PDGA survey

[dmoore1998]

So for a person assigned male at birth who presents as male some days and female others, and doesn't transition, do you think that person is a cisgender man some days and a transwoman other days? They are transgender. And they are gender fluid. Not a transwoman. Transition, medical and/or social, is evidenced by transwomen. That's not transphobia.

Yes to the bold. "Presents" must relate to the presenter's intention though, not how some outsider feels they present.

Though we're not talking about transgendered non-binary individuals. We're talking about transgendered women.

Transgender: denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex.

So what are you calling someone assigned male at birth, who identifies as a woman, and does nothing to medically transition? They are a transgender woman. There is NO medical requirement to be a transgender woman.

 

[jenb]

Words alone are not enough. Their brain IS enough though. They don't even NEED the words...simply knowing in their mind that they are a woman is 100% enough. Any statement to the contrary is transphobic.

Please provide evidence of this imaginary transwoman who never says boo or transitions in any way, yet lives in a world where Brahman caste Hindus are willing to become untouchable caste Hijra legally prohibited from being employed and forced to beg in the street in order to transition, said transition involving hormone therapy that is drinking the urine of pregnant mares. It's absurd to propose that a person with so little motivation to transition has a female brain.

 

[dmoore1998]

Please provide evidence of this imaginary transwoman who never says boo or transitions in any way, yet lives in a world where Brahman caste Hindus are willing to become untouchable caste Hijra legally prohibited from being employed and forced to beg in the street in order to transition, said transition involving hormone therapy that is drinking the urine of pregnant mares. It's absurd to propose that a person with so little motivation to transition has a female brain.

People transition in non-medical ways all the time to present as their preferred gender without deciding to ingest hormones or undergo surgery. Women don't need to PROVE to you that they are women.

So again:

So what are you calling someone assigned male at birth, who identifies as a woman, and does nothing to medically transition? They are a transgender woman. There is NO medical requirement to be a transgender woman.

 

[jenb]

Words alone are not enough. Their brain IS enough though. They don't even NEED the words...simply knowing in their mind that they are a woman is 100% enough. Any statement to the contrary is transphobic.

People transition in non-medical ways all the time to present as their preferred gender without deciding to ingest hormones or undergo surgery. Women don't need to PROVE to you that they are women.

So again:

So what are you calling someone assigned male at birth, who identifies as a woman, and does nothing to medically transition? They are a transgender woman. There is NO medical requirement to be a transgender woman.

I've been saying all along that social transitioners are transwomen. Do you not understand what those words mean?

 

[Golden Tuna]

Emotional is emergent from biological.

Fair, but no one has been able to explain why we're indulging (for lack of a better word) a situation of metal illness.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to feel or what to think. But, at some point, each person has to prioritize their decisions which inevitably dictate what they are/are not able to do.

I think someone else used the analogy of getting married and giving up the single life. Married people may retain some of who they were when they were single, but largely grow/mature into different people. As they become a new person, they leave much of that old person behind.

Again, not to pass judgement. The terms right or wrong don't really apply to feelings, but the original segregation of players into gender-protected divisions was done for very real, very reasonable reasons.

Mental issues or disorders do not disqualify you from being human or mean that you are bad. Hopefully we wouldn't treat someone with cancer as an "other" because of their condition.

100% completely agree.
I'm merely suggesting we don't have designated divisions for people with cancer, PTSD, kids, or a spouse. Why are we indulging this particular mental disorder to the point where we have to re-write rules of competition?

When I played hockey (a decade ago), I joked that I "identified as an old man" because I was so out of shape at the time and asked to play in the Over 40 league. Unfortunately, my biological birth year precluded me from playing in the age-protected division. Regardless of "how old I felt" there were standards in place to protect the integrity of the age-protected division.

 

[dmoore1998]

I've been saying all along that social transitioners are transwomen. Do you not understand what those words mean?

No you haven't, you've continually said you must medically transition to be a trans woman. Are you confused? Or just wildly backtracking now that you've been proven to have a completely vile standpoint. Go away troll. You're a transphobe, and you're blocked like the other transphobes who think they control who counts as a woman or not.

