Transsexualism & philosophy

[Anders Schlander]

Topic split from Statement about Solway and Trump -- moderator
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That was something to read. It is surprising for me to observe how much has changed in the last 8-9 years. While I understand if Kevin may be worried of people limiting the right of people to speak truthfully to the point of a so called police state, if I understand any of that right?.

But I think it could end up much worse in America than say Canada, it could cause even more suffering, more hatred, poverty, violence, unease.

Also hello people of these forums, old or new.

I came by looking for some much needed enlightening thoughts in a world of mess. A mess that seems pretty obvious now in the global political / humanity scene. This whole thread is a bit of a mess but i want to post anyway, sorry if it's a bit out of place and should be in Wordly Matters

In fact I transitioned from male to female, in terms of hormones, etc. Because I never felt normal in a male body. I grew up feeling uncomfortable as male, That makes this topic Kevin has delved far into a bit closer to home.

When I joined GF I was lookin for more than scientific knowledge. I was about 17 years old, when I was 20 my core ego led me to pursue fame and fortune despite having experienced great things in search of truth, my ego still somewhat remained in the shadows, I believe a big part in searching for answers was due to my upbringing and perhaps condition. (trans). But nevertheless...

So i am wondering about what you guys think of trans rights etc.

I am very unknowledgeable around the so called SJW's and those who oppose them. I can't see any logic in opposing trans or gay rights, It will only lead to suffering. People can't undo being trans or gay any more than cis people can undo how they feel.



I believe being trans, and being uncomfortable is real enough, brains can be wired to feel wrong, like your body should look different.

But, if you're enlightened, it would by definition not cause any suffering.(your particular body is not something to cause happiness or suffering any longer).

But what's wrong with being a normal trans person? its just as bad as being a normal 'non trans' person. Even something as being ugly can affect regular people and cause suffering. Which a Buddha wouldn't care about.

There are countless things that are hard on humans, that may ultimately be solved by being enlightened, like anger, jealousy, envy, boredom etc. But these things are to be expected. Just as we can expect most humans to have an attachment to their body / gender, and not willingly have it end up wrong.



therefore, don't take away people's rights, there is nothing that wrong with fighting for social justice, nor human rights. Even if the people benefitted aren't 100% enlightened, it's better than the alternative if you ask me.

What do you people think? and what if it is people transitioning to be male? After all, men aren't exactly all that less feminine than women.



edit: btw. not sure if its the right move to bump this post and talk about something that is maybe on the verge of being worldly matter stuff. do what you have to do :)

[jupiviv]

In fact I transitioned from male to female, in terms of hormones, etc. Because I never felt normal in a male body. I grew up feeling uncomfortable as male, That makes this topic Kevin has delved far into a bit closer to home.

Hey I remember you! So you're transtesticular now? To be honest I have no idea what it is like to not feel comfortable as a man. There is certainly a part of me that is feminine, and a part that is attracted or pleased by femininity, but nothing that actually wants to *be* a woman. But perhaps that's just it - the part of me that is pleased by femininity (including the non- or supra-sexual aspects of it) *is* the desire to be feminine in a less intense form.

So i am wondering about what you guys think of trans rights etc.

I am very unknowledgeable around the so called SJW's and those who oppose them. I can't see any logic in opposing trans or gay rights, It will only lead to suffering. People can't undo being trans or gay any more than cis people can undo how they feel.

It makes no sense to oppose trans or gay rights. Unsurprisingly, the most rabid transphobes or homophobes have sexual identity problems. They murder themselves in others. However, opposition to femininity is inevitable if one wants to become wise. And it has to start with oneself. Of course femininity is much, much deeper than anatomy and mannerisms. If I may ask, how has your transition affected your interest in the issues discussed on this forum?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Hi Anders Schlander , nice to see you back here!

This whole thread is a bit of a mess but i want to post anyway, sorry if it's a bit out of place and should be in Wordly Matters ... not sure if its the right move to bump this post and talk about something that is maybe on the verge of being worldly matter stuff.

It indeed was and I hope you don't mind me moving your fresh topic to a new thread. Lets see if we can make it a bit philosophical, as well!

I came by looking for some much needed enlightening thoughts in a world of mess. A mess that seems pretty obvious now in the global political / humanity scene.

It's even in doubt what the mess exactly is. There's so much of everything, more than ever. One thing that is hard to find is some coherent meaning, some justification for the process. It's like the promised world came but many are not happy with it, What's next? Core beliefs are shifting and for some simply collapsing as we speak. That's indeed messy.

I am very unknowledgeable around the so called SJW's and those who oppose them. I can't see any logic in opposing trans or gay rights, It will only lead to suffering. People can't undo being trans or gay any more than cis people can undo how they feel.

The main issue with SJW, or at least in the discussion you pointed to was the sense of harassment and forcing of changes. It almost never was about some right to seek changes of any kind and live with them. Or a lack of acceptance even. Universal acceptance cannot be a right.

I believe being trans, and being uncomfortable is real enough, brains can be wired to feel wrong, like your body should look different.

How far could this be a need for identity, something you were not before but felt you needed to become? Do you ever doubt if the feeling would come back to haunt? For example, I feel that humans are compared to animals all "wrong". Like we're handicapped and just body fragments. Not all the time but always had that sense. But the thought never came up to change any of it. Of course for me it would be: into what :-)

But what's wrong with being a normal trans person? its just as bad as being a normal 'non trans' person. Even something as being ugly can affect regular people and cause suffering. Which a Buddha wouldn't care about.

