Bruce Jenner Needs Counselling, Not Support

[shirgall]

[AncapFTW]

 

Just pointing out that you're ignoring me after I (three times) asked you to answer a very simple Yes/No question.

 

Moreover, I pointed out that one symptom of borderline personality disorder is "idealized relationships, wherein everyone is either idealized or devalued" - and refusing to answer a simple Yes/No question - (especially one which objectively points out blatant blind spots in your argument) - looks exactly like an "idealized relationship".

 

Moreover, I'll point out something that happened in my call-in show with Stefan. Way towards the end, I mentioned that I had been dumped only a week ago by the best woman I've ever been with. And he immediately replied, "If she was truly the best woman you've ever been with, I'm very sorry." We weren't doing video, so he couldn't see the small, appreciative smile that formed across my face - but that smile happened because his reaction was immediate and empathetic.

 

Meanwhile, I told the story of a ten year old male child who was forced to wear tutus and respond to "Danielle", even though he was not transgender. AND I told the story after pointing out that a leading medical expert insists that male-to-female transgenders are largely indifferent to children, (which really creeps out normal, heterosexual people). And, in response to that story, not one of the transgender individuals said, "I'm really saddened that this boy went through that."

 

So we all listen to Stefan, whom I deem masterful at empathy - which means you'd expect his admiring listeners to know how to at least fake having basic empathy. But none of the transgender individuals expressed basic empathy. *shrug*

I specifically said that what they did was evil. If you can't accept that by calling something evil I sympathize with the victim, then I'm not sure what you'll accept. I guess if we don't use the exact words you want us to, then it isn't obvious.

 

Also, did you ask yourself why she dumped you? Yes, I feel sorry for you, but I'm more of a solution person or a person that looks for a reason than a "show my feelings" type.

[Alice Amell]

A cutter is suicidal. They are using the destruction of flesh, causing physical pain and damage to their body, self-harm and self-violence to escape or change reality. The cutting may stop after one time, or they may bleed to death, or it may escalate into a pattern of ritual self-abuse. Either way, the cutting didn't solve the problem or change anything except temporary "releif". Why would cutting your penis off change anything?

People who cut themselves are not automatically suicidal. Repetitive cutting is classified as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). NSSI behavior such as cutting are associated with an increased risk of suicide - but most people who engage in self-harm are not suicidal.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-harm

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/self-injury/basics/definition/CON-20025897

 

This is the third time I'll say it: surgery is not the removal of the penis.

 

Furthermore, as I said, being transgender is not addictive behavior. You backed away from it being certain and obvious, now you say it may escalate into being addicting. How can I be addicted to something I haven't even done yet? There is no tolerance nor physical dependence, and if I were an addict seeking emotional release - there are other means of doing so. Having surgery is not immediately satisfying, as in, it won't help me right now. 

 

Do you need to figure out why you are cisgender or why you are attracted to women and not to men? The question of why I am transgender presupposes that it is not a natural phenomenon, that I should not accept it at face value and that I therefore can choose to not be it. If you ask me why I am sexual rather than asexual, I have no answer and I need no answer. I just am. Science may find the reason why in time, but in my opinion it is by no means a need.

[Eternal Growth]

GuzzyBone, I agree with the broad point you are making: the important of self-acceptance. The importance of fully accepting the reality of any situation before making a decision. That surgeries can be motivated by mere insecurity, and that the surgery itself will not make the insecurity go away. I think I can quote Stef in once saying in a video "There is no external cure to the problem of insecurity", and this seems congruent with my own experience and other experts I have read.

 

However, there are really two types of things that can both be called "self-acceptance". One is the acceptance of reality as it is in a self-empathetic way; the other is complacency with and a refusal to change something about yourself, even if it could be improved and this would bring about beneficial things for you.

 

For example, one type of self-acceptance is the acceptance of the fact that you are a procrastinator, and trying to find out what aspects of your experiences, ideas, relationships and emotions cause this. The other type is knowing you are a procrastinator, knowing methods that could potentially help you drop the habit, but being complacent with your inferior state of being and continuing to be one.

