Psychology Today: People Refusing To Date Transgenders Is ‘Dehumanizing’

originally posted by: Saiker
that among other factors.

Take for example, can you ever put yourself in a place that would make you capable of murdering your family because you can't support them? I hope not nor could I, but you hear about it happening almost daily where mom drowns her kids are dad goes nuts.

I argue that when this very terrible thing occurs because the father or mother felt an utter failure because they don't feel good even when they are doing the things based upon sociological NORMS ask of them. This feeling lent itself to a psychological spiral downward to where I hope you and I could never conceive or understand.

Man beats his beautiful wife over and over again because he is not happy even tho he is doing what he is supposed to be doing. Why do you think that is?

While you may be happy following the status quo and being who your SUPPOSED to be many are finding they are not wired that way and cannot cope with going against their natural desires.

Forcing others to conform to the prescribed way of living results in these terrible things occuring.

I understand staring through faith stained glasses and being raised with unfaliable faith because its why i never came out or never give in to my desires. I can never be happy with my life, but have learned to cope with that, but you can ask my wife its a road paved in pain and tears.

The only times I've heard about a mother killing her kids, there was things like post-partum or other mental issues involved.

A man beating his wife is most likely a control freak and/or super jealous. A man that kills his family, again, I've only heard about mental issues being the main cause. Then there are the outlier cases of people trying to collect insurance money if their spouse dies etc.

And who am I SUPPOSED to be? I'm just me. I'm not my genitalia, or my sexual preference. I don't base my life around such a narrow identity. And societal norms seem to be in favor of gay and trans now more than ever. If you want a wedding cake, however, maybe don't target the christian baker that advertises that they are such when you have other bakers to choose from. Unless Christian bakers have cornered the wedding cake market?

And, not trying to come off as rude or anything, but you evidently gave in to some desires, if you got married. And if you can't ever be happy, why did you get married in the first place?

By this logic homosexuals are dehumanising heterosexuals by refusing to date us.

Bigots.

originally posted by: Saiker
...
Either way treating someone differently or refusing to see things as they are due to the brainwashing of political religion - faith-based stained glasses makes you ignorant.

You should get off that high horse you are sitting on. Whatever you might think, or believe people have a right to think for themselves and decide what to believe. But hey, here you are insulting people for daring not be, or think like you...

There is not one ounce of humility in you, and it's obvious you think you are better than anyone else. I don't give a crap whom you decide to be and it is your right to think and be whomever you want to be. But it is exactly this smug attitude you are showing why people are not siding with you anymore. If you keep it up people will not accept you and will simply ignore you. Be and think who you are but learn some humility in the process, and understand people have a right to their own opinions and beliefs instead of wanting to push your own beliefs and opinions on everyone.

If there is no such thing as boys or girls, why do trains people need to change sex to something that doesn't exist?

a reply to: Saiker

Sorry, but this guy is just full of crap!

originally posted by: continuousThunder
it is dehumanising to declare that you wouldn't date an entire class of people.
that's a simple fact - you're treating people as an identical mass that you can just cast aside in one go.

Seriously?

So my choosing not to have relations with a human who has a penis, and a refusal to have relations with anyone who has a penis means I'm intolerant towards humans who have a penis?

FFS...

Do you idiots actually read what you post before you post it?

hey if they had this kind of agenda for gingers it would be a really great help for getting me laid thanks.

originally posted by: fastzombie
hey if they had this kind of agenda for gingers it would be a really great help for getting me laid thanks.

Depends upon whether your undead corpse has a penis or not.

a reply to: EternalSolace

I'm not undead, just soulless

a reply to: continuousThunder

Oh puh-leeeaaaase!!! It is not dehumanizing to not be attracted to someone based on their sex. I do not find other men attractive. I am secure in my sexuality and I know what I am attracted to. If they have a penis, I am not interested. Trying to make people feel guilty for their sexual preferences is pretty effed. I don't feel dehumanized if a lesbian tells me that she is not interested because she likes girls. But based on your "logic", that person would be a bigot, right?
At the end of the day, it is part of our base instincts to want to procreate and pass our genes down. I cannot do that with another penis and frankly, the thought of having another naked mans junk anywhere near me, makes me uncomfortable and I whatever the opposite of horny is. I will not be shamed into sex with someone I am not attracted to.

originally posted by: nnik00
a reply to: continuousThunder

I will not be shamed into sex with someone I am not attracted to.

No matter how passionate and zealous people would be to try and enforce that, that is ultimately why it will die on its arse.

You can't make people fancy what they don't fancy.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse



Whats dehumanizing is telling a man or a woman its ok to think they are in fact the opposite sex. THATS where the confusion starts, and the dehumanization results from that. And you can thank the psychological community for that. Some of us refuse to buy into bizarro world alternate reality. Sorry but that's not likely to change.

a reply to: openminded2011

Yep.

One day, you send your perfectly normal little boy off to school. He's pretty adamant he's a boy and he certainly shows all the signs of being a boy and has from a young age with no effort on your part.

Then, one day, he comes home crying because his teacher and his school psych told him he can't be a boy because they don't exist.

In a few days' time, they've removed or planted doubt in part of your little boy's human identity. How is that not dehumanizing, and they've left you as a parent the pieces to try to pick up and put back together again.

Now, that hasn't happened to me, but I've had a teacher take my child apart in other ways, and as a parent who has had to deal with picking up and trying to reassemble those pieces ... it's not nearly as easy as it is to take them apart.

Not going to overthink this. Yea, Like everything else lol

When I was a kid, it was a disorder, really really simple! Isn't is really obvious?


I agree with those who feel it is agenda, political driven! More confusion, more chaos, more reporters on tv with warped/ perverted perspectives. Yea, look into it!

The famous decision did not come about as a result of a lengthy professional debate on the scientific merits. It happened in an important national political context -- the Watergate Affair -- and revelations surrounding Nixon's "Enemies List" and his conduct of the Vietnam War. This was an era in which much of academia was very loathe to be seen as authoritarian, and very sensitive to charges of political complicity in upholding the cultural status quo. This was the heyday of "humanist psychology" and of second wave feminism. The "backlash" of "angry white men" was still a gleam in the Koch brothers' eyes.
This anti-authoritarian atmosphere undoubtedly contributed to the willingness of the head of the APA to "do the right thing" and remove homosexuality from the DSM. His decision occurred immediately before the actual vote, and as a result of being taken into a room in which many psychiatrists he knew personally were present and came out to him as homosexual. Thus, this major change in the legal status of homosexuals turned on a knife edge and actually had nothing to do with "scientific evidence". The issue had never been about "science", only about political prejudice posturing as "science". The fear that the APA would be stigmatized as an "establishment institution" was the primary driving factor behind the change in the DSM.

www.dailykos.com...

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover outlines the influence of gay organizations on the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Association of Social Workers, which has lead them to abandon scientific accuracy and authentic research in order to support the political goals of the homosexual community.
His paper, The Trojan Couch: How the Mental Health Guilds Allow Medical Diagnostics, Scientific Research And Jurisprudence To Be Subverted In Lockstep With The Political Aims Of Their Gay Sub-Components, was published by the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). (See complete text of Dr. Satinover’s paper here:

www.lifesitenews.com...

On the flip side of the debate, who ever tinkered with our DNA, didn't do a very good job, or maybe, intended to be the way it is, because at heart, they didn't really care about the outcome.....

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

First let me say that the research strictly deals with rejection of transgendered people as romantic interests (dating) and that the dehumanizing factor comes into play predominantly from the LGBTQ respondents of that study. Heterosexual respondents answered as one would expect, why would we think otherwise?

There is very little research being done on transgender relationships, social and otherwise, but the prevailing message is that a person's mental and physical health are adversely affected without support. Now, add to that discrimination and rejection from members of the LGBTQ community and we get a basic outline of the constructs of dehumanization.

Studies such as this one touch lightly on the underlying problems society has always had in regards to non-acceptance and lack of tolerance of anyone who steps out of the programmed norm; sexual or otherwise.

"Guess who's coming for dinner?"

cmhahkpr.ca... ..pdf



From the study:

However, even among those willing to date trans persons, a pattern of masculine privileging and transfeminine exclusion appeared, such that participants were disproportionately willing to date trans men, but not trans women, even if doing so was counter to their self-identified sexual and gender identity (e.g., a lesbian dating a trans man but not a trans woman). The results are discussed within the context of the implications for trans persons seeking romantic relationships and the pervasiveness of cisgenderism and transmisogyny.

You see, that trans women (men who transformed into women) are more likely to be rejected as a romantic partner by the LGBTQ community than a trans man.

It is obvious that heterosexuals would reject trans people as romantic partners but the rejection based on gender goes further than that now doesn't it - from reading some of the replies on this thread.

A new word for us all to throw around - 'transmisogyny'.

More dehumanizing:

It is said many trans women experience an additional layer of misogyny in the form of fetishization; Serano talks about how society views trans women in certain ways that sexualize them, such as them transitioning for sexual reasons, or ways where they’re seen as sexually promiscuous.

Taking it to far, or not:

I think perhaps that if a trans woman flirts with a man who is straight, and that man feels humiliated or embarrassed (is that last word strong enough? maybe mortified), it is probably because he is identified by the trans man as someone with whom flirtation is possible, who could himself be involved with a trans woman or might himself be one. For some straight men, it may be possible to flirt back or to say, "thanks but no thanks," and for others, they reach for a gun. What accounts for those differences? I presume that the straight man who shoots the trans woman, he feels like he has been "attacked" by the flirtation. That is very crazy reasoning, but there is lots of craziness out there when it comes to gender identity and sexuality. — Judith Butler, Interview with Broadly

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

They are Just " Pretending " Not to Date them . Makes Sense .............)

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Homosexuality is no longer considered a disorder.

www.apa.org...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The weaponization of prejudice has been interesting, but the outcomes were quite predictable. So basically the psychologists are prejudiced against the people who won't date tranny's but they call those people prejudiced. See how this works? We are all prejudiced. Many women are prejudiced against short men. Many men are prejudiced against overweight women. Some people are prejudiced against black people, others are prejudiced against white people. None of this is a problem so long as we treat each other with respect and dignity. The idea of using ones prejudice to then be prejudiced against them is so irrational and funny to me. It's simply a way to try to control the thought of other people.

a reply to: fastzombie

"considered" being the operative word here.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The weaponization of prejudice has been interesting, but the outcomes were quite predictable. So basically the psychologists are prejudiced against the people who won't date tranny's but they call those people prejudiced. See how this works? We are all prejudiced. Many women are prejudiced against short men. Many men are prejudiced against overweight women. Some people are prejudiced against black people, others are prejudiced against white people. None of this is a problem so long as we treat each other with respect and dignity.

But all of that is a problem because people don't treat each other with respect and dignity...this is the issue with its roots based in societal programming, sexualization of children into stereotypical roles, intolerance of diversity, and now the blatant dismissal of scientific evidence that trans people may have biological factors affecting them.