that they better match their gender identities, an approach that conceptualizes them as having a medical problem that is corrected through various forms of medical intervention. Treatment for gender identity disorder is also controversial, as changes made are typically irreversible.
Note the following subheadings/links in this Wikipedia page — can you imagine the rage of those who don’t think they need to be “treated”?:
And if you want a little entertainment — call this a transgender cat fight:
Let’s close this out on a serious note…and yes, I’ve been trying to be serious but it’s not always easy. A friend of mine who is well-read, morally grounded in Biblical truth, and always ready to seek out answers from experts, recently weighed in on this topic.
My friend reminded me that scientists are often politically motivated, and that we can’t completely divorce world view and biases from the theories they champion. Opposing evidence is ignored or ridiculed — a clear sign that their “conclusions” are their goal no matter the evidence.
My friend reminded me that biochemistry has nothing to do with the issue of morality, since “since science tells us nothing about the morality of biochemically shaped impulses.”
My friend reminded me that some scientists say that behavior can actually alter brain chemistry and brain structures. So, the question arises, could, for example, cross-dressing and porn use contribute to deviant desires and changes in these areas of white matter?
One more point from my friend. Does the presence of brain-structure abnormalities, or genetic anomalies, or chemical disorders render behaviors impelled by these disorders inherently good, healthy, and moral? Will we apply that consistently to all behaviors influenced by genetic or bio-chemical factors?
There — we included some questions after all.