Gender Dysphoria: Collapsing Humanity

[9-18-1]

Among the many (sometimes highly) questionable things one might find in (any) scripture (especially relating to what one might consider basic human morality/decency), one of the elements that seems to be consistent is the notion that there are only two genders: masculine (man with a phallus) and feminine (woman with a vagina). If one stops here, there is not a single natural phenomena (that is not imagined and later turned into a psychopathy) which suggests anything otherwise. Or in other words, on this one thing: the many scriptures of the world got it 'right'.

Now, however, humanity seems frustrated by these two *real* genders and have decided to disassociate themselves by identifying as "something else" hence the many many so-called "genders" of today.

This, I suggest without reservation, is a sign of a collapsing / degenerating humanity. It is unfortunate to admit, and to accept as simply true, but I am not one to chase after making what "sounds" good the reality as "believers" so often do. This again is why "belief" is not a virtue - it is a barrier that prevents one from seeing/accepting the reality that he/she is invariably *in* and/or a part of. This is where gender (as well as other/all types of) dysphoria becomes a red flag: people are rejecting the reality in which they live, and trying to alter it to accommodate their own (likely trauma-induced) dysphoric worldview much to the overall detriment of all others.

The basic framework of continuous creation is very simple; being comprised of three components:

i. Will (individual/shared)
ii. To Bestow (ie. man bestows phallus; masculine)
iii. To Receive (ie. woman receives phallus; feminine)

which operate as a triunity where ii. and iii. are two willing conscious beings.

For example, when two people (disregarding gender for now) interact, one acts as a(n archetypal) bestower, and the other a(n archetypal) receiver. The most explicit example of this is a/the sexual act.

Here is how basic "creation" works:

When the will of one who bestows
becomes the same (shared will) as
the will of the other who receives
two become one.

This is practically the same meaning of the "name" the god of Moses gives:

"I am that I am"
is also
I am (who bestows) that I am (who receives)

because the will is shared/perfect:
I am that I am
'Let there be light,' and there was light.
etc.

A crude graphic to supplement words:

Here we find an equilateral triangle containing the two modes of will (to bestow and to receive) joined at the top by will itself. However, the top will can be in two states: shared and/or unshared.

When a will is shared, this is "good". The only limitation (Hebrew: 'soph') is the imagination(s) of the beings within the partnership. This is why aur ein soph is "light without limitation". When two beings become one wherein the will to receive becomes the others' will to bestow, this is akin to the "kingdom of heaven" that is within, as there are no real limitations in such an internal state of being when two are acting as one.

When a will is not shared, this is "evil". If one being has a will to bestow/receive something from another, but the other does not share in it, and the first in any way forces the second to undergo anything he/she does not themselves will, this is where from "evil"; pain, suffering, slavery, war, resentment etc. result. An explicit example of this on an individual basis would be rape.

As such the appreciation of only two genders not only recognizes the (correct) fundamental basis of existence in its entirety (even as acknowledged by virtually all scriptures) but contains within it the key to continuous creation.

This is yet another of one of the many reasons I find any "religion" that utilizes male central figures as authoritative idols to follow are inherently idolatrous: Judaism/Islam and Christianity are notorious for this. Being that they are based in "belief" it stands to follow why I also repeat: "belief" is not a virtue.

When one alone looks at the nature of a being such as the prophet of Islam in light of this, one finds that a religion such as Islam does virtually nothing to balance/stabilize the genders on the planet: in fact it does quite the opposite. Because such religions are idolatrous and use male central patriarchal figures (who for all intents and purposes was a dictator war lord in the case of Islam) as the "example" for all of humanity, how these central figures behaved with women sets the precedent for the entire empire and how adherents likewise treat women. This involves (and sets the precedence for) pedophilia: a man having sexual intercourse with a child as young as nine. When one factors in that such a leader as Muhammad had multiple wives and sex slaves: allowing his followers to take up to four wives, we find Islam is fundamentally rooted in sexual degeneracy that involves men forcing themselves on women and/or having an exceedingly disproportionate power *over* women. The same is true today and continues to motive similarly sexually degenerated politicians who have warlord attitudes. Here I refer to individuals such as PM of Canada Justin Trudeau, Turkey's Erdogan and SA's MBS - all deeply rooted in corruption.

