[Pansy-Mae]

I really think you need to seek professional help. You can't carry on like this.

[flamesabers]

So girls if you could take a magic pill too become a 100% male,

Would you do it ?

Julie

No, I wouldn't take it. My first thought is how much would I lose in terms of personal identity and personality. It's not a comforting thought to imagine who would I become after taking such a magic pill.

You and she (particularly she) need to read this:
http://www.avitale.com/FAQ.htm
In particular, section 9
http://www.avitale.com/FAQ.htm#Category 9, Question 5

B.

Thank you for the link. I enjoyed reading it.

[SarahSchilling]

Where's this magic pill? lol

The only personality traits I'd lose from taking it would be the ones I deplore. The thought of the changes I'd experience are quite exciting to think about.

I wish I could say I'd have no interest in this magic pill, but that'd be a lie.

[flamesabers]

Reverse the question... would I take a magic pill to become 100% female and the answer is definitely yes. Ask me why and again I don't know, maybe just because the grass always looks greener on the other side.

I think I'm in the same boat as you Pansy-Mae in regards to the 100% female pill. It's hard to say why exactly the female pill is much more alluring than the male one. Maybe it's because we're trying to emulate women to a certain extent by growing breasts?

[Pansy-Mae]

Reverse the question... would I take a magic pill to become 100% female and the answer is definitely yes. Ask me why and again I don't know, maybe just because the grass always looks greener on the other side.

I think I'm in the same boat as you Pansy-Mae in regards to the 100% female pill. It's hard to say why exactly the female pill is much more alluring than the male one. Maybe it's because we're trying to emulate women to a certain extent by growing breasts?

"Chicken and egg" question again I think.
I believe there is a lot in Vitale's theory and on that basis, my brain has been programmed to expect female hormones.I have always had a need to express my female side. I want breasts because that is the ultimate outward sign if 'femaleness'. To grow breasts I need female hormones be they synthetic or phyto-. However my body is male and being realistic there is nothing anyone can do about that. My 'magic pill' would simply bring body and brain in line with each other, but the reason I would go female rather than male, given a choice is that the brain is in charge and the brain is programmed to want oestrogens.

OTOH, if the question is actually "If you could go back to your time in your mothers womb and alter her hormonal balance at the critical point, to give your brain a male slant, would you?" Then yes I would do that because I believe my brain was brainwashed into being different to the body it inhabits.

[bryony]

"Chicken and egg" question again I think.
I believe there is a lot in Vitale's theory and on that basis, my brain has been programmed to expect female hormones.I have always had a need to express my female side. I want breasts because that is the ultimate outward sign if 'femaleness'. To grow breasts I need female hormones be they synthetic or phyto-. However my body is male and being realistic there is nothing anyone can do about that. My 'magic pill' would simply bring body and brain in line with each other, but the reason I would go female rather than male, given a choice is that the brain is in charge and the brain is programmed to want oestrogens.

OTOH, if the question is actually "If you could go back to your time in your mothers womb and alter her hormonal balance at the critical point, to give your brain a male slant, would you?" Then yes I would do that because I believe my brain was brainwashed into being different to the body it inhabits.

Exactly! Pretty much what I said back in post #5 link

The problem is not "being in the wrong body", it's the dissonance between what your brain expects and what the body is. There are a whole group of unfortunate individuals having limbs amputated because they suffer from a brain disorder that tells them that it is somehow "wrong" to have a particular arm or leg.

Are they living in the "wrong body"? Of course not. It would be ludicrous to try to explain the way their brain thinks as correct and their body is "wrong".

However there are strident political activists who are trying to say that gender dysphoria is not a mental illness and that they are, indeed, "in the wrong body". (See Dysmorphia - it really isn't too different from Gender Dysphoria)

Once you see the analogy between the two, it isn't a very great step to see that homosexuality is, as was once accepted, a mental disorder.

To be sure it is a problem that has to be lived with, and not persecuted, as indeed our problem is, but I find it very troubling that not only have activists succeeded in removing it from that category, they are also trying to do the same with our problem. (The main reason why they are finding it harder to succeed is because of the medical intervention required, whereas "all" homosexuality required was changes in law, cultural conditioning and moral relativism.)

These are troubling times, when science is bending under the will of political pressure. Just because all the scientists in the world suddenly decide to agree a consensus that the moon is made of green cheese, it would not make it so.

Yet now, to utter scientific theories that do not meet with "social approval" means being branded as a heretic every bit as much as Galileo was, with the twitterati taking the place of the Catholic Church. (Hence my non-avatar "label")

A good modern example of such wrong-headed scientific orthodoxy/heresy in Stalin's Russia can be found here:-Lysenkoism when the "heretics" were geneticists, who suffered and sometimes died for their theories!

[gloom on]

For someone of my age, who read Orwell and Huxley, and regarded their work as troubling science fiction written by people of long ago, the whole business of thought crime coming into being is an alarming harbinger of a weird new form of totalitariansim, frighteningly similar to Stalin's Russia.

