Prsmpower4

2019 Madison Scouts!

Recommended Posts

Ok one poster finds medical people who agree with his side and the other finds medical people who agree with his totally opposite side.... 

and hopefully takes this useless argument somewhere else.. especially since some of the “facts” have changed over the years regarding sexuality and mental illness....

(Really biting tongue on my conversation therapy opinion....)

 

 

 

Edited by JimF-LowBari
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GetOFFmyDot said:

 

There are several current members who do not identify as male.

This is interesting. It is not consistent with the Scout's transgender policy and if their management is aware of it, it is insubordination. 

The Madison Scouts will accept students based on the gender identity indicated by the applicant. Students assigned female at birth who identify as male (transgender males) will be eligible for participation provided their gender identify is similarly expressed to their immediate family members, school (if enrolled), and community. Any decision as to member eligibility based on gender identity may be appealed to the Forward Performing Arts, Inc. Board of Directors.

Edited by madisonsmiley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this thread never disappoints. I just had to look up DSM. Now can I please return to my objections to the BOD and ED?  Also, I nominate Deb’s Diner and NDKBASS as two new BOD members. A two generational family duo. Anybody who runs the food truck can have any position they want. 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Well, this thread never disappoints. I just had to look up DSM. Now can I please return to my objections to the BOD and ED?  Also, I nominate Deb’s Diner and NDKBASS as two new BOD members. A two generational family duo. Anybody who runs the food truck can have any position they want. 

Too many alphabets. I think you’re missing a Q in there somewhere. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gantang said:

You're right, the DSM no longer lists homosexuality and there is a similar move to remove pedophilia from the next edition (b4uact.org) but I stated a fact that cannot be disputed.

There are still many psychiatrists who believe that Gender Dysphoria is a mental illness and that many young people are being taught things that are dangerous to their own mental well-being. The debate on whether is should be removed from the next edition is ongoing because there hasn't been longitudinal studies of enough patients to get firm data. There have many reports of transgender regret from doctors around the world, which is one of the reason the APA is reluctant to remove GD as a disease.

This is why I stated that many older people are concerned about mental illness. The current generation of kids have been diagnosed and treated for more mental illnesses than any generation before them. Coping mechanisms have been replaced with drugs and therapy. I'm as concerned about misdiagnoses of depression as I am GD. 

My point to the OP was that you can't "view" something that is scientifically based differently just because you want to. You may think Facebook is correct in stating that there are 58 genders, but the science doesn't support that notion, nor does DNA, or the medical society.



 

Facebook does not actually list fifty eight different genders.  Facebook lists fifty eight options for identifying one's gender that provide multiple options for similar categories (https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/).  I.e., cisgender man or cisgender woman or cis man or cis woman.  Those are the same things, just slightly different ways of saying it.  Facebook is simply allowing users to identify themselves with a wider variety of presentation than it has before, it is not prescribing specific boundaries that then force people to identify in a way that may make them uncomfortable (or could ultimately be inaccurate).  Same thing with its pronoun options.  So, saying that there are fifty eight genders is not actually correct.  Facebook just has a plethora of options for identifying a limited amount of genders (of which there are more than the basic two most people are familiar with).

Gender identity or performance is way different than biological sex.  DNA does not have as much to do with gender, which is primarily a social construct (see the whole field of Gender, Women's, and Sexuality Studies or Queer Studies), as many may think it does.  Many prior societies (including Greco-Roman, African pre-Western intervention, and Feudal Japan) had different definitions of gender norms/roles and sexual orientation including things like what we know call homosexuality or transgender.

Again, how many psychiatrists out there actually believe that?  There are still people who believe in homosexual conversion therapy.  There are technically still scientists who do not believe in human influenced climate change.  There are still people who argue for biological differences in the races.  Does not mean they are right or in the majority.  Science is constantly evolving, and theories are theories.  Trusted theories are ones that stand the tests of time and either are themselves constantly adapted or refined.  The DSM itself is constantly being refined.  Arguing for gender dysphoria as a disorder based on current DSM classification is definitely a loosing argument in my opinion.  The history of homosexuality is one example where the DSM got it wrong over multiple iterations and updates to their classification.  The same can be said, and I argue is on going, with regards to transfolk and transrights.

Over diagnosis does exist to a degree in regards to anything that can be diagnosed.  But, like any field of inquiry, mental health is growing, and many younger individuals seem to have less issues or stigma surrounding therapy and open, honest discussion of mental health amongst themselves and their peer groups.  This is not necessarily a bad thing, and does not necessarily mean that they are over diagnosed as you argue.  Sure, there may be an overwhelming dependency on pharmaceuticals in modern (Western) medicine, but these things need to be teased out in more detail, and not lumped together.  Things like A.D.D. or A.D.H.D. or the larger (white) opioid crisis are different than the issues of transgender individuals and their treatment.  Before one can transition they undergo a wide battery of examinations, both physical and psychological.  Although I am not familiar with the number of folks who experience some sort of regret off the top of my head, my memory tells me the numbers are not great when considering the entire population of transfolk who come out and transition.  Queer theory is not my area of expertise, so I would need to do a little digging or consulting with other scholars to completely answer that question (Sara Ahmed's work is absolutely dope though, and I highly recommend her work if you want to read some scholarship on this and related subject matters because her stuff absolutely kills).  I just do not think it is as widespread as you argue here.

Coping mechanisms include pharmaceuticals and therapy.  How are they not coping mechanisms?  Rubbing dirt in it, drinking alcohol, or any other form of self-medication or coping may not actually be healthy in the longterm, and may not be as appropriate as therapy or medication.  That would depend on an individual's brain and blood chemistry and the appropriate consultation and recommendation of/from trained professionals, among other things.

Also, homosexuality and pedophilia are entirely different things, and should not be conflated.  Pedophilia involves issues of consent (since a minor cannot legally consent), and is not limited to same-sex attraction whereas homosexuality does not involve those same issues of consent (outside of sexual violence and assault, which, unfortunately, occur in every subset of humanity) and is limited to same-sex attraction.

Also, science, like any academic argument, is constantly a space of contestation like this very forum and thread are.  Nothing is set in stone.  Even major accepted theories like relativity, etc. are always being amended or challenged or updated or critiqued.  That is the nature of the game.  Academia is simply a long running conversation where people seek truth(s).  So, challenging an established fact is not actually outside of the norm for general society or scholarly communities.

 



 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Well, this thread never disappoints. I just had to look up DSM. Now can I please return to my objections to the BOD and ED?  Also, I nominate Deb’s Diner and NDKBASS as two new BOD members. A two generational family duo. Anybody who runs the food truck can have any position they want. 

Hmmm.  I believe neither is eligible to run for a board seat.  I highly doubt they are association members?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xandandl said:

What???

 

 

For sure. I think scholars in Queer Studies, and other related fields and sub fields, do a much better job articulating these issues than the DSM or psychiatrists do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.