What do you people think? and what if it is people transitioning to be male? After all, men aren't exactly all that less feminine than women.

Perhaps tell a bit more about the changes for you. You feel more at peace or at ease? How does it effect your thinking? What do you believe the "feminine" is? If men aren't all that less feminine, would it be still a useful word even to use?

[Pam Seeback]

Hi Anders, I can't see any upside to caring what anyone thinks about something that defines one existentially which I believe applies most definitely to trans people. As for trans and gay rights, as a woman, I am aware there was once a time when my gender couldn't vote so I am deeply grateful for the passion exhibited by my predecessors that fought so valiantly for that right. As I see it, anything that is fought for from the deepest part of one's being are the things that truly bring about change. In contrast, the common perception of SWJ's is that they're fight for social justice is more about personal validation than about any deep seated desire to 'make things right'.

[jupiviv]

The main issue with SJW, or at least in the discussion you pointed to was the sense of harassment and forcing of changes.

I vomitously disagree. Even though I'm chronically active on this forum, I almost never use social media except youtube for watching etymology tutorials. My understanding of the concept of SJWs was *during* the QR/S thread.

None of the soi-disant celebutards of the *explicitly* anti-SJW "dead centre" possess the tiniest sliver of basic intellectual honesty let alone goodwill. It was never about "lefty project XYZ gone mad". The strategy from the very beginning (long before gamergate) was to monopolise commentary on morbid instances and prepare the rhetorical groundwork for a direct assault on basic premises.

...lies and delusions that cannot adapt are superseded by those that can, rather than the truth.

The bona fide outraged voices of sanity, who genuinely wanted to point out everything wrong with skepchickism, atheism, feminism etc., bailed out shortly after '09.

Universal acceptance cannot be a right.

Yes it can. Indeed the very concept of "right" is a posteriori to it. The question is not about acceptance but its object.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

None of the soi-disant celebutards of the *explicitly* anti-SJW "dead centre" possess the tiniest sliver of basic intellectual honesty let alone goodwill. It was never about "lefty project XYZ gone mad". The strategy from the very beginning (long before gamergate) was to monopolise commentary on morbid instances and prepare the rhetorical groundwork for a direct assault on basic premises.

Huh? All I did was confirming Anders his statement: "While I understand if Kevin may be worried of people limiting the right of people to speak truthfully to the point of a so called police state, if I understand any of that right?". My answer was like yes, that's how he saw it and on the various negative issues surrounding SJW didn't seem much disagreement about in that thread e.g. when Dan wrote "when Kevin speaks of the horrors of Intersectional Feminism and the egregious forms of the Social Justice movement it has spawned, I totally agree". If any extreme or elaborate activism against it would be justified or useful, that's a whole other topic.

Universal acceptance cannot be a right.

Yes it can. Indeed the very concept of "right" is a posteriori to it. The question is not about acceptance but its object.

Rights are moral or legal entitlements to have or do something, or certain things not to be done to you. It has little to do with any more general sense of feeling accepted. Acceptance as the experience of being received as adequate, valid, or suitable. This is not quantifiable as such and completely relative to a situation and circumstance. It cannot be given or withheld. Please note the word "general" to contrast with specific cases like the right of being accepted into X if conditions Y and Z, which are both not dependent on the person's ethnic or sexual identity, are fulfilled.

[Glostik91]

Transitioning genders is such a huge waste. You have to go through so much effort, pain, debt, and suffering. All for what? A little squirt of dopamine when you look in the mirror and feel like a woman. What a huge waste of time. Take some advice. If you want that same feeling of satisfaction for a fraction of the price, just seek out your local cocaine dealer.

[Pam Seeback]

In order that humans confront the pain of the experience of self-contradiction, the sense of being divided between two forces, the idea of gender goes deeper than how one physically or socially interprets what it means to be a man or a woman.

Could it be as the depth psychologist Carl G. Jung proposed in his alchemical essay entitled The Psychology of Transference that the tensions we experience within and without vis a vis our existential (deep, profound) sense of gender are really the experience of alchemical eros at work and that when the interaction between these two forces become conscious, they become the enduring of the tension of the opposites until the fruit of this tension is realized in their redemptive reconciliation as the newly born and heavenly blessed imperishable, creative, androgynous (whole) spiritual Man? In other words, every human being, in contemplating the idea of being divided against the truth of an undivided reality or the illusion of two against the truth of one - Alchemical Eros - is transformed into the Divine Duality of the Heavenly Man?

A link to the article:

http://gnosis.org/jung_alchemy.htm

[jupiviv]

Huh? All I did was confirming Anders his statement: "While I understand if Kevin may be worried of people limiting the right of people to speak truthfully to the point of a so called police state, if I understand any of that right?". My answer was like yes, that's how he saw it and on the various negative issues surrounding SJW didn't seem much disagreement about in that thread e.g. when Dan wrote "when Kevin speaks of the horrors of Intersectional Feminism and the egregious forms of the Social Justice movement it has spawned, I totally agree". If any extreme or elaborate activism against it would be justified or useful, that's a whole other topic.

There is and was disagreement from me with Kevin (and you) about the validity of "anti-SJW" arguments, and indeed the term "SJW" itself. I don't remember if I expanded on those points though, since my primary concern was David's hysteria.

Rights are moral or legal entitlements to have or do something, or certain things not to be done to you. It has little to do with any more general sense of feeling accepted.

I don't believe I mentioned "feeling" accepted, whatever a "feeling" is supposed to be. Anyway, the thing/s which are connected to a certain right need to be accepted in order for it to be instituted and implemented - the history of rights in one sentence.