NAACP leader has been lying about her race

[RunningMn9]

The argument isn't "just because". There are reasons why A has been classified as a specific medical condition and the other hasn't.

Second, gender is much, much more integral to a person than their race.

Are we relying on GreenGoo to make the medical argument? One only needs to peruse the thread for a glimpse of the biological evidence for there being a "real" condition. Do we imagine that there are "white" people out there with "black" brain structures? Is there such a thing as a "black" brain structure?

I don't think there is. Do you?

[GreenGoo]

The argument isn't "just because". There are reasons why A has been classified as a specific medical condition and the other hasn't.

Second, gender is much, much more integral to a person than their race.

But that's not why one is a medical condition and the other is not.

I fail to see how it's close minded to simply state that science has determined that one is a medical condition while the other has not been. Pretending they "could be" similar is just that, speculation at absolute best.

Especially after Capt. Caveman's explanation of what constitutes race versus ethnicity.

[Carpet_pissr]

The argument isn't "just because". There are reasons why A has been classified as a specific medical condition and the other hasn't.

Second, gender is much, much more integral to a person than their race.

Are we relying on GreenGoo to make the medical argument? One only needs to peruse the thread for a glimpse of the biological evidence for there being a "real" condition. Do we imagine that there are "white" people out there with "black" brain structures? Is there such a thing as a "black" brain structure?

I don't think there is. Do you?

Maybe I am not being clear. Here is what I perceive:

Someone mentions Jenner or transgender in this thread about racial self identity.
Pile on by several, saying 'don't even put those in the same context - racial identity is not a thing, gender identity IS a thing, because the medical community says so'
My only point is that we seem to be very quick to dismiss "human quality X self identification" as not valid, or not AS valid, as gender self identification because society, and specifically the medical community has relatively recently declared its existence. Granted (and now I am arguing with myself), that is a form of validation, but it seems a bit...presumptuous to assume there are no other possible self identifying qualities, or at least none as important as gender.

I DO need to look closely at the difference between race and ethnicity, and the biology that comes into play there vs. societal or cultural influence. Could be a case of semantics that I am missing something here, or misunderstanding.

[GreenGoo]

My only point is that we seem to be very quick to dismiss "human quality X self identification" as not valid, or not AS valid, as gender self identification because society, and specifically the medical community has relatively recently declared its existence. Granted (and now I am arguing with myself), that is a form of validation, but it seems a bit...presumptuous to assume there are no other possible self identifying qualities, or at least none as important as gender.

But you're asking us to "keep an open mind" about something that is not established fact, when compared to something that is established fact. And you've offered us nothing but speculation that it might be true, while we've provided oodles of evidence establishing one as true.

I mean come on Carpet_pissr, one is pure speculation. How on earth can you or expect us to think it should be in the same category as established fact?

[GreenGoo]

Amusingly, I see this discussion happening in multiple places all over the 'net right now, with similar results.

[RunningMn9]

Someone mentions Jenner or transgender in this thread about racial self identity.

No need to beat around the bush. McNutt brought Jenner into the discussion because people were treating this woman differently than they were treating Jenner. I explained that I thought his confusion probably stemmed from not understanding the condition that Jenner has, to which McNutt agreed he was ignorant of.

Pile on by several, saying 'don't even put those in the same context - racial identity is not a thing, gender identity IS a thing, because the medical community says so'

They shouldn't be put into the same context. Because racial identity is not a thing. And gender identity IS a thing. I don't know why those two sentences bother you. I suspect (and maybe this is where I am wrong) that the issue is mostly likely NOT that you think that racial identity is a thing, but rather that you also think that gender identity is not a thing. Although that's actually how I perceived it when McNutt and Grifman were talking about it. So maybe you are unfairly lumped in with them. I apologize for that.

The issue isn't just "because the medical community says so". The issue is WHY the medical community says so. There are fundamental biological differences between a man and a woman. And sometimes when a human being is born with man parts, their DNA is such that they have more of the fundamental biological traits of a woman. They appear to be a man on the outside, but internally the wiring is all (or predominantly) female. The possibility of this existing isn't something that should be shocking to anyone.