 

[jenb]

No you haven't, you've continually said you must medically transition to be a trans woman. Are you confused? Or just wildly backtracking now that you've been proven to have a completely vile standpoint. Go away troll. You're a transphobe, and you're blocked like the other transphobes who think they control who counts as a woman or not.

Go back and read. Anyone who cares anyway. The evidence is in this thread and the LGBTQ thread in the politics section.

 

[jenb]

Fair, but no one has been able to explain why we're indulging (for lack of a better word) a situation of metal illness.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to feel or what to think. But, at some point, each person has to prioritize their decisions which inevitably dictate what they are/are not able to do.

I think someone else used the analogy of getting married and giving up the single life. Married people may retain some of who they were when they were single, but largely grow/mature into different people. As they become a new person, they leave much of that old person behind.

Again, not to pass judgement. The terms right or wrong don't really apply to feelings, but the original segregation of players into gender-protected divisions was done for very real, very reasonable reasons.



100% completely agree.
I'm merely suggesting we don't have designated divisions for people with cancer, PTSD, kids, or a spouse. Why are we indulging this particular mental disorder to the point where we have to re-write rules of competition?

When I played hockey (a decade ago), I joked that I "identified as an old man" because I was so out of shape at the time and asked to play in the Over 40 league. Unfortunately, my biological birth year precluded me from playing in the age-protected division. Regardless of "how old I felt" there were standards in place to protect the integrity of the age-protected division.

My information is that gender dysphoria was removed from the DSM as a mental illness over 30 years ago. It caused some therapists and psychiatrists a few problems at first, since they no longer had a billing code for that diagnosis. IIRC they started doing things like billing for counseling relating to stress associated with gender dysphoria.

So officially not a mental illness. But many argue that a lot of (maybe all) mental illness stems from deviation from normal levels of the millions of trace hormones in the brain, all or most of which are produced by physical brain structures. So physical brain structure may program all of our personalities. I've heard that 95% of neuroscientists think they do, and they dream of the day they can take a bank robber, give him or her a personalized cocktail of brain hormones, and put them in charge of the bank.

 

[foxdawg10]

Sports are a beauty contest intended to identify the best mating partners for achieving various physical traits in offspring to be used as cannon fodder in wars fought over natural resources.. Require fertility tests for all competitors and all of this goes away.

Blinks.

I guess this is why they have mating rooms in the locker rooms at football games, right?

There are some pretty gangly and gruesome disc golfers so I'm not sure what that says about us as a sport, lmao.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Fair, but no one has been able to explain why we're indulging (for lack of a better word) a situation of metal illness.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to feel or what to think. But, at some point, each person has to prioritize their decisions which inevitably dictate what they are/are not able to do.

I think someone else used the analogy of getting married and giving up the single life. Married people may retain some of who they were when they were single, but largely grow/mature into different people. As they become a new person, they leave much of that old person behind.

Again, not to pass judgement. The terms right or wrong don't really apply to feelings, but the original segregation of players into gender-protected divisions was done for very real, very reasonable reasons.

The problem I have with the point regarding "the analogy of getting married" is that this has to do with physical structures of the brain that develop prior to birth. Although the process of transitioning is something one does as an adult, that process is a part of these folk effectively becoming "whole" in their identities, in alignment with their neuroanatomy. They're not "leaving that old person behind" as much as they are bringing everything in alignment with the person that they are.

A big difference in how you and I react to this situation, maybe I'm wrong here, seems to come from the fact that I perceive one's neuroanatomy as just as crucial to who someone is (if not more so) as their external sex organs, their chromosomal structure, or the down/upregulation of hormones. Whereas you seem to see neuroanatomy as secondary to those. Correct me if I'm wrong, obviously I don't know what you think.

 

[Arisugawa]

The problem I have with the point regarding "the analogy of getting married" is that this has to do with physical structures of the brain that develop prior to birth. Although the process of transitioning is something one does as an adult, that process is a part of these folk effectively becoming "whole" in their identities, in alignment with their neuroanatomy. They're not "leaving that old person behind" as much as they are bringing everything in alignment with the person that they are.