 

Applied to this situation, the first type of self-acceptance is a transsexual accepting their body as it is and being gentle and kind to themselves, understanding that they didn't choose the nature of their body but were just born with it. This is unambiguously positive, and is the kind of self-acceptance that may serve as the bedrock from which to objectively and level-headedly evaluate whether any kind of surgery or other improvement would be beneficial. The second type of self-acceptance would be for the trans person to be able to benefit from surgery, but instead to be complacent with their state of being, either out of stasis or because other people look down upon cosmetic surgery.

 

I believe you are promoting in your writing the first type of self-acceptance, which is a good thing, but also sliding into the second type, which is potentially unhealthy and could needlessly prolong a person's suffering where industrial civilisation has developed the technology to reduce it.

 

Moreover, I think you are poisoning your entire argument by misusing the word "violence". A dictionary defines violence as "action which causes destruction, pain or suffering" - and it is clear that, from the perspective of trans individuals who choose surgery, it is not regarded as an act of destruction - but of creation, and they see it as relieving pain and suffering - and in fact opening room for greater enjoyment of their body. "Violence" is more typically a word used to describe harm which is involuntarily imposed upon a person against their will. Surgery in this case is both voluntary and not regarded as harm by all individuals involved.

 

A blanket anti-cosmetic surgery position is also not a healthy one to be promoting. Should a person with a cleft palate be subject to as much therapy as is necessary for them to develop unconditional self-acceptance and desire no modification to their body? It should be clear that, if the technology is available to fix this cosmetic issue of their body, improving their quality of life, this should be an option on the table.

[MMX2010]

GuzzyBone, I agree with the broad point you are making: the important of self-acceptance. The importance of fully accepting the reality of any situation before making a decision. That surgeries can be motivated by mere insecurity, and that the surgery itself will not make the insecurity go away. I think I can quote Stef in once saying in a video "There is no external cure to the problem of insecurity", and this seems congruent with my own experience and other experts I have read.

 

However, there are really two types of things that can both be called "self-acceptance". One is the acceptance of reality as it is in a self-empathetic way; the other is complacency with and a refusal to change something about yourself, even if it could be improved and this would bring about beneficial things for you.

 

So this is the part where I, for the fifth time, repeat the question that no one has answered: "GuzzyBone and utopian have stated that Alice Amell is delusional because she said, 'During male-to-female transgender surgery, the penis is cut off and re-shaped into a vagina.'  This statement is delusional because the penis is cut off and re-shaped into the illusion of a vagina.  A real vagina is self-lubricating, leads to a uterus, and aids in sexual reproduction.  Is GuzzyBone's and utopian's argument TRUE OR FALSE?"

[Eternal Growth]

 

So this is the part where I, for the fifth time, repeat the question that no one has answered: "GuzzyBone and utopian have stated that Alice Amell is delusional because she said, 'During male-to-female transgender surgery, the penis is cut off and re-shaped into a vagina.'  This statement is delusional because the penis is cut off and re-shaped into the illusion of a vagina.  A real vagina is self-lubricating, leads to a uterus, and aids in sexual reproduction.  Is GuzzyBone's and utopian's argument TRUE OR FALSE?"

 

If Alice thinks that her surgery will give her "a real vagina [that is] self-lubricating, leads to a uterus, and aids in sexual reproduction", yes, she would be delusional to think that - but I do not think she thinks it, and having met dozens of trans women in real life, I have met none who have thought this about bottom surgery - instead regarding it as a process that provides a close approximation of a cisgender woman's vagina, that is different in some regards but similar in many others. And to be objective here, I will point out that many cisgender women's vaginae also vary in how much they meet your definition - not all cisgender women are fertile, for example.