Initially, all human fetuses are female, in that the default pathway is to develop into a female. During the eighth week of gestation, the presence of a Y chromosome and a functional locus for the SRY gene product, also called the testes determining factor (TDF), determines if testicular development will occur. This process converts the inherently female fetus into a male one, as a steadily increasing surge of testosterone is then produced by the testes. Much of the testosterone is converted to dihydrotestosterone, which is the key hormone to virilize the fetus. Along the biochemical pathway, other recently identified gene products likely play an additional role in the masculinization of the fetus.

Further progression toward the eventual male phenotype occurs as antimüllerian hormone is produced, inhibiting the formation of müllerian ducts, which would lead to female genital development. The fetal brain is also affected by this process. The corpus callosum, amygdala, cerebellum, and portions of the preoptic area of the hypothalamus are larger in brains exposed to testosterone. Corresponding parts of the brain are smaller in female, or testosterone-deprived, fetuses. Indeed, in the absence of testosterone, the fetus continues its progression in the female state. Development of the ovaries and the female genital tract is likely triggered by follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), which is present in both male and female fetuses, but whose effect is masked by the testosterone surge in males.

The gender identity of a fetus, and later an infant, is still incomplete. Yet, current research indicates that because of the expected hormonal exposure secondary to genetic sex, a certain gender bias probably exists in all newborns. This rudimentary gender identity, although incomplete, is an important determinant in gender development. The dimorphism of the brain itself suggests this. Nevertheless, variations may occur when endogenous or exogenous factors create a fetal environment where hormone levels do not follow the genetically determined pattern. The gender bias of these infants may be tilted away from one that correlates with the genotype. Such variations are discussed below.

Human babies don't all start out as culturally white babies, and then because of the presence (or lack) of a hormone, turn into culturally black babies.

My only point is that we seem to be very quick to dismiss "human quality X self identification" as not valid, or not AS valid, as gender self identification because society, and specifically the medical community has relatively recently declared its existence.

I'm quick to dismiss it because "black culture" isn't a "human" quality. There aren't fundamental biological differences between white people and black people that can cause the same sort of issue that exists with gender identity.

presumptuous to assume there are no other possible self identifying qualities, or at least none as important as gender.

That's the simple reality of the biological nature of GID and how/why it happens.

[Madmarcus]

I think her lying about her background is the huge issue. If she just admitted she was white but identify with black then this wouldn't even register

Agreed. The problem, if there is one, isn't her identification as black, it is the lying about your background, who your parents are, your brothers etc. To this day she cannot just say she isn't black.

Big agreement with this.

[Carpet_pissr]

Balanced response which could have easily been nasty, but wasn't

Thanks for that. Several good points that I had not considered.

And yes, you were incorrect to assume that I was somehow diminishing the gender topic, or didn't believe that it was real. I do believe it, but now I see why the initial piling on happened -some perceived the question/comment as an indirect way to somehow diminish the gender issue. At least speaking for me, that was not the intent, but I could be wrong.

[gameoverman]

I think her lying about her background is the huge issue. If she just admitted she was white but identify with black then this wouldn't even register

Agreed. The problem, if there is one, isn't her identification as black, it is the lying about your background, who your parents are, your brothers etc. To this day she cannot just say she isn't black.

Big agreement with this.

I agree, I think fraud should be the key point. Or lying, however you want to say it. I don't have an issue with her identifying herself as black, whatever that's supposed to mean. But lying to or even just misleading people by letting them think you're black, that's terrible. It means she treated the entire thing like a joke.

As far as the comparisons to gender identification, well identifying as a race has nothing to do with medical conditions or treatment. Someone who is transgender has a right to healthcare privacy. So if she was born male I would not say she's obligated to tell anyone in the organization that fact. It would compromise her right to privacy. If you identify as another race I don't see how you'd be sacrificing any type of privacy that's protected by law if you told someone that.

[Madmarcus]

Someone mentions Jenner or transgender in this thread about racial self identity.

No need to beat around the bush. McNutt brought Jenner into the discussion because people were treating this woman differently than they were treating Jenner. I explained that I thought his confusion probably stemmed from not understanding the condition that Jenner has, to which McNutt agreed he was ignorant of.