As such the gender dysphoria problem is deeply rooted in institutions such as Islam (herein I include Judaism) by proxy: women who are abused/accused by men for simply being a woman and/or men who are lead to feel ashamed for being a man begin to pathologically disassociate themselves from their natural birth gender as a result/response of/to shame (which is also not a virtue). As stated earlier, this is a red flag and indicates there is essentially a "war" against humanity: not the least of which is women (in the case of Islam).

This again brings me back to why "belief" is not a virtue: "believing" that any particular book or long-dead man is the greatest thing to use (ie. bind ones self to) as a guide has produced nothing but long-term destruction on this planet, which is why I vehemently oppose the Patriarchal institutions causing it: not the least of which are Islam and Christianity.

For those who have perhaps read my other two posts: this "shame" is another form of "the expression of being bound in an ongoing state" (satan) and is at the basis of the gender dysphoria. As such, I do say (not rhetorically) that gender dysphoria is practically "satanic", along with the religions and peoples of religions that cause / give rise to it.

 

[Curious George]

It seems to me you are making entirely too much over something too little.

I would suggest that it is quaint pearls of wisdom that are actually at dissonance with reality.

 

[Quintessence]

I think you might want to read up a bit more on the topics of sex and gender. You seem to be conflating the two, and unaware of how both of these are to some extent constructs. There are plenty of natural phenomena that suggest sex and gender are not binary, but rather a spectrum. Especially if one looks outside of humans, where monoecy and asexuality is vastly more common than mammalian dioecy.

 

[9-18-1]

It seems to me you are making entirely too much over something too little.

I would suggest that it is quaint pearls of wisdom that are action at dissonance with reality.

Man's relation to woman is not something little - it is technically the thing upon which all else is built: from offspring to human life as a whole. The overall health of a nation owes itself to the overall health of the women in that nation which is directly tied to how men treat/regard women on a basic level.

You can not have life without the women/womb within which to produce life; this is the reason why Eve/Havah is named by Adam "mother of all that lives". In essence, women *are* the mother of all that lives because men i. came from the womb and ii. can not conceive. This is not "little": this is profound and necessitates that the two balance and cooperate. It is this balance that patriarchal institutions upset.

If anything this renders the problem of man in relation to woman not "little" but rather "the biggest thing there is whence all else comes".

I think you might want to read up a bit more on the topics of sex and gender. You seem to be conflating the two, and unaware of how both of these are to some extent constructs. There are plenty of natural phenomena that suggest sex and gender are not binary, but rather a spectrum. Especially if one looks outside of humans, where monoecy and asexuality is vastly more common than mammalian dioecy.

Well no on the contrary: I don't conflate sex and gender. In fact one of the reasons I didn't exclusively/explicitly only use male/female and/or masculine/feminine (which are themselves different) is because there is even a more principle (androgynous) relationship that transcends them: bestowing and receiving. This is why the primordial Adam of the Hebrew mythology is initially made both male/female before being separated. As such sex/gender can be considered as constructs, but they also certainly have unique characteristics that manifest physically. Any gender can assume either bestowing/receiving - and indeed there is a spectrum within which varied stable configurations can exist. A typical configuration (man and woman) relies on the natural gender-afforded bestowal (phallus) and reception (ovum). However as we know in homosexual relationships one man takes the bestowal role while the other the reception (and perhaps vice versa). This alone is enough to suggest that there is a more principle basis for life which transcends gender (and/or is not limited by/to it).

I'm not too interested in anything "outside" of humans on this topic as the problem only involves humans/humanity.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

there is not a single natural phenomena (that is not imagined and later turned into a psychopathy) which suggests anything otherwise.

Which natural phenomena are you referring to here?

However as we know in homosexual relationships one man takes the bestowal role while the other the reception (and perhaps vice versa).

Erm, you appear to be referring to only one way in which two men might enjoy sexual relations with each other. And what about two (or more) women?

Also, can you clarify whether the focus of your argument is the procreative act or something else (perhaps a spiritual coming together of 'bestower' and 'receiver'?)?

 

[PureX]

I don't believe that humans are any different biologically or psychologically today from what they were a few thousand years ago. What is very different, however, is that our ability to communicate with each other has increased exponentially. And the result is that we now know more about each other than we ever could, before, and with this knowledge has come no small number of surprising revelations. One of them being that our sexual preferences and orientation are not nearly as 'fixed and binary' as we had always assumed in the past. This doesn't mean that humanity is changing, for better or worse. It just means that we are learning new things about who and what we have always been.