[MMX2010]

If Alice thinks that her surgery will give her "a real vagina [that is] self-lubricating, leads to a uterus, and aids in sexual reproduction", yes, she would be delusional to think that - but I do not think she thinks it

 

 

So even though Alice directly said, (and let's quote her here), "The penis is not removed in surgery; it is inverted and used to create a vagina via vaginoplasty. However, the testicles are removed." you're interjecting that "She didn't really mean it that way!"?

 

Okay, well, then if she didn't really mean it that way, then she'll have no problem saying, "You're right, MMX.  I misspoke.  The correct version is that the penis is inverted and used to create a faux-vagina, a pseudo-vagina, or a mimic-vagina." 

 

If she corrects her mistake, then I'll believe you when you say, "She doesn't really think that way."  But if she refuses to correct her mistake, (which I predict will happen, because the prefixes faux- pseudo- and mimic- have negative emotional connotations, and Alice doesn't want to face any negative emotional connotations), then I won't accept your argument that "she didn't really mean it that way." 

 

Do you agree to these terms? 

[labmath2]

GuzzyBone, I agree with the broad point you are making: the important of self-acceptance. The importance of fully accepting the reality of any situation before making a decision. That surgeries can be motivated by mere insecurity, and that the surgery itself will not make the insecurity go away. I think I can quote Stef in once saying in a video "There is no external cure to the problem of insecurity", and this seems congruent with my own experience and other experts I have read.

 

However, there are really two types of things that can both be called "self-acceptance". One is the acceptance of reality as it is in a self-empathetic way; the other is complacency with and a refusal to change something about yourself, even if it could be improved and this would bring about beneficial things for you.

 

For example, one type of self-acceptance is the acceptance of the fact that you are a procrastinator, and trying to find out what aspects of your experiences, ideas, relationships and emotions cause this. The other type is knowing you are a procrastinator, knowing methods that could potentially help you drop the habit, but being complacent with your inferior state of being and continuing to be one.

 

Applied to this situation, the first type of self-acceptance is a transsexual accepting their body as it is and being gentle and kind to themselves, understanding that they didn't choose the nature of their body but were just born with it. This is unambiguously positive, and is the kind of self-acceptance that may serve as the bedrock from which to objectively and level-headedly evaluate whether any kind of surgery or other improvement would be beneficial. The second type of self-acceptance would be for the trans person to be able to benefit from surgery, but instead to be complacent with their state of being, either out of stasis or because other people look down upon cosmetic surgery.

 

I believe you are promoting in your writing the first type of self-acceptance, which is a good thing, but also sliding into the second type, which is potentially unhealthy and could needlessly prolong a person's suffering where industrial civilisation has developed the technology to reduce it.

 

Moreover, I think you are poisoning your entire argument by misusing the word "violence". A dictionary defines violence as "action which causes destruction, pain or suffering" - and it is clear that, from the perspective of trans individuals who choose surgery, it is not regarded as an act of destruction - but of creation, and they see it as relieving pain and suffering - and in fact opening room for greater enjoyment of their body. "Violence" is more typically a word used to describe harm which is involuntarily imposed upon a person against their will. Surgery in this case is both voluntary and not regarded as harm by all individuals involved.

 

A blanket anti-cosmetic surgery position is also not a healthy one to be promoting. Should a person with a cleft palate be subject to as much therapy as is necessary for them to develop unconditional self-acceptance and desire no modification to their body? It should be clear that, if the technology is available to fix this cosmetic issue of their body, improving their quality of life, this should be an option on the table.

While i have let go of the transgender debate, i do think this post is a gem in the backdrop of a rather unpleasant debate.

[_LiveFree_]

So a person born with female genitalia that is unable to self-lubricate and who is unable to reproduce does not have a real vagina? Women who have hysterectomies cease having real vaginas?

 

This thread has become ridiculous.

 

The existence of transwomen does not invalidate healthy masculinity. Nor does the existence of transmen invalidate healthy femininity.

[MMX2010]

So a person born with female genitalia that is unable to self-lubricate and who is unable to reproduce does not have a real vagina?

 

 

No, a person born with female genitalia that is unable to self-lubricate and is unable to reproduce has a real, but non-functioning, vagina. 