They shouldn't be put into the same context. Because racial identity is not a thing. And gender identity IS a thing. I don't know why those two sentences bother you. I suspect (and maybe this is where I am wrong) that the issue is mostly likely NOT that you think that racial identity is a thing, but rather that you also think that gender identity is not a thing. Although that's actually how I perceived it when McNutt and Grifman were talking about it. So maybe you are unfairly lumped in with them. I apologize for that.

The issue isn't just "because the medical community says so". The issue is WHY the medical community says so. There are fundamental biological differences between a man and a woman. And sometimes when a human being is born with man parts, their DNA is such that they have more of the fundamental biological traits of a woman. They appear to be a man on the outside, but internally the wiring is all (or predominantly) female. The possibility of this existing isn't something that should be shocking to anyone.
genetically determined pattern. The gender bias of these infants may be tilted away from one that correlates with the genotype. Such variations are discussed below.

Human babies don't all start out as culturally white babies, and then because of the presence (or lack) of a hormone, turn into culturally black babies.

That's the simple reality of the biological nature of GID and how/why it happens.[/quote]

An earlier post had the interesting info that not everyone with GID has the identifiable changes/mismatch, some people without GID do have these mismatches, and other research says that these brain changes are possible through nurture or environment not just DNA. This seems to suggest that some tansgender issues do not have a clear cut developmental biological issue. Perhaps I'm being imprecise, is the specific developmental mismatch the difference between GID and transgender as terms?

[RunningMn9]

An earlier post had the interesting info that not everyone with GID has the identifiable changes/mismatch, some people without GID do have these mismatches, and other research says that these brain changes are possible through nurture or environment not just DNA.

Any time you are dealing with hormones and their application during development (fetal, infant, juvenile), I assume there are environmental factors that can lead to the same outcomes. And there will always be matters of degree. These aren't always on/off switches. Sometimes it's a dimmer.

[GreenGoo]

It's interesting that you are focusing on the research of potential non-biological causes, which appear to be an outlier of the central condition. Do you feel that the biological and non-biological conditions are identical? What would lead you to that conclusion? In the wiki article I linked to, the discussion of the non-biological causes was fairly limited, with only 1 or 2 cites.

Why are you giving that paragraph such importance while seeming to ignore the preponderance of discussion of the biological condition to which Rmn9 continually refers?

If I think I'm a girl because I'm delusional, do I have GID? Is my delusion biochemically the same as those that have GID? What's the difference between a crazy person who thinks he/she is a different gender, and a sane person that thinks he/she is a different gender? Can you tell the difference?

Psychological treatments
Main article: Psychotherapy

Until the 1970s, psychotherapy was the primary treatment for GID, and generally was directed to helping the person adjust to the gender of the physical characteristics present at birth. Psychotherapy is any therapeutic interaction that aims to treat a psychological problem. Though some clinicians still use only psychotherapy to treat GID, it is now typically used in addition to biological interventions as treatment for GID.[43] Psychotherapeutic treatment of GID involves helping the patient to adapt. Attempts to "cure" GID by changing the patient's gender identity to reflect birth characteristics have been ineffective.[44]:1568

[GreenGoo]

An earlier post had the interesting info that not everyone with GID has the identifiable changes/mismatch, some people without GID do have these mismatches, and other research says that these brain changes are possible through nurture or environment not just DNA. This seems to suggest that some tansgender issues do not have a clear cut developmental biological issue. Perhaps I'm being imprecise, is the specific developmental mismatch the difference between GID and transgender as terms?

The portion of the wiki that you're focusing on to the exclusion of pretty much everything else in the article.

There may, for example, be some non-transgender heterosexual men with some brain structures that would be expected in a female, as the sample size in Zhou et al. (1995) is too small to exclude such possibilities.

