• ObjectivityIncarnate
    link
    English
    -8
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    So gender dysphoria is not a thing then?

    Gender dysphoria is part and parcel of a “desire to be the opposite sex”. Seems pretty obvious that such a desire can’t manifest without dysphoria about one’s sex being present.

    So…I have no idea why you would think I was claiming gender dysphoria isn’t a thing. It obviously is.

    It’s important because wanting to be the opposite sex “sometimes to often” is an entirely different beast from being gender confused. Seems you don’t even have a base understanding of what I’m talking about, lol.

    You’re doing the same semantic straw-grasping. Confusion is uncertainty. Until/unless that desire to be the opposite sex becomes either “always” or “never”, that is, objectively, a state of confusion.

    Is it also fair to lump gender confusion with being transgender, and then make the conclusion that “being trans is just a phase”?

    Well, if there is anything to criticize the original article (the one this linked article is talking about, I mean) for, it’s the fact that those children who have those feelings, and then no longer do in adulthood, should be considered never to have been trans in the first place.

    It would have been more accurate for it to say instead “most children who experience the desire to be the opposite sex are not actually trans”.

    Do you disagree with this?

    If a child said they wanted to be the opposite sex, and then as an adult said they did not, it doesn’t mean they ever were transgender, or changed back from being transgender. It’s an entirely different thing altogether.

    It seems we are in fact in agreement on this, after all, as I basically wrote the exact same thing before I got to this part of your comment.