 

[Audie]

Among the many (sometimes highly) questionable things one might find in (any) scripture (especially relating to what one might consider basic human morality/decency), one of the elements that seems to be consistent is the notion that there are only two genders: masculine (man with a phallus) and feminine (woman with a vagina). If one stops here, there is not a single natural phenomena (that is not imagined and later turned into a psychopathy) which suggests anything otherwise. Or in other words, on this one thing: the many scriptures of the world got it 'right'.

Now, however, humanity seems frustrated by these two *real* genders and have decided to disassociate themselves by identifying as "something else" hence the many many so-called "genders" of today.

This, I suggest without reservation, is a sign of a collapsing / degenerating humanity. It is unfortunate to admit, and to accept as simply true, but I am not one to chase after making what "sounds" good the reality as "believers" so often do. This again is why "belief" is not a virtue - it is a barrier that prevents one from seeing/accepting the reality that he/she is invariably *in* and/or a part of. This is where gender (as well as other/all types of) dysphoria becomes a red flag: people are rejecting the reality in which they live, and trying to alter it to accommodate their own (likely trauma-induced) dysphoric worldview much to the overall detriment of all others.

The basic framework of continuous creation is very simple; being comprised of three components:

i. Will (individual/shared)
ii. To Bestow (ie. man bestows phallus; masculine)
iii. To Receive (ie. woman receives phallus; feminine)

which operate as a triunity where ii. and iii. are two willing conscious beings.

For example, when two people (disregarding gender for now) interact, one acts as a(n archetypal) bestower, and the other a(n archetypal) receiver. The most explicit example of this is a/the sexual act.

Here is how basic "creation" works:

When the will of one who bestows
becomes the same (shared will) as
the will of the other who receives
two become one.

This is practically the same meaning of the "name" the god of Moses gives:

"I am that I am"
is also
I am (who bestows) that I am (who receives)

because the will is shared/perfect:
I am that I am
'Let there be light,' and there was light.
etc.

A crude graphic to supplement words:

View attachment 27755

Here we find an equilateral triangle containing the two modes of will (to bestow and to receive) joined at the top by will itself. However, the top will can be in two states: shared and/or unshared.

When a will is shared, this is "good". The only limitation (Hebrew: 'soph') is the imagination(s) of the beings within the partnership. This is why aur ein soph is "light without limitation". When two beings become one wherein the will to receive becomes the others' will to bestow, this is akin to the "kingdom of heaven" that is within, as there are no real limitations in such an internal state of being when two are acting as one.

When a will is not shared, this is "evil". If one being has a will to bestow/receive something from another, but the other does not share in it, and the first in any way forces the second to undergo anything he/she does not themselves will, this is where from "evil"; pain, suffering, slavery, war, resentment etc. result. An explicit example of this on an individual basis would be rape.

As such the appreciation of only two genders not only recognizes the (correct) fundamental basis of existence in its entirety (even as acknowledged by virtually all scriptures) but contains within it the key to continuous creation.

This is yet another of one of the many reasons I find any "religion" that utilizes male central figures as authoritative idols to follow are inherently idolatrous: Judaism/Islam and Christianity are notorious for this. Being that they are based in "belief" it stands to follow why I also repeat: "belief" is not a virtue.

When one alone looks at the nature of a being such as the prophet of Islam in light of this, one finds that a religion such as Islam does virtually nothing to balance/stabilize the genders on the planet: in fact it does quite the opposite. Because such religions are idolatrous and use male central patriarchal figures (who for all intents and purposes was a dictator war lord in the case of Islam) as the "example" for all of humanity, how these central figures behaved with women sets the precedent for the entire empire and how adherents likewise treat women. This involves (and sets the precedence for) pedophilia: a man having sexual intercourse with a child as young as nine. When one factors in that such a leader as Muhammad had multiple wives and sex slaves: allowing his followers to take up to four wives, we find Islam is fundamentally rooted in sexual degeneracy that involves men forcing themselves on women and/or having an exceedingly disproportionate power *over* women. The same is true today and continues to motive similarly sexually degenerated politicians who have warlord attitudes. Here I refer to individuals such as PM of Canada Justin Trudeau, Turkey's Erdogan and SA's MBS - all deeply rooted in corruption.