The presence of typically female patterns of white matter and neuron patterns has also been observed in the brains of male-to-female transsexuals[25][26] and overall longer instances of the androgen receptor gene.[27] (Also see Causes of transsexualism.) However, these markers do not identify every individual who undergoes transition.[28]

Similar brain structure differences have, however, been noted between gay and heterosexual men, and between lesbian and heterosexual women.[29][30] More recent studies have found that circumstance and repeated activities such as meditation modify brain structures in a process called brain plasticity or neuroplasticity. In May 2014, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reported that for fathers, parenting "rewires the male brain".[31]

As you can see by the bolded sections, the first suggests that it is possible that some hetero men have similar brain structure, but we don't know because the sample size was too small. So that's pure speculation. We can't exclude the possibility. Not exactly a resounding endorsement.

Secondly, not all transgenders show the same brain structure changes. Sounds like we need to do more research to me.

Thirdly, it's not even clear that this portion is referring to modifying brain structure *away* from the transgender patterns. I've re-read this portion several times, and it seems to being saying that meditation can alter brain structure, and that being a father can alter brain structure. No where does it mention that this can be an effective treatment for those with GID, nor does it cite examples of Transgender cases where meditation or fatherhood were used to successfully treat it. The whole thing seems to be irrelevant to the transgender condition, which makes it's appearance in this article suspect.

I will try to follow up on the cites so I can better understand why it is in the transgender article. The implication is that it can be used to treat GID, but elsewhere in the article it explicitly states that psychotherapy to "cure" GID resulted in abject failure.

edit: A quick follow up shows that the cites are not specific to transgender brain alteration, nor is there reason to believe they are, except their inclusion in the transgender article. I am increasingly suspect as to the reason they appear in this article. The meditation link simply goes to a general meditation article within the wiki. It's not even clear that the brain patterns altered by meditation relate in any way to the patterns identified as a precursor to the transgender condition.

[Madmarcus]

If I think I'm a girl because I'm delusional, do I have GID? Is my delusion biochemically the same as those that have GID? What's the difference between a crazy person who thinks he/she is a different gender, and a sane person that thinks he/she is a different gender? Can you tell the difference?

I don't consider anyone experiencing CID as delusional. Nor do I consider that someone who is transgender but not experiencing distress from it (since such issues seem to be part of what defines the disorder part of CID) as delusional. That is I trust, barring other evidence, that they are correct and truthful when they say the feel they are whatever gender. What is less clear is if it is due only to developmental biology (DNA miss-wiring) or whether social or cultural causes also do something.

Honestly this mostly matters to me because I respond very negatively to absolute statements. Particularly absolute statements that are backed up with references that are not absolute. I'm also interested in the odd cases; why do some people have the biological miss wiring but not express feelings of being transgendered? What differences are there between the people who have been found with similar brain functioning even though one is a homosexual man while the other is a transexual woman? Finally; how do chemicals in our diet and environment enter into this? I don't expect to find answers in a random forum thread but the absolute answers implicitly shut down the questions and I hate that.

There is also an interest in the description of racial identity that was spelled out in this thread. Heritage/ethnicity is like biological sex. It is fixed. But racial identity and culture are both social creations like gender. I don't think it is a perfect analogy and I agree completely that there is no gene for a specific culture. However if neuroplasticity might be a significant enough effect on trangender research to get mentioned in a general article it makes me wonder about its influence on people who seemingly try their hardest to become a culture they were not born into. Additionally at some point we, as a society of people who are more mobile and more intermixed than ever, need to come to grips with people whose phenotype doesn't match their culture.

There is also just a smidgin of cynical prognostication.

[Madmarcus]

As you can see by the bolded sections, the first suggests that it is possible that some hetero men have similar brain structure, but we don't know because the sample size was too small. So that's pure speculation. We can't exclude the possibility. Not exactly a resounding endorsement.

Secondly, not all transgenders show the same brain structure changes. Sounds like we need to do more research to me.

Thirdly, it's not even clear that this portion is referring to modifying brain structure *away* from the transgender patterns. I've re-read this portion several times, and it seems to being saying that meditation can alter brain structure, and that being a father can alter brain structure. No where does it mention that this can be an effective treatment for those with GID, nor does it cite examples of Transgender cases where meditation or fatherhood were used to successfully treat it. The whole thing seems to be irrelevant to the transgender condition, which makes it's appearance in this article suspect.

I will try to follow up on the cites so I can better understand why it is in the transgender article. The implication is that it can be used to treat GID, but elsewhere in the article it explicitly states that psychotherapy to "cure" GID resulted in abject failure.

