How about you just canon your protagonist is transgender, then you'll have a transgender romance!
It makes little sense otherwise given the whole concept of ME is an idealized future where current real world issues have long since passed. That being said, if they did include a transgender character. That had better not be their defining characteristic.
So its correct to assume there is no treatment for dysphoria, because we don't know where it comes from or why it exists. Its not like a disorder to look for symptoms and causes etc... its not different that feeling love, and there is indeed no medical treatment for it.
the research that I've seen again suggests both nurture and nature as culprits a cursory glance again pins the blame on in utero hormone levels, differences in the layout of the brain, and simple genetics
Also Gender Dysphoria is absolutely still listed as a disorder so you can stop with that nonsense saying its not.
You're the one confusing the definition of "normal" though.
I doubt Steelcan meant "normal" as in the opposite of "weird". Homosexuals or transgender people aren't weird, but they aren't normal either. Transgender people specifically aren't normal, as they are suffering from gender dysphoria, which most of the time prevents them from functioning as normal human beings unless they get treatment (e.g. hormonal treatment, therapy and/or a sex-change operation).
You are focusing way too much on social aspect and not enough on the scientific/medical aspect of transgenderism, which is what Steelcan and I are talking about.
The problem with the use of the word "normal" in this context is that even the scientific/medical community is impacted by cultural and social conditioning in determining what is "normal".
The practice of pederasty may have been considered "normal" in ancient Greece, but would be considered abhorrent in most (?) cultures today.
This is more a comment on the poor mindset and stigma surrounding mental illness than anything, at least in the United States. Serious mental illnesses such as depression are still considered by many to simply be a mindset that one must snap out of. On the other extreme, admitting to and getting help for many mental illnesses carries a social stigma attached that leads to many simply living with it, which is a damn shame.
In other words, in a world where people were much more understanding and accepting of mental illness, there might not be so much pushback to calling transgenderism mental illness. That's not the world we live in, though. There is a justified fear that calling transgenderism mental illness would legitimize the viewpoint that these people are wrong for feeling how they do about their bodies.
That's a very valid point. But calling it an "illnes" automatically stigmatizes trans people, because an "illnes" can be cured, thus making them cisgender. That's not possible. If a person was born straight, this person will be straight for the rest of her life, they simply will not be attracted to their same gender. As I said before and you stated too, the only illness that needs treatment is the severe depression most of these people tend to acquire because of the social backlash they suffer. But people just want to consider the gender identity an illnes and the real problem doesn't matter, they just need to "snap out of it". 
By the way, I love your icon 
Most current research suggests a biological combination of genes and in utero hormone levels. With varying explanations of the particulars. Not sure if that's the same for transgender people though as I'm not as recent on that research body.
Actually most current research suggests that homosexuality results from a combination between nature and nurture. Some people are biologically predisposed to becoming gay, but not all people who carry the "gay gene" actually become gay, suggesting that there must be some kind of "trigger" that can "activate" the gay gene and turn a person homosexual.
That's a very valid point. But calling it an "illnes" automatically stigmatizes trans people, because an "illnes" can be cured, thus making them cisgender. That's not possible. If a person was born straight, this person will be straight for the rest of her life, they simply will not be attracted to their same gender. As I said before and you stated too, the only illness that needs treatment is the severe depression most of these people tend to acquire because of the social backlash they suffer. But people just want to consider the gender identity an illnes and the real problem doesn't matter, they just need to "snap out of it".
By the way, I love your icon
Not all disorders or illnesses can be cured. I thought you would understand this by now, especially because I and many others have explained this to you on several occasions.
That's a very valid point. But calling it an "illnes" automatically stigmatizes trans people, because an "illnes" can be cured, thus making them cisgender. That's not possible. If a person was born straight, this person will be straight for the rest of her life, they simply will not be attracted to their same gender. As I said before and you stated too, the only illness that needs treatment is the severe depression most of these people tend to acquire because of the social backlash they suffer
and that depression is usually a result of being in the wrong body, of which there are two options from there, don't transition and continue to live life as the wrong gender or transition and (hopefully successfully) be able to have the desired body.
However, this doesn't always work and even with therapy and transitioning many people still experience extreme depression and anxiety lending further credence to the idea that the condition as a whole needs to have treatments, not just treating the symptoms such as depression.
Actually most current research suggests that homosexuality results from a combination between nature and nurture. Some people are biologically predisposed to becoming gay, but not all people who carry the "gay gene" actually become gay, suggesting that there must be some kind of "trigger" that can "activate" the gay gene and turn a person homosexual.
If the current definition of "Normal" is a result of straight people being the default in society, then society really needs to change.