As such the gender dysphoria problem is deeply rooted in institutions such as Islam (herein I include Judaism) by proxy: women who are abused/accused by men for simply being a woman and/or men who are lead to feel ashamed for being a man begin to pathologically disassociate themselves from their natural birth gender as a result/response of/to shame (which is also not a virtue). As stated earlier, this is a red flag and indicates there is essentially a "war" against humanity: not the least of which is women (in the case of Islam).

This again brings me back to why "belief" is not a virtue: "believing" that any particular book or long-dead man is the greatest thing to use (ie. bind ones self to) as a guide has produced nothing but long-term destruction on this planet, which is why I vehemently oppose the Patriarchal institutions causing it: not the least of which are Islam and Christianity.

For those who have perhaps read my other two posts: this "shame" is another form of "the expression of being bound in an ongoing state" (satan) and is at the basis of the gender dysphoria. As such, I do say (not rhetorically) that gender dysphoria is practically "satanic", along with the religions and peoples of religions that cause / give rise to it.

The sky is falling!!!
I wonder what is with people who are always
doing prophecy-of-doom?

 

[Audie]

I don't believe that humans are any different biologically or psychologically today from what they were a few thousand years ago. What is very different, however, is that our ability to communicate with each other has increased exponentially. And the result is that we now know more about each other than we ever could, before, and with this knowledge has come no small number of surprising revelations. One of them being that our sexual preferences and orientation are not nearly as 'fixed and binary' as we had always assumed in the past. This doesn't mean that humanity is changing, for better or worse. It just means that we are learning new things about who and what we have always been.

zactly.

 

[Audie]

It seems to me you are making entirely too much over something too little.

I would suggest that it is quaint pearls of wisdom that are action at dissonance with reality.

I would also suggest that people be aware of
the "protesteh too much" thing. The more someone
goes on about sin and perversion, the more
they are talking about themselves.

That is the reality.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Among the many (sometimes highly) questionable things one might find in (any) scripture (especially relating to what one might consider basic human morality/decency), one of the elements that seems to be consistent is the notion that there are only two genders: masculine (man with a phallus) and feminine (woman with a vagina). If one stops here, there is not a single natural phenomena (that is not imagined and later turned into a psychopathy) which suggests anything otherwise. Or in other words, on this one thing: the many scriptures of the world got it 'right'.

Now, however, humanity seems frustrated by these two *real* genders and have decided to disassociate themselves by identifying as "something else" hence the many many so-called "genders" of today.

This, I suggest without reservation, is a sign of a collapsing / degenerating humanity. It is unfortunate to admit, and to accept as simply true, but I am not one to chase after making what "sounds" good the reality as "believers" so often do. This again is why "belief" is not a virtue - it is a barrier that prevents one from seeing/accepting the reality that he/she is invariably *in* and/or a part of. This is where gender (as well as other/all types of) dysphoria becomes a red flag: people are rejecting the reality in which they live, and trying to alter it to accommodate their own (likely trauma-induced) dysphoric worldview much to the overall detriment of all others.

The basic framework of continuous creation is very simple; being comprised of three components:

i. Will (individual/shared)
ii. To Bestow (ie. man bestows phallus; masculine)
iii. To Receive (ie. woman receives phallus; feminine)

which operate as a triunity where ii. and iii. are two willing conscious beings.

For example, when two people (disregarding gender for now) interact, one acts as a(n archetypal) bestower, and the other a(n archetypal) receiver. The most explicit example of this is a/the sexual act.

Here is how basic "creation" works:

When the will of one who bestows
becomes the same (shared will) as
the will of the other who receives
two become one.

This is practically the same meaning of the "name" the god of Moses gives:

"I am that I am"
is also
I am (who bestows) that I am (who receives)

because the will is shared/perfect:
I am that I am
'Let there be light,' and there was light.
etc.

A crude graphic to supplement words:

View attachment 27755

Here we find an equilateral triangle containing the two modes of will (to bestow and to receive) joined at the top by will itself. However, the top will can be in two states: shared and/or unshared.