Oddly enough I never thought of these in connection to curing GID. Only in terms of causes. The"cure" for GID is to accept the person how they want to be accepted.

[RunningMn9]

The issue of cultural identity seems to me more along the lines of being born into an Auburn family, but self-identifying as an Alabama fan. I don't think that "racial identity" is a thing outside of the cultural aspects.

[Madmarcus]

This is weird. Last night I figured I'd just drop this conversation because I have been responding more out of a reaction to people's absolutism not out of a real feeling that transrace should be considered on par with transgender. On the other hand this is just too extreme to ignore.

The issue of cultural identity seems to me more along the lines of being born into an Auburn family, but self-identifying as an Alabama fan. I don't think that "racial identity" is a thing outside of the cultural aspects.

Why do transgendered people undergo surgery and hormone treatment? Because they want their external body to match their mental image and so that society will react to their external body in the correct way. Clearly that is very different from your Auburn vs. Alabama example since that change can be done by changing your shirt. You might feel a little pressure from your family but society at large will respond properly to whichever fandom you want to express.

Now look at an in between case. You find yourself absorbed by a totally different culture; something that has a different look such that you can not pass as a native member. Just for example - no matter what I do with dress and speech I would never be taken as East Asian, Black, or Arabic. Everything is this culture calls to you the music, the food, the manners,the religious expression. When you learn the language you find that it seems to have concepts or usages that make more sense to you than some of what you learned in your original culture. You could adopt mannerisms and language, cook the food, follow the religion, and so forth but you will almost certainly be viewed as an outsider by the culture you want to get into and a poser by the rest of society.

The psychological stress suggested above is clearly real since minorities have described that exact feeling of not fitting in because their external appearance doesn't match the culture they want to be part of while at the same time they feel little or no connection to the culture they look like. I would say that this is much closer to GID than to whether you support Auburn or Alabama.

[hepcat]

Leave it to Stewart to sum it up in a fair, but hilarious, manner. While taking a swipe at Fox, of course.

[GreenGoo]

If I think I'm a girl because I'm delusional, do I have GID? Is my delusion biochemically the same as those that have GID? What's the difference between a crazy person who thinks he/she is a different gender, and a sane person that thinks he/she is a different gender? Can you tell the difference?

I don't consider anyone experiencing CID as delusional

That's good, because they aren't. But there are also people who believe they are women (who are male) because they are insane. They are different, even though it might seem that they superficially are experiencing the same condition. The "crazy" people might be curable through psychotherapy and/or pharma, whereas the GID people aren't, apparently. Following up on the paragraph you were focusing on led to a dead end. As far as I'm concerned, based on the wiki article alone, GID is primarily a physiological condition, and not a psychological one.

[Jaymann]

I guess once you go black you can go back.

[GreenGoo]

Oddly enough I never thought of these in connection to curing GID. Only in terms of causes. The"cure" for GID is to accept the person how they want to be accepted.

But that's the important part. For the person to feel comfortable in their own skin. Whether that means reverting to their genitalia gender or converting their genitalia to match their inner gender. My point here was that psychotherapy has never been used to successfully revert a GID person to their physical gender, which leads me to believe that it is not a purely psychological condition, but rather a physiological one. All of which reinforces/agrees with Rmn9's statements that GID people are different, and not just in their thinking.

[GreenGoo]

This is weird. Last night I figured I'd just drop this conversation because I have been responding more out of a reaction to people's absolutism

We've been over this like 5 times now. GID is a thing. Transrace is not a thing. If you want to read that as absolutism, then have at it. I think you're being needlessly and confusingly open to possibilities that just aren't true and have no basis in fact/science.

[Trent Steel]

For me it comes down to a simple question. Would this lady have "transracial" identity disorder claiming to be a black person without having been exposed to black culture growing up? The answer is no. All of her claims are built around her perceptions and have nothing to do with her genetic makeup.

If she self-identified more with squirrels instead of humans and said that she is, in fact, a squirrel, would that be delusional?

Tosh.O did a bit on a guy who preferred to behave like a dog more than a person a while back.

Spoiler:

The guy is not actually a dog.