[gloom off]

[flamesabers]

Bryony,

I think trying to eliminate gender dysphoria as a mental illness is about removing the belief you're abnormal if you don't fit in the binary, male/female model of your physical sex matching your gender identity. I think this is about trying to say people who have gender dysphoria aren't defective.

I think part of the reason why homosexuality was removed from being considered a mental illness was to advance equal rights for homosexuals. I think so long as homosexuality was labeled a mental illness it could be argued that homosexuals are really heterosexuals who have a disorder. I consider the organizations that claim to be able to "cure" homosexuals is proof of this.

I think with removing the labels of mental illness from homosexuality or anything else, it's not so much about defying science but removing a basis for stigmatization and discrimination. When you, I or anyone else is considered to have a mental illness, it could be argued we don't know what's best for ourselves because we are under the influence of a mental illness.

[bryony]

Bryony,

I think trying to eliminate gender dysphoria as a mental illness is about removing the belief you're abnormal if you don't fit in the binary, male/female model of your physical sex matching your gender identity. I think this is about trying to say people who have gender dysphoria aren't defective.

That may be so, but either something is a mental illness or it isn't. To refer to mental illness as a label which can be applied or removed for socio-political reasons is really part of the problem that I am discussing.

I am under no illusions that what I have is a mental disorder. My perception of my body as somehow "wrong" is due to an imbalance during gestation, best guess, and my brain has a developmental problem.... I suppose disorder is a better word than illness. But just wishing it away and relabelling it doesn't stop it being so.

I sincerely believe that for the majority of sufferers, it is more important to treat the symptoms to allow them to function as they are than to accommodate wishes that may in the end turn out worse for them.

Out of sheer luck I have discovered a herbal remedy for acute mental anguish without having to dress up for a considerable period in female garb in which I would frankly look ridiculous. Because of the socio-political pressure to accept as "normal" the everyday sight of men walking around looking like men dressed as women, it worries me that an opportunity is being missed, of treating the mental problems of such people so that they no longer feel a desperate need to do so.

I feel particularly sorry for the wives of men who have fathered children, like myself, and get into the same mental state as I have experienced, convincing themselves that they have no choice but to go for the full transition, when with treatment they may, like me, find that it really isn't too hard to cope with the condition.

I think part of the reason why homosexuality was removed from being considered a mental illness was to advance equal rights for homosexuals. I think so long as homosexuality was labeled a mental illness it could be argued that homosexuals are really heterosexuals who have a disorder. I consider the organizations that claim to be able to "cure" homosexuals is proof of this.

Well, again, you are more or less reflecting back to me what I have been saying. For socio political reasons, we remove what is clearly a mental disorder from the list; how can it be otherwise, when without serious medical intervention in the form of AI for women, or surrogacy for men, homosexuals are unable to breed? Sounds like a disorder to me. You may say that heterosexuals sometimes have to resort to these methods to breed, but such people are also suffering from a disorder that prevents them breeding - just a different one.

I'm not trying to be offensive, just dispassionately logical. Nowadays, unfortunately, the two become confused. At no other time in my 60 years have people been howled down for speaking what they sincerely believe to be the truth. In discussions the "phobe" suffix manoeuver is played, and debate shut down almost immediately.

I think with removing the labels of mental illness from homosexuality or anything else, it's not so much about defying science but removing a basis for stigmatization and discrimination. When you, I or anyone else is considered to have a mental illness, it could be argued we don't know what's best for ourselves because we are under the influence of a mental illness.

I see your point, but that is a very dangerous game, and it presupposes that all mental disorders imply a lack of judgement.

On the other hand, surely you have experienced for yourself the changes in your mental state when you take PM? I freely admit that before I took it, I honestly do not think that I did know what was best for myself. If I had not taken it, there would have been a very good chance that I would have started on the road to transition.

That would have been a disaster, because my condition is such that when I reach the right estrogen balance, I lose the desire to dress as a woman. I believe that these are the kind of TS people who eventually wind up as suicides.

Read this link, in particular Case Study 2, and see if you think the individual in question knows what best for himself/herself.

Again, I'm really not trying to be offensive, or provocative, just presenting another perspective for consideration.

We live in truly frightening times, wherein it seems that the first commandment is "thou shalt not offend" . The new orthodoxy demands that freedom not to be upset trumps freedom of speech, and the truth of science. People are hounded out of their jobs when their academic research show results which do not conform to this new orthodoxy. People in Europe have been put on trial recently for actually speaking the truth about a particular religion, where the truth of what they say is not even at issue, merely that their use of the truth was considered hateful!

In a misguided attempt to make people with real problems feel somehow better about themselves by relabelling them as someone of an "alternative lifestyle", it worries me that the best solution for individuals are being missed due to this "new orthodoxy".

In fact, it has generated a "new conformity" that somehow dismisses someone like me as "abnormal" because I want to be able to cope with a transsexual brain but live the life of a genetic male. A "new abnormality", if you will, because now that there are laws protecting transsexuals against discrimination, why would I not want to make use of them? One particular TS who used to participate on this forum dismissed me as a fantasist, who was not in the real world.

