/sci/ - Science & Math

No, there's no logic to it. Nature would never devise a method where genders have to be reversed before reproduction, especially when you consider that nearly all transgender people are infertile.
The only time a more complicated process evolves is when it is more beneficial to the population, and there is no way transgenderism is beneficial to the population.

Those aren't hypotheses. I'm not sure what you're trying to ask us here.

It's no worse than simply not breeding. I don't see why all the high schoolers on this board take issue with it.

Sexuality? Yes.

Gender is a trivial construct.

>>2185499
>you will never know what it's like to have an intelligent and perfect evolutionary process
sadfrog.jpg

>>2185508

>Gender is a trivial construct.

This is what retards actually believe.

>>2185499
I'm more inclined to believe we've just populated so much recently that all the smaller kinds of mutations that would never get noticed suddenly have big groups of people as parts of them.

>Physics teacher comes out trans during summer
>new students and parents rage, want to transfer out of class
>some sort of sensitivity committee has to come around and do a little presentation on it
>after it's over, yell to my friend
>this is your fault (it was, he was one of the complaining people)

Their personal choices have nothing to do with the further evolution of humanity.
Evolution chooses the simplest, most beneficial choice as it is the one most likely to survive. Transgenderism is neither.

>>2185515
This is what people who have no argument say.

>>2185521

>Implying this is not the beginning of humanity's trend towards a eusocial society

>>2185522

>gender, a physical manifestation of biological differences is a trivial construct

Does that make any sense to you?

I'll give you a hint: it doesn't.

Gender ROLES may be a trivial construct, but to say gender is a trivial construct? Sorry but you're just retarded.

>evolutionary evidence

Evolution doesn't set goals, and transgender people tend not to reproduce. Natural selection would appear to be working as intended.

>scientific evidence

You need a hypothesis to support first.

>>2185529
>he doesn't realizes he's actually referring to sex.
>calls others retarded.

>>2185529
Barring weird mutations, a person is either a man or a woman. Check the chromosomes. The labels of hetero- homo- bi- and asexual are actually useful describing terms. Gender isn't.

For the prevalence it has today, it's either the result of social restructuring, or it's some kind of hangover from something that helped us out.

Maybe in our ancient past we could change sexes like some frogs can?

>>2185536
>>2185538

>implying language isn't fluid and words can't mean whatever the fuck i want them to

Stay retarded, /sci/.

i thinks he want to kno if monkeys cut their dicks or what

>>2185541
>it's some kind of hangover from something that helped us out.

Yes, that would be sex drive and attraction.
Both have been quite useful in the past.

>>2185542
>implying you can argue semantics in science

>>2185542
Only retards who failed English class believe this.

>>2185549

I got straight A's in English class retard, looks like you're the one that failed if you can't understand the concept of evolving language.

U mad?

>>2185547

>implying you can't argue semantics in anything

sure is aspie in here

>>2185555
That's not how you even form a sentence.

There are humans with multiple Y chromosomes and extra X's. This doesn't always result in transexualism though.

Can I please have some serious answers or would I need to go ask Tinychan instead?

>>2185586
Does that still support it in a way, I'm confused, science confuses me.

>>2185588

Try asking a serious question.

There is not any scientific or evolutionary evidence clearly supporting transsexuality. There are theories, and a bit of research primarily relating to similarities in brain structure between MTFs and non-trans women, but nothing concrete.

As an FTM myself, I'm not overly concerned with the idea of empirically validating my gender.

>>2185589
Well, there's no such thing as "the 2 sexes," like we are commonly lead to believe. There's a multitude of different kinds of sexual orientations, but we like to lump them up into "has a penis," or "doesn't have a penis."

Science enthusiasts always state that human behaviors are dictated are 50% genetic and 50% environment, so to answer your question: Yes, there is at least some form of genetic evidence for transexualism and transgenderism.

But then again I'm a complete amateur so who the fuck knows.

>>2185586
Sex chromosome abnormalities never result in transsexuality. They (often) result in intersex conditions.

>>2185597
>There are theories
>doesn't know how science works.
>There

You're asking a meaningless question. You'll have to elaborate on what you mean by "support". Does transsexuality exist? Absolutely. Scientific evidence supports this. Is it moral? That's not a question for science.

I think the matter this comes down to is can someone's brain be wired similar to that of the opposite sex?

>>2185597
Depends on what you mean by evidence and supporting.