[hepcat]

Tosh.O did a bit on a guy who preferred to behave like a dog more than a person a while back. NOTE: The guy is not actually a dog.

Spoilers, please!

[GreenGoo]

My wife watches trash tv like tmz, E! Entertainment, stuff like that. The E! guys and gals are as vacuous as you can get. I was listening from the kitchen when they were exploring all the possibilities of Transrace being a thing and their minds were just exploding with all sorts of exciting possibilities, when they decided to ask an expert, who slapped them down so hard it was borderline rude (not something you see on E!, everyone is everyone else's besties). Transrace is not a thing. Period. was the expert's comments. You could cut the silence with a knife, they all shut up so fast.

I cackled to myself.

[Trent Steel]

Spoilers, please!

Apologies.

[Anonymous Bosch]

If she self-identified more with squirrels instead of humans and said that she is, in fact, a squirrel, would that be delusional?

More importantly, if she self-identified more with Sideshow Bob, and said that she is, in fact, Sideshow Bob, would that be delusional?



I think not.

[Madmarcus]

We've been over this like 5 times now. GID is a thing. Transrace is not a thing. If you want to read that as absolutism, then have at it. I think you're being needlessly and confusingly open to possibilities that just aren't true and have no basis in fact/science.

Is it the word transrace that is the issue?

What is your short, non-discriminatory word for a person who could truthfully say "I am ethnically X but I have never felt fully comfortable in that identify and instead would instead prefer to be recognized as a member of Y group. I would be willing to undergo significant efforts towards this end so that my outward appearance more closely matches my desired identification."

As I've said a couple of times this isn't the same as transgendered as there is no gene issue involved. I agree completely that its not recognized as a diagnosis. On the other hand it doesn't appear to be a delusional state either (like identifying with a squirrel, dog, or giant sequoia would be). Note that unlike the the case that started this all I'm assuming no lying about past experiences and no hiding of the initial race. Just a desire, similar to those of transgendered persons, to be viewed by society at large in a way that matches their inner feeling.

GID exists when a person suffers discontent due to gender identity, causing them emotional distress.[12] Researchers disagree about the nature of distress and impairment in people with GID. Some authors have suggested that people with GID suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized;[20] and that, if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.

We come back to the idea that someone who suffers discontent due to racial identity, causing them emotional distress is not even worthy of being discussed. Why? That's the absolutism that I have an issue with. That's not something that can be addressed by just saying "transgender is a thing, transrace is not." Transracial and transrace are accepted terms in scholarly articles concerning adoption. On relatively brief reading they seem to be used more or less how I'm using them for children that have grown up in one culture yet resemble another. Interestingly they seem to be used both for children who want to identify with their phenotype as well as children who want to be recognized as their culture not their phenotype.

[RunningMn9]

Why do transgendered people undergo surgery and hormone treatment? Because they want their external body to match their mental image and so that society will react to their external body in the correct way.

From what I understand, this is somewhat incorrect. The physical transformation is much more about matching their inner and outer reality, for themselves. It's about "fixing" their physical self, not really about getting other people to react properly to their inner self. Although I'm sure that is an element.

Clearly that is very different from your Auburn vs. Alabama example since that change can be done by changing your shirt. You might feel a little pressure from your family but society at large will respond properly to whichever fandom you want to express.

I chose that example because cultural identity is something that is completely made up, like sports fandom. Not "made up" in the sense that it's not real, but "made up" in the sense that it isn't part of you. No one is born as a member of modern black culture in the US. That's something that is imprinted on you by your environment. Will Smith was one way because of the environment in which he was raised, and Carlton Banks was another way because of the environment he was raised. And Uncle Phil started out one way, and then changed through his own life experiences.

No humans are born with a cultural identity. It's imprinted on you as you grow up.

You find yourself absorbed by a totally different culture; something that has a different look such that you can not pass as a native member. Just for example - no matter what I do with dress and speech I would never be taken as East Asian, Black, or Arabic. Everything is this culture calls to you the music, the food, the manners,the religious expression. When you learn the language you find that it seems to have concepts or usages that make more sense to you than some of what you learned in your original culture. You could adopt mannerisms and language, cook the food, follow the religion, and so forth but you will almost certainly be viewed as an outsider by the culture you want to get into and a poser by the rest of society.