 

 

 

Women who have hysterectomies cease having real vaginas?

 

 

Actually, according to Wikipedia.org, every woman who has a hysterectomy continues to have a real vagina.  She just has her ovaries, womb, and cervix removed.

 

All of this, of course, validates my claim that no transwoman possesses a real vagina after transsexual surgery. 

 

[utopian]

It seems this thread has petered out. But before it goes completely, I want to leave some final thoughts, as it can be seen some people have valued them.

 

Throughout this thread, I have encountered arguments from perspectives I have seen before; perspectives from religion. Where the argument is unfounded by anything but "feelings" and "just knowing" from where people claim facts from which there can be no empirical evidence. In the same ways, these arguments have thrown every unfounded and distracting argument in the book out there, in a desperate attempt to find any measure of confusion that could confound and frustrate anyone opposing these perspectives. Also, not unlike arguments for religion, people here have attempted to depend upon social aspects like political correctness and "hate speech" in order to justify their reasoning. Attempts to simply make opposing arguments seem naive, in order to socially pressure anyone from making opposing arguments. Despite all this, no unresolvable evidence has been put forward in favor of transgenderism. 

 

 

 

And as we have gone through this thread, three mechanics have made themselves apparent to me. The first is, look how much attention transgenders are getting. Has anyone stopped to consider that perhaps, this is what so called transgenders were really after in the first place? That perhaps transgenders are the kinds of people who are so desperate for attention, they are willing to surgically and chemically alter themselves to get it? Attractive women can get no lack of attention, to be sure. Perhaps in some labyrinth of insanity, there are people willing to alter themselves without regard, in order to attract the same attention. The bottomless depths of what Stephan calls "me plus".

 

 

The second is, look how much controversy has been spun over this. This is the media's wet dream, getting people to argue and debate over an issue, while the media gets ratings from hosting these stories, as well as advertising and other revenue. The media is unconcerned with the mental health of the public, only ratings and revenue. They are perhaps the only true winners here. 

 

The third mechanic is, and this is the most important one; it seems big corporations are practicing, with surgical precision, how to go about committing atrocities while hiding themselves in the "hurtful truth". We all understand the mechanic of "the hurtful truth" on some level. It's simple; if you see a woman who is ugly or fat, and she asks you if she is either, you will not tell her the truth, because it will hurt her feelings. 

 

The same mechanic that applies when you can't tell an American soldier the army he works for is doing wrong, because it's disrespectful.

 

The same mechanic that applies when you can't disagree with a woman, because society deems it sexist. 

 

The same mechanic that applies to criminal blacks, terrorist Muslims, money manipulating Jews, Orientals who can't drive, racist white cops, hypergamous women... the list goes on and on.

 

 

 

 

 

And so, what is the hurtful truth with transgenderism? The hurtful truth is, insanity. Because to suggest to a religious fundamentalist, or an ugly prude, and yes, even a man who believes he is a woman... that they are actually living a lie... that the very thing they believe without evidence, is untrue... is to suggest to the person that what is really going on is that they were impressionable enough to believe what others, or themselves, have wrongfully convinced them of. The painful idea that whatever it was they have invested their lives in, was not actually worth anything at all.

 

 

 

Why accept that? Why face the painful truth? Why not go on through life, living a beautiful lie? After all, it's so much more enjoyable to live in a fantasy world. That's why women watch so much TV, and men play so many video games. And so, people go on, living their beautiful lies, and branding anyone who brings them the truth as insensitive hate-mongering bigots. 

 

 

 

This idea should be familiar to anyone who has watched "The Matrix", and also should the consequences of the idea be familiar. In The Matrix, the machines drain the humans of their energies while feeding them their beautiful lies. In real life, it is the same; corporations and government are feeding on the commonfolk as they feed us their beautiful lies. No one wants to be woken up from the Matrix; no one wants to be told the truth. And yet, those of us who know the truth are trapped, because we cannot overthrow the system without the people still stuck in the Matrix.