When a will is shared, this is "good". The only limitation (Hebrew: 'soph') is the imagination(s) of the beings within the partnership. This is why aur ein soph is "light without limitation". When two beings become one wherein the will to receive becomes the others' will to bestow, this is akin to the "kingdom of heaven" that is within, as there are no real limitations in such an internal state of being when two are acting as one.

When a will is not shared, this is "evil". If one being has a will to bestow/receive something from another, but the other does not share in it, and the first in any way forces the second to undergo anything he/she does not themselves will, this is where from "evil"; pain, suffering, slavery, war, resentment etc. result. An explicit example of this on an individual basis would be rape.

As such the appreciation of only two genders not only recognizes the (correct) fundamental basis of existence in its entirety (even as acknowledged by virtually all scriptures) but contains within it the key to continuous creation.

This is yet another of one of the many reasons I find any "religion" that utilizes male central figures as authoritative idols to follow are inherently idolatrous: Judaism/Islam and Christianity are notorious for this. Being that they are based in "belief" it stands to follow why I also repeat: "belief" is not a virtue.

When one alone looks at the nature of a being such as the prophet of Islam in light of this, one finds that a religion such as Islam does virtually nothing to balance/stabilize the genders on the planet: in fact it does quite the opposite. Because such religions are idolatrous and use male central patriarchal figures (who for all intents and purposes was a dictator war lord in the case of Islam) as the "example" for all of humanity, how these central figures behaved with women sets the precedent for the entire empire and how adherents likewise treat women. This involves (and sets the precedence for) pedophilia: a man having sexual intercourse with a child as young as nine. When one factors in that such a leader as Muhammad had multiple wives and sex slaves: allowing his followers to take up to four wives, we find Islam is fundamentally rooted in sexual degeneracy that involves men forcing themselves on women and/or having an exceedingly disproportionate power *over* women. The same is true today and continues to motive similarly sexually degenerated politicians who have warlord attitudes. Here I refer to individuals such as PM of Canada Justin Trudeau, Turkey's Erdogan and SA's MBS - all deeply rooted in corruption.

As such the gender dysphoria problem is deeply rooted in institutions such as Islam (herein I include Judaism) by proxy: women who are abused/accused by men for simply being a woman and/or men who are lead to feel ashamed for being a man begin to pathologically disassociate themselves from their natural birth gender as a result/response of/to shame (which is also not a virtue). As stated earlier, this is a red flag and indicates there is essentially a "war" against humanity: not the least of which is women (in the case of Islam).

This again brings me back to why "belief" is not a virtue: "believing" that any particular book or long-dead man is the greatest thing to use (ie. bind ones self to) as a guide has produced nothing but long-term destruction on this planet, which is why I vehemently oppose the Patriarchal institutions causing it: not the least of which are Islam and Christianity.

For those who have perhaps read my other two posts: this "shame" is another form of "the expression of being bound in an ongoing state" (satan) and is at the basis of the gender dysphoria. As such, I do say (not rhetorically) that gender dysphoria is practically "satanic", along with the religions and peoples of religions that cause / give rise to it.

What an ignorant post. Trans people aren't anything new and were recognized in cultures throughout the world. Even in the Bible, they're mentioned as eunuchs, which was a third gender category in the ancient Near East and Hellenic world. The Bible never says there's only two genders. You're reading things into it that aren't there, as is usual when people want to justify bigotry.

 

[suncowiam]

people are rejecting the reality in which they live, and trying to alter it to accommodate their own (likely trauma-induced) dysphoric worldview much to the overall detriment of all others.

You got that right!

 

[SomeRandom]

Umm excuse me, but many cultures and indeed scriptures worldwide have identified more than 2 genders for literally thousands of years.
Also what about hermaphroditism?

 

[Liu]

Well, as a transguy I consider your whole theory to make not much sense, and most has already been pointed out by others here, but

As such the gender dysphoria problem is deeply rooted in institutions such as Islam (herein I include Judaism) by proxy: women who are abused/accused by men for simply being a woman and/or men who are lead to feel ashamed for being a man begin to pathologically disassociate themselves from their natural birth gender as a result/response of/to shame (which is also not a virtue). As stated earlier, this is a red flag and indicates there is essentially a "war" against humanity: not the least of which is women (in the case of Islam).

I was raised by atheistic humanists, how do you explain that with your theory?

