No.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

How about the intersection with any group of people.

Uh . . . How about it? The intersection of transgenderism and the mentally disordered is 100%. By definition.

By the way, what do you the intersection is between global atrocities and groups of people. Let's say males, females, whites, blacks, hispanics, LGBTQ and triathletes? I know where I think we should be spending our energy.

Do tell, do tell.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Can you please expand on how it is a physical disorder?

\

---

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Team Off Constantly

That's for me to know and you to find out. Nice clip though.

---

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Team Off Constantly

I believe it's classified as a psychiatric or psychological disorder. I suppose in normal layman's terms, "mental disorder" is close enough. But I'm not a doctor, so maybe it doesn't fit a narrowly defined category of disorder.

Regardless, the point is that it's a diagnosable medical disorder, and should probably be approached as such.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Here I think you're looking it the wrong way. The harm you're talking about is resultant from the treatments for the disorder, not the disorder itself. The harm caused by the disorder is the distress (sometimes extreme) that the person feels at the perceived disconnect between physical and psychological gender.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

The harm you're talking about is resultant from the treatments for the disorder, not the disorder itself.

Sure- but the harm results just the same, right? And ultimately because of the disorder.

The argument in some circles is that gender identity disorder shouldn't be classified as a disorder because a disorder was defined as a state that causes harm or distress. If the "treatment" for it is surgical mutilation, I think it's hard to argue it doesn't result in harm or distress.

More fundamentally, though, I think that definition of "disorder" is flawed.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

There ya go.

---

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Team Off Constantly

When deciding if the condition is a disorder, you can't take the treatment into account. That comes afterwards. The treatments for GD are not just surgery, but hormone therapy, or even just psychotherapy. In other words, the treatments may result in varying degrees of additional harm, but that doesn't come into the discussion of how to classify the underlying condition.

Gender dysphoria is a disorder because of the distress it causes the sufferer. That's the harm. Even if they choose not to be treated, they suffer harm. I don't know what "circles" you're talking about, but I don't think I've ever heard of a person with gender dysphoria who wasn't suffering distress, even and especially before treatment.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

When deciding if the condition is a disorder, you can't take the treatment into account.

Eh. Sure you can. I don't really consider disabling a healthy physical body treatment anyway- more capitulation to the disorder, really. But if that's the treatment, the disorder itself must be pretty bad.

Consider, as we have before, those who suffer from body integrity disorder. If it leads someone to cut of their own leg, isn't that harm? It's different if the "treatment" is inflicted on the reproductive organs, and carried out in an operating room? Why?


Gender dysphoria is a disorder because of the distress it causes the sufferer. That's the harm.

That's one harm. Permanent physical disability is another harm.

But again, whether or not it causes distress or physical harm, it's still a mental disorder (or psychological disorder, if that's preferable) because it's a state in which one's perception does not match reality.

I don't know what "circles" you're talking about, but I don't think I've ever heard of a person with gender dysphoria who wasn't suffering distress

I'm talking about the same "circles" who tried to define gender identity disorder out of existence in the first place- the professional psychiatric class.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Eh, no you can't, not really.

A condition is a disorder or not, regardless of whether or not a particular treatment causes harm.


I'm not arguing that it's different. I'm simply distinguishing from the harm caused by the chosen treatment, and the harm caused by the disorder itself.

A disorder causes a certain amount of harm if left untreated. The treatment then presumably reduces that harm. The question then is what additional harm does the treatment bring, and does it outweigh the original harm done by the underlying disorder.


Except permanent physical disability does not necessarily follow as a result of gender dysphoria. It only results if the sufferer chooses that particular course of treatment.


Well, medically, it's a disorder because it causes the sufferer distress due to the disconnect between what their physical gender is, and what they perceive their gender should be. If it didn't cause them distress, then it would just be a disconnect, but not a disorder I suppose.


I think it's an over generalization to claim the professional psychiatric class wanted to define GID out of existence. There was some controversy over whether or not it should be classified as a disorder in the 80s, but mostly because people thought it was an attempt to stigmatize suffers and homosexuals by association. There are also some who think it's only classified as a disorder so that the treatments will be covered by insurance companies. I haven't particularly studied the issue in depth, so I haven't seen anyone argue that there's no distress or harm in the underlying condition, but I'm sure there are some who would say so, since you can basically find some group who will argue any side of whatever issue is at hand.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

So I will go with it is not physical then.

I'm not arguing that it's different. I'm simply distinguishing from the harm caused by the chosen treatment, and the harm caused by the disorder itself.

So if someone with body integrity cuts off their leg, is that harm? Or treatment? Serious question, because I think it's definitely harm, definitely caused by the disorder, and no different than surgical gender reassignment.


A disorder causes a certain amount of harm if left untreated. The treatment then presumably reduces that harm.

There is harm, and there is distress. They aren't necessarily the same. What you're saying is that someone with gender dysphoria experiences distress, and the "treatment" reduces that distress. It might, it might not- but I'm saying either way, the treatment itself is harm.


Except permanent physical disability does not necessarily follow as a result of gender dysphoria. It only results if the sufferer chooses that particular course of treatment.

Well, that's true.

Again, some people argue that transgenderism itself- the incongruity between one's actual gender, and one's perceived gender- is not a disorder, it's merely a state of being. According to this argument, it's not a disorder unless it causes distress or harm. My argument is that for those who are driven to the extremes of surgically altering their genitals, that represents harm- not treatment, and is clear evidence all by itself of a disorder.

But really, my argument is that requiring evidence of harm or distress is a dishonest definition of a disorder in the first place. Whether or not someone is happy to believe their gender is different from their actual gender makes no difference insofar as that is concerned- it represents an incorrect perception of reality and of self, and is therefore disordered.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Of course it's harm. However, it very well may be viewed as harm caused by the person's attempt to treat, rather than harm from the underlying disorder.


Well, the obvious difference is that gender reassignment surgery is an endorsed medical procedure, conducted (in general) by licensed physicians, and accepted practice in the medical community. Whereas lopping off your own leg is, you know,...not. Whether you and I think it should be an acceptable practice or not is a separate question.


They're not necessarily the same, but in this case, the distress (frequently extreme) caused by the disconnect between physical and perceived gender IS the harm that is deemed to be caused by gender dysphoria. If that distress didn't exist, or if it wasn't harmful, there would be no need to seek treatment.


I can't speak to the efficacy of the treatment. I don't know if it relieves the distress or not. As I mentioned, with any treatment, the question is whether or not any harm caused by the underlying disorder outweighs any harm that comes with the potential treatment. For example, chemotherapy for cancer is basically poison to the body. They harm the body enormously. But that harm is acceptable because it treats the greater harm of the cancer itself.


I think the medical community generally tries to stay away from calling harmless delusions "disorders." If they didn't, there'd be a lot of medical professionals trying to label the religious as "disordered" due to their incorrect perception of reality. Therefore, they only worry about something as a disorder if it causes harm.

I agree that, whether it causes harm or distress or not, believing yourself to be one physical thing when you are demonstrably another is a sign of something psychological or physiological not working correctly. I simply think the specific term "disorder" is use more narrowly for medical purposes.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)