 

 

 

 

Personally, I have almost been tricked into being physical with some transgenders. I have been lucky; I have always been able to spot and avoid them. Regardless, the system is manipulating these people into trying to trick me, and not just in this way. That is the real issue here; that when all is said and done, transgenderism is an attempt to convince outside parties that they are something other than the gender they were born. Nobody is cutting off their penis and having it shaped into a vagina so that they can live by themselves that way.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, this really is one of the lesser methods by which the system is attempting to manipulate the common man. I wish I could just download all of my information into a reader's head. It really is obvious how in line the transgender agenda is with corporate/government manipulation. As far as proving it... I am working on it. I have quite a long post I have been meaning to put on this forum, and things like this thread have distracted me from completing it. While transgenderism effects a small percentage of the population (and maybe manipulates much more of it) the dangers of the Federal Reserve and other big money powers effect every person on earth. The pieces of that board game have long since been moving; a titanic shift is coming, beginning with the default of Greece's debt. Transgenderism has served as a great distraction as we dive headfirst into another recession, quite possibly worse than the one we have just been through. I imagine that was the idea all along. 

 

And so because of this, I will not be responding to anything else in this thread, at least until I complete my post about economic history. I suggest we all stop distracting ourselves with petty political incorrect offensives. Let's worry more about the cliff we are about to drive over. 

[Jagsfan82]

I have somewhat had this discussion before. I was planning to post my argument towards this when it was more well cited, but I also have another post I am mainly working on, so my incomplete post will have to do until then.

 

.....

This is about everything I could ever imagine to say about the topic.

 

There are lots of ways the transgender community want to justify the whole process, but its not a good process, and its far more damaging in the long run to go through the process than it is to go through the pain of fixing the underlying issues because the whole process is a lie.  The reality is there is no such thing as transgender.  The reality is if the person is unhappy before, they will be unhappy after.

 

I understand the argument that these people feel they have been assigned the wrong gender at birth, or however fucked up way you want to use language to say their brain genuinely feels like a woman when their body is a man (or the other way around), but the bottom line is it doesn't matter.  That sucks that it happened to you, whether it was genetic from the moment of conception or epigenetic or completely environmental based... but it really doesn't matter.  The bottom line is that person is stuck with being that way.  If they don't have the ability to adapt and be happy in the body they were given, they certainly won't be happy after going through the lie of trying to change genders. Telling them they can, and should, is not healthy and doesn't support what most people want others to feel, which is owning, accepting, and "being proud" of who you are.

[MMX2010]

It seems this thread has petered out. But before it goes completely, I want to leave some final thoughts, as it can be seen some people have valued them.

 

Throughout this thread, I have encountered arguments from perspectives I have seen before; perspectives from religion. Where the argument is unfounded by anything but "feelings" and "just knowing" from where people claim facts from which there can be no empirical evidence. In the same ways, these arguments have thrown every unfounded and distracting argument in the book out there, in a desperate attempt to find any measure of confusion that could confound and frustrate anyone opposing these perspectives. Also, not unlike arguments for religion, people here have attempted to depend upon social aspects like political correctness and "hate speech" in order to justify their reasoning. Attempts to simply make opposing arguments seem naive, in order to socially pressure anyone from making opposing arguments. Despite all this, no unresolvable evidence has been put forward in favor of transgenderism. 

 

 

 

And as we have gone through this thread, three mechanics have made themselves apparent to me. The first is, look how much attention transgenders are getting. Has anyone stopped to consider that perhaps, this is what so called transgenders were really after in the first place? That perhaps transgenders are the kinds of people who are so desperate for attention, they are willing to surgically and chemically alter themselves to get it? Attractive women can get no lack of attention, to be sure. Perhaps in some labyrinth of insanity, there are people willing to alter themselves without regard, in order to attract the same attention. The bottomless depths of what Stephan calls "me plus"

 

 

I agree with you, but it's more than that. 

 

I asked Alice Amell exactly what process she used to discover she was transgender, because the process is always the same. 