 

[9-18-1]

Which natural phenomena are you referring to here?



Erm, you appear to be referring to only one way in which two men might enjoy sexual relations with each other. And what about two (or more) women?

Also, can you clarify whether the focus of your argument is the procreative act or something else (perhaps a spiritual coming together of 'bestower' and 'receiver'?)?

Natural as in man impregnates woman - not artificially induced.

The two men example was just an example - it applies to any/all configurations of beings.

It involves the procreative act (micro) and the largest scale possible (macro) as fundamentally they are the same.

The sky is falling!!!
I wonder what is with people who are always
doing prophecy-of-doom?

It's not a prophecy - it is an observation.

Not that the world will end - it never seems to. But humanity will suffer a tremendous WW3 which will essentially be fought over human rights / women. Islam has been waging war on the planet for 1400 years trying to install Islam as the only religion within which the human rights problem can be found relating to women.

I would also suggest that people be aware of
the "protesteh too much" thing. The more someone
goes on about sin and perversion, the more
they are talking about themselves.

That is the reality.

Congratulations, you know how psychological projection works. Now look at the Democratic party of the U.S. and see how they just tried to blame POTUS for "Russia Collusion" when in fact it was the Democrats doing the collusion.

This is how Islam as a whole operates: do something, blame the other side for doing it. That is why Muslims always use Jews as their scapegoat - to blame their own doings on.

What an ignorant post. Trans people aren't anything new and were recognized in cultures throughout the world. Even in the Bible, they're mentioned as eunuchs, which was a third gender category in the ancient Near East and Hellenic world. The Bible never says there's only two genders. You're reading things into it that aren't there, as is usual when people want to justify bigotry.

It is actually your post that is ignorant.

i. I never stated transgenderism is "new". I personally don't recognize transgenderism as anything but dysphoric - to each their own.
ii. I never stated transgenderism is not in the Bible. It is not a component of the creation account - only male and female is mentioned. According to the account both are required.
iii. The bigotry is coming from you.

I didn't realize discussions relating to gender would trigger people so much: they really did the ground work for getting people easily offended.

There are only two genders with regards to humans - anything beyond this is (as discussed in the OP) dysphoria (often) relating to a deeply embedded trauma (shame) in which a being becomes insecure with their own gender. The insecurity is coming from somewhere else manifesting as gender dysphoria as a means to cope.

This is partially why gender dysphoria is actively used as a non-military warfare strategy to covertly fight wars: get as many people disassociated with their genders and adopting new ones as possible so they are easily to control. If you know what triggers a person (by creating an attachment that defines them), you control them. This is the same how idol worship works: make people attached to something and control them through it. Jesus/Zeus, Muhammad, Moses etc. All attachment and idol worship used to control/enslave people who can not otherwise think for themselves.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

i. I never stated transgenderism is "new". I personally don't recognize transgenderism as anything but dysphoric - to each their own.
ii. I never stated transgenderism is not in the Bible. It is not a component of the creation account - only male and female is mentioned. According to the account both are required.
iii. The bigotry is coming from you.

The creation account (which one, by the way? There's two in Genesis) is a myth, not a science textbook for human biology. It doesn't mention intersex people either but obviously they exist and are not "satanic".

Nothing I said was bigoted. how laughable. You're the one claiming that trans people are part of some "satanic" plot.

This is partially why gender dysphoria is actively used as a non-military warfare strategy to covertly fight wars: get as many people disassociated with their genders and adopting new ones as possible so they are easily to control. If you know what triggers a person (by creating an attachment that defines them), you control them. This is the same how idol worship works: make people attached to something and control them through it. Jesus/Zeus, Muhammad, Moses etc. All attachment and idol worship used to control/enslave people who can not otherwise think for themselves.

Lol. Paranoid garbage.

 

[Liu]

Natural as in man impregnates woman - not artificially induced.

The two men example was just an example - it applies to any/all configurations of beings.

It involves the procreative act (micro) and the largest scale possible (macro) as fundamentally they are the same.

Most beings procreate asexually.
And among the sexually procreating ones, there are some that change their sex throughout their lives.

Us humans can't do that fully, but we can do that superficially, and it seems to help some people to do so, so what would be the problem with it?

