It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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.
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.
originally posted by: nnik00
a reply to: continuousThunder
I will not be shamed into sex with someone I am not attracted to.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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
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.