There are usually clear discrepancies in brain tissue density and gender-specific regional activity in transgendered persons.

But in another way

There's no evidence to support people having gender. We simply don't have a model of the brain good enough to correctly simulate how we think.

>>2185600

It's not about the penis. It's about which sex cell you produce.

Sperm = male
Egg = female
Both = herm
None = doesn't matter

>>2185612
I know that, I was simply stating that our conventional - or cultural - way of defining sex is innately wrong.

>>2185562

You can try to argue it and have your faggotry dismissed, which amounts to the same thing.

>>2185612
Wait, does this mean male seahorses are really women?

>>2185589

Support how?

We have evidence that it exists, and you seem to already accept this evidence else you would not have formulated your question.

>>2185625

Male seahorses don't produce eggs. They just carry them after the female lays them.

>>2185625

The female produces the eggs, then deposits them in the male's cunt. The male still produces the sperm.

>>2185604
Semantics, bro. You know what I mean.

>>2185636
Science is exact. If you don't have your semantics right in a scientific debate you're still fuckin wrong.

>>2185646
Excuse me then. Hypothesis.

>>2185629
The male needs something to carry the pheatus in dumbass.

>>2185629
>We have evidence that it exists

Yet you haven't once provided a shred of evidence in this thread itt.

>>2185661
I guess this means they admit defeat.

What is going on in this thread?

Oh come on guys. There are male brains and there are female brains, this is well accepted in neuroscience and psychology, we can measure differences. MTF brains look more like female brains than male brains, while FTM brains look more like male brains than female brains. Yes transsexuality is "natural," evolution has not set up a perfect developmental system (and it is indeed a developmental system that "tells" a zygote whether it will go in the male or female direction) and sometimes a person develops mixed body features of males and females. This includes the brain.

>>2185661

Look, a transsexual. Ergo, they exist.

>>2185676
Yeah, the people do, but you can't disprove that transsexuality isn't a person choice and lifestyle.

>>2185668
I have a degree in anthropology you little shit.

I know what I am talking about and such things are not evolutionary.

>>2185691
>sex development is not evolutionary
>anything about an organism is not related to evolution on some level
>laughingelfman.jpg.png.exe

>>2185689
I made the personal choice to be transsexual. Granted, my other choices were living miserably as a woman or suicide, but I still made the choice.

>>2185689

...and? If you were trying to ask if some people are biologically predetermined to dress like a woman, you did a pretty shit of doing it.

>>2185703
Considers to not provide evidence to support why transsexuals are freaks.

Meaning they're freaks like furries and otherkin.

You admit defeat. Science is shit.

>>2185702
I don't get the miserable part. Why would being a particular gender make you miserable?

>>2185711
New person here. It must be distressful if she is willing to be potentially ridiculed and ostracized by her actions. Some things you just can't understand because you will never experience it.

There are things you want to hump. There are things you don't want to hump. There are characteristics you find attractive. There are characteristics you find revolting. That is all you need to know.

>>2185710

That's not even grammatical. What is your argument?

I think I am transgender but I am not sure if it's just a faze I can get rid of or if it's a real condition or if I was just born this way. Please help me.

>>2185711
Imagine having to dress and act according to the expectation put upon the opposite sex. Imagine, as a man, trading male socialization in youth for female socialization. Imagine having to wear explicitly female clothing, keep your hair long, and play only with girls, because your male classmates don't want to play with a girl, even a masculine one. Imagine every birthday and Christmas getting shit you didn't want because it was appropriate for your assigned gender. Imagine puberty hitting you in the face with lumps all over the place and wishing every day that it would fall away and you could wear a t-shirt again without feeling hideous. Imagine as an adult being perceived not just as the opposite sex, but as someone who has failed to preform their assigned gender correctly. Or if you do preform it well, it's not because it comes naturally to you. It's because you make a conscious choice every morning to put on a show for everyone, wear clothing you find uncomfortable and unflattering, walk differently, talk differently, interact with people differently, because that's how you're supposed to be.

Basically you spend every moment of your life pretending to be someone else.

>>2185721
>she

I'm a guy.

You guys are faggots and need to be put down.

http://www.endahurtskids.com/

The truth hurts.

The way I want to have someone try and understand what it's like is to ask them how would their life have turned out if they had the opposite genitals. That everything else was the same, they just had the wrong genitals.

That may be the wrong thing to ask women, but for men, I think it'd get the point across.