A big difference in how you and I react to this situation, maybe I'm wrong here, seems to come from the fact that I perceive one's neuroanatomy as just as crucial to who someone is (if not more so) as their external sex organs, their chromosomal structure, or the down/upregulation of hormones. Whereas you seem to see neuroanatomy as secondary to those. Correct me if I'm wrong, obviously I don't know what you think.

And this, unfortunately, is the context a lot of the people in the world are lacking. This isn't about "feelings." This isn't about some vague, intangible dream or wish to be something else. This is about the fundamental parts of biology in the mind responsible for identity. It's not an illness, it's not desire or some feeling. Even saying "Natalie identifies as a female" is problematic, because identify being used as a verb implies choice instead of recognition or acknowledgement in the eyes of the public.

It's not something that can be changed with medication, not something that can smoothed over with therapy. It's lifelong, and it's a terrible burden for the people with it.

It is very, very difficult for those of us in the world without it to understand or really even conceptualize it, because it is outside of anything else we may experience.

 

[davetherocketguy]

I propose the following solution to be fair to everyone. Reduce the divisions to the following:

Pro

Am

/thread

 

[foxdawg10]

I propose the following solution to be fair to everyone. Reduce the divisions to the following:

Pro

Am

/thread

There should be a character limit on threads like this. So much pseudo-intellectual obfuscation going on in here, this thread jumped the rails many pages ago.

 

[davetherocketguy]

There should be a character limit on threads like this. So much pseudo-intellectual obfuscation going on in here, this thread jumped the rails many pages ago.

My post didn't have enough words so it shouldn't be allowed.

Got it.

 

[gammaxgoblin]

This is a RESEARCH study, as it states, which is using the PDGA member base to gather data. They are going to see if there are correlations between views on transgender beliefs and other beliefs. I don't think its anything to be afraid of. It is concerning that the PDGA would offer its member base for participation, but it seems as though participation is optional. Our data is always being fed into algorithms to see correlations for targeting marketing purposes anyway.

 

[gammaxgoblin]

The problem I have with the point regarding "the analogy of getting married" is that this has to do with physical structures of the brain that develop prior to birth. Although the process of transitioning is something one does as an adult, that process is a part of these folk effectively becoming "whole" in their identities, in alignment with their neuroanatomy. They're not "leaving that old person behind" as much as they are bringing everything in alignment with the person that they are.

A big difference in how you and I react to this situation, maybe I'm wrong here, seems to come from the fact that I perceive one's neuroanatomy as just as crucial to who someone is (if not more so) as their external sex organs, their chromosomal structure, or the down/upregulation of hormones. Whereas you seem to see neuroanatomy as secondary to those. Correct me if I'm wrong, obviously I don't know what you think.

You are not wrong in your understanding as stated.

 

[denny ritner]

This is a RESEARCH study, as it states, which is using the PDGA member base to gather data. They are going to see if there are correlations between views on transgender beliefs and other beliefs. I don't think its anything to be afraid of. It is concerning that the PDGA would offer its member base for participation, but it seems as though participation is optional. Our data is always being fed into algorithms to see correlations for targeting marketing purposes anyway.

Sounds like a bait and switch.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CjXpY3EpvMr/?igshid=NjZiMGI4OTY=

 

[ChrisWoj]

Sounds like a bait and switch.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CjXpY3EpvMr/?igshid=NjZiMGI4OTY=

No, it sounds like incompetence.

But you keep searching for conspiracies.

 

[txmxer]

This is a RESEARCH study, as it states, which is using the PDGA member base to gather data. They are going to see if there are correlations between views on transgender beliefs and other beliefs. I don't think its anything to be afraid of. It is concerning that the PDGA would offer its member base for participation, but it seems as though participation is optional. Our data is always being fed into algorithms to see correlations for targeting marketing purposes anyway.

I don't mind being asked to participate. I didn't care for it because it was poorly designed IMO.

I also expect questions that seem irrelevant. Once again, they were poorly designed IMO.

 

[gammaxgoblin]

Here is a way to derail the thread...the research study I would LOVE to see is the correlation between surge in cannabis use over the last 5-10 years and paranoia as manifested by conspiracy ideation =)