There are only two genders with regards to humans - anything beyond this is (as discussed in the OP) dysphoria (often) relating to a deeply embedded trauma (shame) in which a being becomes insecure with their own gender. The insecurity is coming from somewhere else manifesting as gender dysphoria as a means to cope.

While you deny it, you do seem to be conflating sex and gender.
My "gender" disphoria btw had not much to do with gender expression (I've basically been behaving like a guy since ever) but with getting depressions from having female sexual characteristics.

 

[9-18-1]

You got that right!

It is the same thing as socialism: make everyone else suffer as much as you suffer yourself. Anyone who suffers themselves and blames others for their own suffering are socialists. This is why I argue the Semitic religions are fundamentally the (main) sources of all socialism and fascism on the planet.

Umm excuse me, but many cultures and indeed scriptures worldwide have identified more than 2 genders for literally thousands of years.
Also what about hermaphroditism?

More offended people - can you name what scriptures and genders you are referring to here?

What about hermaphroditism? According to the Hebrew scriptures the primordial Adam was a hermaphrodite prior to the separation of sexes. That is because fundamentally all beings have both polarities (bestow/receive) but the body takes one or the other 'form' - phallus or ovum. A hermaphrodite has both - being born in this way naturally is extremely, extremely rare and really is nothing more than a biological mishap.

Well, as a transguy I consider your whole theory to make not much sense, and most has already been pointed out by others here, but


I was raised by atheistic humanists, how do you explain that with your theory?

I don't understand the question. What does being raised by atheistic humanists have to do with the OP and/or gender?

 

[ManSinha]

when in fact it was the Democrats doing the collusion.

What source do you have for that claim?

That is why Muslims always use Jews as their scapegoat

The white men chanting against Jews in Charlottesville were certainly NOT Muslims

There are only two genders with regards to humans - anything beyond this is (as discussed in the OP) dysphoria (often) relating to a deeply embedded trauma (shame) in which a being becomes insecure with their own gender. The insecurity is coming from somewhere else manifesting as gender dysphoria as a means to cope.

Which school did you get your Psychology or Psychiatry degree from? I ask because you are making statements that have been debunked by the professionals in the field of behavioral health

All attachment and idol worship used to control/enslave people who can not otherwise think for themselves.

I thought idol worship was forbidden by God's law?

 

[Liu]

I don't understand the question. What does being raised by atheistic humanists have to do with the OP and/or gender?

In the part of your post I was quoting you were saying that Islam and similar ideologies in which the sexes are treated differently causes people to be transgender.
I was saying that I was raised by un-ideological people who treat the sexes equally and still am transgender.

 

[9-18-1]

The creation account (which one, by the way? There's two in Genesis) is a myth, not a science textbook for human biology. It doesn't mention intersex people either but obviously they exist and are not "satanic".

Nothing I said was bigoted. how laughable. You're the one claiming that trans people are part of some "satanic" plot.

Lol. Paranoid garbage.

Indeed it is a myth - again I never suggested to be anything but.

Pretty much everything you said was bigoted - you are contesting things I did not even purport (twice in the last response) and one here: that I am claiming trans people are part of some "satanic" plot. I never "claimed" anything near this and is your own:

You're reading things into it that aren't there, as is usual when people want to justify bigotry.

Isn't accusing the other side of what you are doing 'bigotry'?

Most beings procreate asexually.
And among the sexually procreating ones, there are some that change their sex throughout their lives.

Us humans can't do that fully, but we can do that superficially, and it seems to help some people to do so, so what would be the problem with it?

While you deny it, you do seem to be conflating sex and gender.
My "gender" disphoria btw had not much to do with gender expression (I've basically been behaving like a guy since ever) but with getting depressions from having female sexual characteristics.

I sense different people have different understandings of "sex" and "gender". Personally the former is "kind" - ones kind is determined by their sex(ual behavior). If one is chaste and transmutes the energy, they are of a certain "kind". If one is promiscuous they are of a certain "kind". The sexual behavior always determines the kind. Gender is just gender - male and female. However masculine and feminine (principles/polarities) transcend gender and can be contemplated completely absent "gender". These are what come closest to will to bestow (masculine: 'el') and will to receive (feminine: 'eem') and is denoted in the Hebrew mythology as el-ha-eem or Elohim. This is what truly creates: and it need not involve gender unless talking about physical reproduction wherein a phallus and ovum is required for human beings.