 

It's NEVER, "I was determined to make friends with all types of people in my high school, the jocks, the nerds, the highly intelligent, the not-intelligent, the good, and the troubled.  And I succeeded in becoming friends with them.  And then I engaged them in highly-contentious debates about the nature of gender and transgender." 

 

It's ALWAYS, "The moment I suspected I was transgender, I had a tepid argument with someone important to me - usually my parents.  Once that person didn't instantly accept me, I shut down and stopped debating with them.  This inevitably led me to seek out the company of people who already agreed with me, and that company of people was found in such-and-such internet group.  The connection I felt made me so happy that I knew transgender was real, and that everyone needs to acknowledge it." 

 

--------------------

 

There's a seemingly unrelated article by TheLastPsychiatrist entitled The Second Story of Echo and Narcissus.  I'll post a link in this thread, but I'm warning you: that article is extremely difficult to read and understand.  The author, himself, warns you that after you've read it, you'll try to re-write its meaning to prevent yourself from seeing it. 

 

But the punch-line, the one-liner that is most relevant to this thread, is: "Narcissus didn't love anyone, and so he fell in love with himself." 

 

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/10/the_story_of_narcissus.html

[Eternal Growth]

This is about everything I could ever imagine to say about the topic.

 

There are lots of ways the transgender community want to justify the whole process, but its not a good process, and its far more damaging in the long run to go through the process than it is to go through the pain of fixing the underlying issues because the whole process is a lie.  The reality is there is no such thing as transgender.  The reality is if the person is unhappy before, they will be unhappy after.

 

May I ask how many trans people or the medical professionals who treat them you have interviewed prior to making this claim?

 

Around 13% of the sample had not transitioned in any way and did not have any

desire to transition. For the other participants however, transition was an issue which

affected them in many ways, warranting a separate section here to explore this

further. The findings from this report have demonstrated that for those who wish

to undergo some form of transition or gender reassignment, being able to do so

dramatically improves their outcomes. As demonstrated above:

★ Transition was related to improved life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale

scores being statistically significant when separated by stage of/desire to transition;

F=18.506, df=5, p<0.005).

★ Transition was related to improved body satisfaction in relation to gender.

★ Transition led to less avoidance of public and social spaces, and changed the

nature of those that are avoided.

★ Transition was related to a decrease in mental health service use. Support is

mainly needed before and during transition.

★ Transition was related to reduced depression (with differences in CES-D scores

being statistically significant; F=2.205, df=5, p=0.05).

★ Mental health was rated as being better post-transition that previously.

★ Self-harm reduced following transition for the majority of those who had a

history of self-harm.

★ Suicidal ideation and attempts were more frequent pre-transition.

★ Very few participants regretted the physical changes that they had undergone

as part of transition. The regrets which they did have were related to surgical

outcome – in particular, revisions, repairs, complications, and loss of sensation.

★ Post-transition many people found that they had the same amount or more

support socially than previously.

★ Transition had many implications for parenting, most notably the possibility of

it negatively impacting upon the participants’ relationships with, and particularly

access to, their children.

★ Most participants experienced improvements in the quality of their sex lives

following transition.

 

Source: http://www.gires.org.uk/assets/Medpro-Assets/trans_mh_study.pdf

 

There was a marked difference in the proportion of people who were currently experiencing

clinically relevant depressive symptoms by both hormone use, and surgical status. In those

taking hormone therapy the proportion was 39.8%, while in those who were not taking it (but

wished to do so), the proportion was 58.4%. Of those who had undergone at least some

form of transition-related surgery, the proportion with clinically relevant depressive symptoms

was 34.6%. Among those who desired (but had not undergone) surgery, it was 51.3%. This

supports previous research that access to hormones and surgery improves quality of life.