I agree with you that this is a real thing. But it is *nothing* like the other thing. No one is BORN as one of these things or the other.

The psychological stress suggested above is clearly real since minorities have described that exact feeling of not fitting in because their external appearance doesn't match the culture they want to be part of while at the same time they feel little or no connection to the culture they look like. I would say that this is much closer to GID than to whether you support Auburn or Alabama.

Again, as with the other three people that I was discussing this with here in this thread - the issue appears to be you not really understanding what GID is. I assume you think that you do - but if you think this quoted paragraph has any relationship at all to GID, you don't.

For those suffering with GID, this isn't an issue of their dirty man/lady parts resulting in people not letting them participate in the gender that they want to be a part of. For those suffering with GID, the issue is that their physical parts don't match the gender that they ARE. That's the disconnect, that someone's gender is determined solely by their physical parts. For the vast majority of people, everything went according to Hoyle and their physical body developed in conjunction with their mental gender. For some, their physical body did not. It's not that they want to be a woman but have stupid man parts. They ARE a woman but have stupid man parts. They ARE a man but have stupid lady parts. And THAT is what causes intense internal suffering.

The suffering they are enduring is nothing like what Vanilla Ice had to go through. They are simply different things. Which isn't to say that Vanilla Ice hasn't suffered. It's just to say that there are easy and obvious reasons for how I can treat the plight of Caitlyn Jenner and Vanilla Ice differently.

[Madmarcus]

For the vast majority of people, everything went according to Hoyle and their physical body developed in conjunction with their mental gender. For some, their physical body did not. It's not that they want to be a woman but have stupid man parts. They ARE a woman but have stupid man parts. They ARE a man but have stupid lady parts. And THAT is what causes intense internal suffering.

And how is that absolutely, 100%, not even a possible analogy to someone who says I am Japanese but I have stupid Caucasian features? Or I was raised white but oops; I'm adopted thus the world reacts to me as if I'm black because that's how I look.

No analogy is 100% perfect. Yes, GID has a basis in biology and racial identity doesn't, I get that. I'm in perfect agreement with the distinction you make above about want and ARE. I could quibble a little bit in that you don't understand what I'm describing when you use Vanilla Ice as an example (I don't think that there is any indication that he even wanted to live as a black man) but that's not really important. I just disagree strongly that it diminishes or denigrates transgender in any way to apply a similar similar linguistic form to something that does have a lot of external similarities.

[Max Peck]

Why can't Rachel Dolezal be as black as she wants to be?

Personally, I don't care what Jenner wants to be; I actually don't care about Jenner at all. But I can only respect the work Rachel Dolezal has done, whatever her motivation. As she says, racially she's human, culturally she's black. Personally, I tend toward the view of Richard Rodriguez, the Pulitzer-nominated California intellectual who has for decades argued that race distinction is becoming pointless. He says a "browning of America" has been under way for years and is accelerating, and that it cannot be ignored or wished away. When it's complete, there'll be one less subject for stupid, sarcastic argument.

[RunningMn9]

And how is that absolutely, 100%, not even a possible analogy to someone who says I am Japanese but I have stupid Caucasian features?

Because people aren't born "Japanese" but with stupid Caucasian features. Not in the way that you are talking about and using it in your analogy. "Japanese" isn't a thing you are born with.

[LawBeefaroni]

And how is that absolutely, 100%, not even a possible analogy to someone who says I am Japanese but I have stupid Caucasian features? Or I was raised white but oops; I'm adopted thus the world reacts to me as if I'm black because that's how I look.

As someone who is half Japanese and half North African (Moroccan, Libyan, Tunisian, no one knows) and was adopted at 2 weeks by a Pole and a Swede into an Irish Catholic church, I can say it's very different than GID. It's sometimes difficult but I never feel betrayed by my body or my physical features. I often stick out but I don't see it as any different than a really tall person in a short crowd or vice versa or whatever. I'm culturally white middle class American but I don't self identify that way. These thing can be rectified. When you are the wrong gender, I have to imagine that it's harder to deal with.

