Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: APA says being transgender is no longer a mental disorder
  • Subject: APA says being transgender is no longer a mental disorder
Subject: APA says being transgender is no longer a mental disorder

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Distant Dawn

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Distant Dawn

Posted by: MadMax888
But the point remains that it's natural, albeit uncommon. No other species besides humans sees it as a negative trait.

Maybe that has to do with the fact that we're a highly intelligent species.

So, because we're intelligent, it's correct to classify being trans as a disorder? Even though it occurs naturally and in other species, it's somehow wrong for us?

Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's not a disorder.
What about being trans is a disorder?

  • 12.04.2012 10:49 AM PDT

*scratches nuts*


Posted by: jacob crawford

Posted by: Distant Dawn
It is standard for people to stick to their own sex, and it's a consistent pattern in our species.

Which is where you just shot yourself in the foot.

There are over 750 species that exhibit multi--blam!- or homogenized -blam!- tendencies. Only 2 or 3 species to my immediate knowledge exhibit same-sex traits that are not mammals. So no, you are dead wrong.

From a biological aspect, it is entirely normal for mammals to be homogenized in their -blam!- tendencies.

Edit:
I stand corrected on who/what can be homogenized in their -blam!- tendencies
I don't think you quite understood what he was trying to say. While a good number of species show these tendencies, it's certainly the exception and not the norm.


If you look at it from a biological standpoint, it certainly isn't good for a species if its members stop breeding because males are no longer attracted to females, females are no longer attracted to males, and certain members are claiming they have no sexua.l orientation/think they're the opposite gender they were born as.


If you are LGBT or whatever else you liberals are going to come up with these days, you're doing your species a great diservice. Wether you like it or not, the primary goal of any organism on the planet is to reproduce and spread its genes amoung the population, being LBGT stops this and therefore is wrong in my eyes


I guess it's time to check my privilege.

  • 12.04.2012 10:58 AM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Distant Dawn

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Distant Dawn

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Distant Dawn

Maybe that has to do with the fact that we're a highly intelligent species.

So, because we're intelligent, it's correct to classify being trans as a disorder? Even though it occurs naturally and in other species, it's somehow wrong for us?

Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's not a disorder.
What about being trans is a disorder?

Being trans isn't a disorder, it's just they themselves have a disorder. If you were "born a man in a womans body" or vice versa, then there's something wrong.

This is the point I've been making the whole time. You're referring to Gender Dysphoria, which is what trans people experience and certainly is a disorder.

The point of the article/this thread is to point out that until now, simply being trans was considered a disorder.

[Edited on 12.04.2012 10:59 AM PST]

  • 12.04.2012 10:58 AM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: General Noobus
Wether you like it or not, the primary goal of any organism on the planet is to reproduce and spread its genes amoung the population, being LBGT stops this and therefore is wrong in my eyes

Absolutely wrong. Identifying as LGBT doesn't mean you're unable to reproduce. Your hardware still works just fine.

The people you should be concerned about are the people who are willfully not having children, even though they are perfectly capable of doing so.

  • 12.04.2012 11:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Writer's Corner
6/15/2011 11:39 PM: bobcast [2597260] issued a 3 day ban expiring on 6/18/2011 11:39 PM.
Reason: A Bungie.net Forum Moderator has banned you for violating the code of conduct and/or rules of the forum in the thread below
http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=61704535
Inappropriate. Went a little to far with the butt hole tearing.


Posted by: General Noobus

Posted by: jacob crawford

Posted by: Distant Dawn
It is standard for people to stick to their own sex, and it's a consistent pattern in our species.

Which is where you just shot yourself in the foot.

There are over 750 species that exhibit multi--blam!- or homogenized -blam!- tendencies. Only 2 or 3 species to my immediate knowledge exhibit same-sex traits that are not mammals. So no, you are dead wrong.

From a biological aspect, it is entirely normal for mammals to be homogenized in their -blam!- tendencies.

Edit:
I stand corrected on who/what can be homogenized in their -blam!- tendencies
I don't think you quite understood what he was trying to say. While a good number of species show these tendencies, it's certainly the exception and not the norm.


If you look at it from a biological standpoint, it certainly isn't good for a species if its members stop breeding because males are no longer attracted to females, females are no longer attracted to males, and certain members are claiming they have no sexua.l orientation/think they're the opposite gender they were born as.


If you are LGBT or whatever else you liberals are going to come up with these days, you're doing your species a great diservice. Wether you like it or not, the primary goal of any organism on the planet is to reproduce and spread its genes amoung the population, being LBGT stops this and therefore is wrong in my eyes


I guess it's time to check my privilege.


I disagree. What about artificial insemination? What about adoption?

We aren't exactly living in a time of famine or strife, brah. If those people were the only one's left on the planet, they'd find a way to reproduce, whether that means have some straight sex here and there.

I think you are greatly overreacting here to a minorities choice.

And if you think that they are doing the species a disservice, then you should also include ANY couple or person that makes the choice to not have children. You should see them as wrong in your eyes as well.

  • 12.04.2012 11:02 AM PDT

“If we will disbelieve everything, because we cannot certainly know all things, we shall do much what as wisely as he who would not use his legs, but sit still and perish, because he had no wings to fly.” - John Locke

"How can anyone be enlightened? Truth after all is so poorly lit." - Rush


Posted by: General Noobus

If you are LGBT or whatever else you liberals are going to come up with these days, you're doing your species a great diservice. Wether you like it or not, the primary goal of any organism on the planet is to reproduce and spread its genes amoung the population, being LBGT stops this and therefore is wrong in my eyes


I guess it's time to check my privilege.
You know what else is a great disservice to our species? Sitting around wasting your time on meaningless electronic entertainment when you could be bettering the progression of humanity.

All animals, humans included, do things that aren't necessarily of the utmost importance to the species, and exhibit natural traits that seem to do similarly. Our biology is what creates the LGBT community, so the LGBT cannot go against our biology, simple enough.


Oh, and of course, by your fallacious logic, any hetero couple that doesn't reproduce is a "disservice" to the species, and anyone who is infertile is also a "disservice" to the species.

[Edited on 12.07.2012 11:28 AM PST]

  • 12.07.2012 11:27 AM PDT


Posted by: Godshatter
Good.

  • 12.07.2012 11:27 AM PDT