I hope you don't get offended by my thoughts, because I appreciate the opportunity to express them. As you can imagine, the opportunity does not often arise!

[ramble mode on - feel free to skip]

For someone born just after WWII, living through the threat of fiery destruction throughout the cold war, and the importance of freedom of speech, it's hard to have to think through every thought nowadays in the worry that someone may take offence.

When I see people getting arrested because of jokes they make on Twitter, I get the impression that maybe we didn't win the cold war after all. Totalitarianism has crept through the back door in the form of "equality" legislation and "anti-hate speech" legislation.

While I'm all in favour of equality, and detest hate speech, I am still committed to freedom of speech above all else. I used to admire the US consititution for its supposed protection of free speech, but nowadays it seems only to protect pornographers.

Because there are so many "protected categories" now, I regularly read of people losing their jobs for remarks deemed offensive by inference, not necessarily intentionally offensive... When I lived in the US I read about an employee being fired for using the word "niggardly", because it sounded like another word!

Interesting times..

B.

[flamesabers]

I think the issue of determining mental health is complex due to individual variances. While there are standards set for defining optimal physical health, I have not heard of such precise standards used to determine optimal mental health. True, brain scans can indicate abnormalities in the brain. However, I don't think such scans can reveal whether a person is feeling happy or sad like tests can be conducted to ascertain whether a patient has a healthy or weak heart.

My primary concern with labeling sexuality, gender identity or anything else as mentally ill is the danger intolerant individuals will use this as leverage to exert socio-political control over those they consider to be deviant. I think this is a separate issue of whether homosexuals, transgender, etc, consider themselves as mentally ill. I think when the behavior or emotion (i.e.) gender dysphoria, becomes problematic to the point it continually interferes or impairs the quality of daily life is when it can be regarded as a mental disorder. This isn't a black and white definition you're asking for, but I think it's a good standard to assess whether someone really needs help or not.

If homosexuality is a mental illness because gay people are unable to reproduce, would the same standard apply to those who voluntarily choose to be celibate or heterosexual couples who can have children but decide not to?

Yes, pm has made changes with my mental state but not in the area of personal judgment.

I don't think anyone who has gender dysphoria should feel that full transition is the only solution. I don't think you're a fantasist because you don't want to fully transition. I think individuals have all sorts of reasons for choosing or not choosing to fully transition. In my opinion it's a very personal decision.

I'm not offended by you sharing your thoughts Bryony.

[sfem]

Hmm. I have stayed out of this because Byrony has expressed these sentiments before and there is nothing new or very different in this reiteration. The only thing I find offensive is your calling me mentally ill. It is your opinion and I defend your right to it, but don't expect me to agree with it or ignore it. I really didn't want to throw any fuel on this fire. But I find myself in the mood to do so this morning. Maybe it's because I have been off PM for so long now.

Byrony, don't you think the issue is not a question of illness versus health but instead an issue of the normal human tendency to want to belong to a group? Almost every argument you raised is simply a way of saying "I am the same as everyone else, please accept me". You're saying if something different is seen about you that it can be fixed by taking a mood/mind altering substance to allow you to blend in better and cope better with the unalterable fact that genetic mutation is actually the norm, not an exception. That is the slippery slope that leads to the insecure powerful people choosing to decide for you what it is you need to join the group. Don't you realize you aren't in their group because they don't want us? We threaten their self-image. Byrony, you are not mentally ill. You just aren't in charge.

The issue isn't whether boys would look bad in dresses, wigs and makeup. It's very disheartening that it gets confused with the actual issues. The issue is that those who have the means to sway public opinion make their money from creating the completely unreal ideal people images and that most definitely includes the part of the image that has to do with gender, sexuality, and the expression of those things. I am saddened to a level you probably cannot understand that you feel you have to fix yourself because you feel you wouldn't "look good" clothing yourself in a way that would make you happy. I feel the same sadness for all of us. It is a far worse incrimination of our society's general lack of progress that these kinds of issues are out there and as strong as they are. For me, I am unhappy that it would incur so many negative social consequences for people that I care about that I also cannot just go around clothed in a way that would make me happy. I don't believe that means I'm ill. I don't feel a need to fix my brain as if it were broken. I am not broken.

I doubt society will change enough in my lifetime to fix what is really broken, namely the concentration of social power in the hands of so few people. If the internet can manage to stay uncontrolled for just another decade or so, then maybe humanity has a chance. But the vested interests are fighting very hard to squash it as the biggest threat to the status quo they have ever faced. I wish them all a short trip on a doomed flight.

As for reproduction being a yardstick of mental health, I hope to hell it never becomes one. Serial rapists and sultans would be the pinnacle of mental health in such a world. Monks, nuns, and others like them would be condemned for the wrong reasons.

As for the pill, I wouldn't take it unless I had a ready supply of them in multiple flavours. Wouldn't it be neat to have that and be unable to tell which pill did what until you took it? I am uninterested in having someone else tell me what I should enjoy and how I should feel in this brief time where my collective components have coalesced into the self-aware being that I am.