If that's the case, then I guess we can just go back to using the term "miscegenation" to describe interracial relationships.
I'm not particularly on topic here either, but I was a teenager when I first became acquainted with that term, and it was thanks to this:
The word and the film will always connect for me. 
the research that I've seen again suggests both nurture and nature as culprits a cursory glance again pins the blame on in utero hormone levels, differences in the layout of the brain, and simple genetics
Also Gender Dysphoria is absolutely still listed as a disorder so you can stop with that nonsense saying its not.
Depends on country, some still see it as a disorder. Some suggest scale. Also any such study deals with theories at best. We have found some reasons for people being homosexuals as well, but they are not even close to be proven. Evidence suggests that people who identify with a gender different from the one they were assigned at birth, may do so not just due to psychological or behavioral causes, but also biological ones related to their genetics, the makeup of their brains, or prenatal exposure to hormones. Some cases are purely psychological, hence its where dysphoria is applied because calling something like this disorder is quite illogical as there is no evidence supporting the definition of "disorder". The psychological cases can only be called a disorder only if homosexuality can be called a disorder and its not.
So its not as simple as you think it is. Starting to label it with this little knowledge that we have of human brain and the fact that the most genius people use 10% of their brain, is a fallacy. I know for a fact that its called Dysphoria in Switzerland, aka the leader of medical researches in the globe.
Well, like I said, I'd love it if you could me towards that body of research because I'm not familiar with it and I don't see how it explains homosexuality in non-human animals, so I'd like to read more. Any links?
Here are some links:
https://web.archive....rientation.aspx
http://pediatrics.aa...113/6/1827.long
Having said that, the issue I had with Krem -- has nothing at all whatsoever to do with him being a transgender character, but rather how he was implemented.
With 8 romance options available in DAI, I couldn't see why he couldn't have been a romance option, better yet; a companion to take out onto the field, with his own personal quest and dialogue options.
Apart from that brief cinematic scene involving the chargers, you don't get to see a lot of him and the conversation was very limited. I would have liked to have gotten to know him as a person, find out a little back story and deal with his personal quest. Sure, let the audience know that he is a transgender, but make him more than that; make him a person, like anybody else, with his own issues and baggage, and his own quirks and positives.
I wouldn't have minded Krem over Bull really.
Or Krem as Bull.
If the current definition of "Normal" is a result of straight people being the default in society, then society really needs to change.
What is "normal" does not mean that people who fall outside of that definition are by definition weird, wrong, and so on. There just isn't really a polite word for those who fall outside of what the vast majority of people are.
If the current definition of "Normal" is a result of straight people being the default in society, then society really needs to change.
Why? Are you suggesting that we should kill all straight people or turn everyone gay until straight people are no longer the default and vast majority of not only humans but pretty much every species on earth?
That's a very valid point. But calling it an "illnes" automatically stigmatizes trans people, because an "illnes" can be cured, thus making them cisgender. That's not possible. If a person was born straight, this person will be straight for the rest of her life, they simply will not be attracted to their same gender. As I said before and you stated too, the only illness that needs treatment is the severe depression most of these people tend to acquire because of the social backlash they suffer. But people just want to consider the gender identity an illnes and the real problem doesn't matter, they just need to "snap out of it".
By the way, I love your icon
That's certainly the fear, that designating transgenderism as an illness carries with it the implication that they can be "cured" into being cis. But I'd argue that doesn't have to be the implication, and I don't think anyone in this thread that is suggesting it's an illness has stated as such. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
This discussion is also fundamentally different from discussions about homosexuality, because transgenderism contains within it an element of rejection; namely of the physical body, that in many cases leads to alteration of the physical body. This brings up new questions that are difficult to answer. If we accept transgender procedures, do we also accept transabled procedures? If we don't, then what's the difference between them? If we do, then are we simply committing to the belief that people are free to do whatever they wish with their own bodies (not, I might add, an entirely unsound belief, but certainly one that is not the case in modern society)?
That's certainly the fear, that designating transgenderism as an illness carries with it the implication that they can be "cured" into being cis. But I'd argue that doesn't have to be the implication, and I don't think anyone in this thread that is suggesting it's an illness has stated as such. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
This discussion is also fundamentally different from discussions about homosexuality, because transgenderism contains within it an element of rejection; namely of the physical body, that in many cases leads to alteration of the physical body. This brings up new questions that are difficult to answer. If we accept transgender procedures, do we also accept transabled procedures? If we don't, then what's the difference between them? If we do, then are we simply committing to the belief that people are free to do whatever they wish with their own bodies (not, I might add, an entirely unsound belief, but certainly one that is not the case in modern society)?