 

Source: https://www.beyondblue.org.au/docs/default-source/research-project-files/bw0288_the-first-australian-national-trans-mental-health-study---summary-of-results.pdf?sfvrsn=2

[regevdl]

I think either way everyone needs to be treated with equality, compassion and respect.  I am sad to see people reiterating this because it reveals that people are intentionally being disrespectful or it reveals that they are reacting emotionally rather than hearing people's challenges in accepting these life choices.  Especially in high profile when it feels 'shoved down our throats'.  I get it.... turn off your TV to avoid it.  of course, but seriously, it's hard to avoid.

 

But bringing up certain challenges one has with these life choices is not disrespectful.  Look, I think it's completely fair to question this transition.  This man was married twice or 3 times and had numerous children with each of his wives, was a top athlete and now this.  Let's set aside his fame-hungry publicity agent ex-wife for the moment.  

 

I mean the moment people question this they get the door slammed in their face about intolerance and bigotry!  That's completely unfair.  Sure.  maybe his marriage failed because of his secret life but that is nothing to celebrate if he was deceiving himself AND a couple of wives WITH children involved.  I'm sorry..... man or woman up and be honest.  Eventually he did but we don't really know at what cost.  I think the picture is too perfect but what do I know....I'm just an observer.

 

I listened to his speech in receiving his award (her award..sorry).  I don't care if she deserves it above the others or not.  MY concern is that she talked a LOT about taking the punches and blows from the haters to hopefully empower or save those in the same position, contemplating suicide.  

 

She is free to carry out her advocacy how she feels but it feels too much 'fame-gluttony' for my blood.  glamerous photo shoots, highly edited and scripted 'documentaries' and such.  What could REALLy help the trans-community in the country?  In person visit.  Follow them for a day and sit iwth them and talk specifically how to handle the haters on a day to day pertaining to their demographics or circumstance.  She is only one person and she can help one person at a time.  But it's a bit 'hands off' and self congratulating to say she's taking all  of the hate to save others from it.....meh...show me the data.  Have trans suicides and bullying gone down since all of this?  

 

Has she publicly admitted to seeking counseling AND her family seeking counsling through this process?  I think that would be a 'practice what you preach' lesson and live example to the other less famous trans out there.  How to transition, how to help the family accept, etc.  none of this is preached by her glorified advocacy.  I guess that is where my diasspointment lies because look.  I saw more humility and more CONNECTION from Princess Diana in her missions around the world that if Caitlynn Jenner is suppose to be a fraction of that level of class and hands-on....I'm just not seeing it.  

 

Her transition does not affect me in the way but if she's going to be splashed all over the media, then show me that she's personally connecting with real trans who are suffering, not just accepting awards months after her outing (again.....hate to speculate on the convenient timing of that with all of her hollywood connections...).

 

missed opportunity to do some real good because honestly, if I was a suffering tranny surrounded by bigotry and all I saw was this famous man now a famous woman and nothing but love and support I would certainly be happy for her but feel more distant  from that reality because that IS far from reality I could imagine for most of the trans community.  It probably looks unrealistic.  Hell.  I got more shit from family and friends for marrying outside of my religion and suddenly I"m suppose to accept that 2 or 3 exwives, parents, AND children are all-aboard her trans train?  I'm reasonably skeptical.

[brucethecollie]

Thought this was interesting, it's a quote from someone who identifies as transgender:

 

 "Gender norms are the issue. There is nothing wrong with a male who wants to wear makeup, high heels, dresses, etc. or a woman who wants to wear a suit and tie. The issue is the belief that somehow reassigning their genitals will make them the opposite sex (I'm transgender and even I believe that is complete dilusion). The problem is society tells us if you want to wear dresses and a skirt and makeup then you must be female. So people in the transgender community feel they have to transition to one or the other binary in order to fit it, once again coming back to the issue that gender norms are the real issue most transgender people face. There is an extremely small minority that are actually transsexual (believe they are in the wrong body). Transgender is just gender nonconforming. Nothing wrong with that. Also to note, not all transgender people get surgery to deal with their dysphoria. For some it's just wearing the "opposite" clothes, or hormones which has been shown to ease the dysphoria. The belief that in order to transition you need to get fully functioning genitals removed is bs."