/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11634309
>Why don't you look up the reasons why GD is never classified as BDD?
yeah because the lgbt community is perpetually butthurt with being called mentally ill. everything else is a post-rationalization.
>GD is about far, far more than "sexual tissue".
nope, then reassignment wouldn't have the effect it does. yet it is so powerful since everything else is a bell and whistle. the core is tissue appeaernce.
>No idea how you arrived at that conclusion.
see above. you know being tall isn't just about height either, right? it's about the role of being an alpha chad. but it manifests itself in bdd because they can't have that role without the tissue backing it up. much the same if you want the role of woman or dog, or female dog.
>Aetiology, treatment and development are entirely dissimilar.
based on:
> Very low quality evidence
> Very low quality evidence
> Very low quality evidence
>It has to be inherent in the mental disorder itself, not just a comorbidity. That should have been obvious.
which it is.
>You are adjusting your observations to your myopic world view.
no, i've been entirely consistent while you haven't been able to keep your model straight as shown again and again.
>That would only be the case if his position was weak.
or there is death sentence in academia for ppl who question politically correct dogma.
>Nothing even remotely of what you say is in that post.
you were saying to the post i replied to.
>Not even close.
what do you think otherkin are?

1/2