I recently heard about transabalism and holy Maker that stuff is disturbing. I hope people are not actually taking that crap seriously? Please tell me that we can all agree that people who deliberately want to mutilate their body are mentally ill and should not be endorsed in such behavior but instead should be treated? Or at least we should try to treat them first! Just like we're doing with transgenders before they are allowed to physically alter their bodies.
Me neither. I have absolutely no dog in this fight. The outrage and vehemence this kind of topic inspires is a little beyond me, but it does on rare occasion lead to some interesting discussions.
On very rare occasion.
Yeah, when I first found out about Krem, I was like, "Oh, that's interesting."
Then I got on with my life.
I'm just responding because gender issues interest me, and I'm a big enough nerd that chatting about socio-political issues on a gaming forum appeals to me. 
As I see it the issue is, as it often is, that society and science have different perceptions on what the term "mental disorder" means.
Society seems to see it as a negative thing that means there is something wrong with the person and we should be spending resources on trying to find a cure so we can fix them and they can become normal again. The "progressive" crowd generally doesn't like implying that there is ever anything wrong with you, and so they don't like the classification.
Science on the other hand really just defines it as any mental condition which influences thinking and/or behaviour, not counting temporary changes that come as a result of consumption of things like alcohol(sorry, but being drunk isn't a disorder =P). Although addiction to substances do qualify as a disorder.
The thing that a lot of people need to understand is that the scientific community usually defines things based on what causes them and how they affect you. Transgenderism can be classified as a mental disorder because the cause and effects fall under that category. It is something that is mental, and it is most certainly something that affects thinking and behaviour.
From a biological standpoint cis/heterosexuality is considered what is normal because that's how our species reproduces and that is how the vast majority of humans are(even if you count the highest 12% estimate). You can try as much as you'd like, but two men having sex can't produce a child.
I would argue that we need to drop the stigma about mental illness/disorders. When science calls something a mental disorder, it's not saying that you need to be "cured into being cis". Society is the one thinking that.
I recently heard about transabalism and holy Maker that stuff is disturbing. I hope people are not actually talking that crap seriously? Please tell me that we can all agree that people who deliberately want to mutilate their body are mentally ill and should not be endorsed in such behavior but instead should be treated? Or at least we should try to treat them first! Just like we're doing with transgenders before they are allowed to physically alter their bodies.
Can't comment.
As a person with large tattoos, which some people consider "mutilation," I'm inclined to live and let live.
As I see it the issue is, as it often is, that society and science have different perceptions on what the term "mental disorder" means.
Society seems to see it as a negative thing that means there is something wrong with the person and we should be spending resources on trying to find a cure so we can fix them and they can become normal again. The "progressive" crowd generally doesn't like implying that there is ever anything wrong with you, and so they don't like the classification.
Science on the other hand really just defines it as any mental condition which influences thinking and/or behaviour, not counting temporary changes that come as a result of consumption of things like alcohol(sorry, but being drunk isn't a disorder =P). Although addiction to substances do qualify as a disorder.
The thing that a lot of people need to understand is that the scientific community usually defines things based on what causes them and how they affect you. Transgenderism can be classified as a mental disorder because the cause and effects fall under that category. It is something that is mental, and it is most certainly something that affects thinking and behaviour.
From a biological standpoint cis/heterosexuality is considered what is normal because that's how our species reproduces and that is how the vast majority of humans are(even if you count the highest 12% estimate). You can try as much as you'd like, but two men having sex can't produce a child.
I would argue that we need to drop the stigma about mental illness/disorders. When science calls something a mental disorder, it's not saying that you need to be "cured into being cis". Society is the one thinking that.
Amen.
Can't comment.
As a person with large tattoos, which some people consider "mutilation," I'm inclined to live and let live.
there's a difference between getting some ink and cutting off your own legs
Can't comment.
As a person with large tattoos, which some people consider "mutilation," I'm inclined to live and let live.
If these "transabalists" pay for their own surgery and/or pay for their own wheelchair and accommodation then I'm inclined to agree. But I'm not gonna let some person mutilate himself to then benefit from accommodation paid by my taxpayer's money. I don't want a single penny of my taxpayer's money to be wasted on those people (unless it's used to treat them, but even then...).
Why? Are you suggesting that we should kill all straight people or turn everyone gay until straight people are no longer the default and vast majority of not only humans but pretty much every species on earth?
Being the default means society caters to you(hypothetical you) the most, don't be absurd just because you disagree with me.
If homosexuals and transgenders aren't "Normal" because they aren't seen as the default straight person, then yes it needs to change.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut