France to Declassify Transsexuality as a Mental Illness

Perhaps i was misunderstood, i do not care what society accepts or does not accept, when it comes down to the human evolution as a species then nature does tend to create distinctions and eliminate the variable which is most likely the least productive for that species to survive. This is what i believe as a concept and not some social acceptance.

But if that is the case, then how come Homosexuality and Bisexuality and even Transgendered behaviour in animals, is not really something uncommon at all?

Bit too late for some, its a sick world where people cannot be themselves.

Shame society doesn't understand people outside the norms.

Like i have said we are the dominant species on the evolution scale on the face of this planet and nature is the referee.

This has nothing to do with society, this a natural occurance which nature then does tend to deal with it in its own way. We meaning you and i, are the bi product of nature, meaning we created society to stabilize and expand our species.

reply to post by tristar

---

But some people are born with XXX chromosomes or XXXX or XYY or XYYY or even XXXXX so honestly, gender is a farse. If you can reproduce, reproduce, but not everyone can and not everyone does and you can still adopt children no matter what.

We all know how much I love evolution, because it's true and I do. But in all honesty, chromosomes and gender aren't a huge deal.

Meaning? Sorry, but that answer doesn't make sence in regards to the question. If Nature eliminates those that are the least productive, then why are Nature full of non-productive speciments? They don't even get eliminated by their other species-meembers, so I don't see any indication what so ever proving that Nature is eliminating those specimens at all?

Ill try and explain it better, as you have posted,"why is nature full of non-productive species". Well nature is not full of non-productive species, its only a small percentage which you or i have happen to see on some documentary. If nature was full of non-productive species then simply there would be no nature, however for those species that are by way of nature allowed to survive and co exist through nature do end up as food for the most dominant productive species.

Within our species, we and i mean, society has granted them to allow continuation of their existence, for if our society had evolved in another form then perhaps they would not have been allowed to co exist within our comprehension of a species in an ordered society.

Yes i do understand and accept that what you have posted, but i do not accept that gender is a non issue on the evolution scale. For without opposite gender chromosomes there can be no natural evolution of species.

Really?

Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual, bisexual and transgender behavior in non-human animals. Such behaviors include sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting. Homosexual and bisexual behavior are widespread in the animal kingdom: a 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior, has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them.[2][3] Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species. The motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied.[4] According to Bagemihl, "the animal kingdom [does] it with much greater sexual diversity -- including homosexual, bisexual and nonreproductive sex -- than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept."

Link and source: en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by tristar

---

There have been species which have evolved backward from sexual fertilization to asexual fertilization to hermaphroditism. Just look at certain species of reptiles.

I mean, if we're going to talk evolution... sexual reproduction isn't a sure-fire permanent thing for any species. Although our population has surged so much, I expect more blocks in place keeping us from reproducing more. I don't think we need to evolve much more, except perhaps to combat things like cancer. Nature is a balance, you know that. And we need to reproduce less.

reply to post by Nightchild

---

You asked for links and sources but in reference to which question.

(Can identical gender chromosomes reproduce to produce a natural species in the evolution scale).

We can twist and turn this topic in any way. I just like to see and call it as it is , 1+1=2 you cannot have 1.5+1.5=2.

Where did I ask for links and souces?

However I understand your reasoning, but I disagree with it simply because of the proven and apparent diversity in Nature, aswell as its many types of relationships.
Who, for instance, can forget the Gay Penguin-couple.

reply to post by Nightchild

---

The point that is apparently trying to be made is that those two male penguins, try as they might, cannot reproduce. Homosexuality is vibrant in the animal kingdom. But, for one, transsexuality does not imply homosexuality. And my point was that anyone can adopt a child and eventually humans may not need to find a member of the opposite gender to reproduce.

reply to post by Nightchild

---

Oh..my mistake about the links and resources. By the way i found it funny the wiki link you supplied.

No worries! Glad you found the link entertaining, however that exactly is to be intepreted.

for the sake of +\- a chemical in there embryonic growth these people would have been born the right gender..so now they are trapped in the wrong body with the mind of the opposite sex..i don't think its a mental illness .. im glad France has taken the step to realize this and change the law....

I just noticed that the terming in the article displayed in the opening-post, is writing "Transsexuality", when the medically correct term is Transsexualism. Transsexualism is not a sexual orientation, but a gender identification.

A Transsexual person may be of any sexual orientation what so ever.

reply to post by The All Seeing I

---

Well I certainly agree that it's not a mental disorder in any way, never has been never will.

However, I do think it's important that these people fully understand and have deal with the very present and conflicting emotions this kind of situation supplies.

I have many friends that have taken this path and some have been scared for life with depression and anxiety because of doctors, or just themselves rushing through the process without taking the appropriate "Mental Health" steps first.

This is one of those things that requires monitoring and counseling, it's not just something that can be reversed, it's a complete lifestyle change. And Complete would probably be an understatement.

So long as they are still providing help for people who are dealing with this issue, then I see it as a step in the right direction. Actually upon further thought, regardless of what they're doing and not doing, it's much better to not call people crazy or less than others because of such a trivial thing as gender identity.

But a small step in the right direction, as I said, so long as they are still providing medical and mental support during the transition periods.

~Keeper

reply to post by Nightchild

---

Actually the new term that's been going around is "Transgender"
I like that one the best.