It's not really something that can be fully explained in one paragraph but it's either that or 5 pages. The simplest way to put it is like this. We don't have black and white restrooms [anymore]. We do have men's and women's (not that we shouldn't).

[GreenGoo]

We've been over this like 5 times now. GID is a thing. Transrace is not a thing. If you want to read that as absolutism, then have at it. I think you're being needlessly and confusingly open to possibilities that just aren't true and have no basis in fact/science.

Is it the word transrace that is the issue?

It's the fact that it doesn't exist as a medical condition. How many times do we have to say it?

I can want to be black all I want, but no (respectable. I can't speak for all the Dr. Nicks out there) doctor is going to diagnose me as transrace, because his little book of real medical conditions doesn't contain it, because it's not a medical condition.

As an example of how transgender is a thing, both the UK and Canadian health care systems will pay (at least in part) for a sex change operation based on a GID diagnosis. I believe your own military helped pay for Chelsea whatshername's hormone treatments (maybe more, I didn't follow the case beyond the whistleblower aspect).

None of those health care systems are going to pay for pigment augmentation as part of the treatment for Transrace, because Transrace is not a thing.

The issue is you want something to be true, or maybe true, when it is not true.

[GreenGoo]

Why do transgendered people undergo surgery and hormone treatment? Because they want their external body to match their mental image and so that society will react to their external body in the correct way.

From what I understand, this is somewhat incorrect. The physical transformation is much more about matching their inner and outer reality, for themselves.

This is correct. While we all want to be accepted and perceived as normal, the changes are undergone to help a person feel like themselves in their own skin, not as if they've been living a lie for years, as Jenner has claimed.

The changes are for personal realisation, not because they're helping society accept them for who they are.

[Madmarcus]

And how is that absolutely, 100%, not even a possible analogy to someone who says I am Japanese but I have stupid Caucasian features?

Because people aren't born "Japanese" but with stupid Caucasian features. Not in the way that you are talking about and using it in your analogy. "Japanese" isn't a thing you are born with.

Is there a statistically significant difference between Japanese and Caucasian based on looks? I believe that there is. Thus you can be born Japanese in the same way that you can be born Caucasian. In an ideal world you might be right. We might even be heading that way (re: Max Peck's reference0 and people do respond to differences in appearance that can be separated from culture. But we're not there yet and thus you can certainly experience a mismatch between phenotype and culture.

Another quibble is that you're not born with culture but you absorb much of it during the time when you are not in control of things. You aren't board with it but you don't chose it either.

[Trent Steel]

Another quibble is that you're not born with culture but you absorb much of it during the time when you are not in control of things. You aren't board with it but you don't chose it either.

You are born with a natural heritage. You are not born with a culture. You cannot change your natural heritage. You can change your culture.

She (to me) seems to be claiming that her natural heritage is black. Which is delusional.

[cheeba]

Rachel Dolezal boycotted Exodus: Gods and Kings because it cast white actors as Africans. Hehe.

[RunningMn9]

Is there a statistically significant difference between Japanese and Caucasian based on looks? I believe that there is. Thus you can be born Japanese in the same way that you can be born Caucasian.

Again, you are just trying to win an argument, without paying attention to anything that anyone is saying. Your analogy talked about religious views, musical preference, clothing styles, etc.

Now you want to tell me that someone with stupid Caucasian features is walking around suffering because they really feel internally like their eyes have a different shape? Stop it. There are people that change their physical appearance because they WANT to look like something else (freaky chicks that want to look like anime characters, that crazy-ass tiger lady, etc.). They aren't doing it because they were born with the physical appearance of a white woman, with the inner reality that she's really a fucking tiger woman.

Another quibble is that you're not born with culture but you absorb much of it during the time when you are not in control of things. You aren't board with it but you don't chose it either.

Right. And when you are in control of things, you can change it. But if you start dressing in traditional Japanese clothing instead of white t-shirts and blue jeans - it's because you like traditional Japanese clothing and not the James Dean look, not because you have somehow been born a white man who internally feels like a Japanese man. Because not even Japanese men are born internally feeling like Japanese men.

[tru1cy]

Jon Stewart "WHAAAAT"