>>2185752
>That may be the wrong thing to ask women

Women are flawed creatures and thus do not get to have options, you nigger.

>>2185737
Typical woman, always whining and complaining.

>>2185770
>implying I wouldn't want a dickgirl

>>2185772
>he thinks I'm a woman
>laughinggoblinshark.jpg

theres evidence that these things and homosexuality are just defects caused by complications during pregnancy. also mercury can turn some animals gay, so there is evidence of significant environmental factors. there is also evidence that boys without a father are more likely to be gay or trannies, more evidence for environmental factors.

>>2185772
He was asked. Men have problems too.

Wait wait wait...could you rephrase the question?
Do you mean, "support transsexuality and transgenderism" as in, "does the phenomenon exist?" or "that it's a good thing?"

Speaking as one of 'em myself, I can assure you the phenomenon exists. Also, at the same time,

a.) it's made for a lot of misery in my life

b.) I wouldn't have it any other way (that is, I wouldn't have my brain's gender made to fit my body's gender. I identify with my brain a lot more than with, say, my forearms).

c.) If transsexuality had been a reason to abort and do over when I was an embryo, I wouldn't have had a life that overall, I've really enjoyed.

Suppose there was a group of genes that made people behave in a transgender/transsexual manner? Should you do anything about it? If you start doing eugenics stuff with the your own zygotes because they might grow up to be faggots or wear womens' clothes, or be likely to vote the wrong way, well...that would be a dystopia for sure. But people will start doing this as long as church and state are intertwined, or the state is dominated by marching guys in buzz haircuts, as in the dictatorships of the 1930's.

>>2185793
>there is also evidence that boys without a father are more likely to be gay or trannies

Is this Sigmund Fraud?

>>2185844
This is an incredibly simplified view of genetics. It will not, at least in our lifetimes, be possible to select for traits like heterosexuality or cissexuality. The contributing factors are far too complicated.

>>2185863
I thought you're born a certain sexuality?

>>2185737
You're going to be called what your sex is; deal with it. Your "gender" might as well just be what you want to be called. A furry might want to be called a dog. Should I call him a dog instead of a person?

What if there's a heterosexual woman who wants to be known as a man? How do I describe the relationship with her husband? "Yeah, it's two guys who got married, but it's not gay or anything."

It's bullshit and "transgender" people are just looking for something to complain about.

>>2185881
I wasn't implying otherwise. I suppose I should have said contributing GENETIC factors to make myself clear.

>>2185884
Now you did it, human.

Your bias savagery and plagued my political party long enough.

Prepare to die as I get your address.

>>2185884
It's funny that you mention a it, I'm actually a "heterosexual woman who wants to be known as a man". If you saw me on the street, you would think I was a straight man. At least until you realized the bro next to me was my boyfriend.

>"transgender" people are just looking for something to complain about

Elaborate.

>>2185793
>>these things and homosexuality are just defects caused by

For all the issues I have with his apologies for the Church of England, author and S&M enthusiast C.S. Lewis had a useful commentary on the usage of the word "just" in argument. He said that when a thing was described as "just" something or other, you can replace the word "just" with the phrase "and that is contemptible"

Therefore, namefag atheismIsGay !YeW.lBLu6Y in post >>2185793 can be paraphrased as saying:

"Transgenderism, transsexuality, and homosexuality are defects caused by known reasons, and therefore, these people are contemptible"

Lots of aspects of our minds and personalities are caused by random events. Does this make them contemptible or devoid of meaning? Yo' Mama sucks chicken butts.

>>2185884
This kind of attitude would get your ass kicked where I come from.

>>2185895
I'd call you a homo, you homo.

>>2185737
While I would certainly be inclined to flout the gender roles imposed by society if I had a sufficient dislike for them, this wouldn't be in my view a good reason to label myself as the opposite sex. The clothing and hairstyles and toys don't have anything to do with being male or female; it's just something that society expects from males and females. To say "Fuck you, society" makes sense to me, but not "Fuck you, biology."

>>2185896
>C.S. Lewis

Was a gigantic fag and an atheist faggot.

This entire thread is dildos who don't even know a thing about transsexuality to even have an opinion on it. I will kill you all.

>>2185901
The fuck you to biology is pertinent when sexual dimorphism leaves you feeling like you were left with the wrong half.

Depends on what you say when you refer to "transgenderism"

Because there's a form of transgenderism where you're a male who literally has the physical brain of a female.

ITT: Arguments solved by reading wikipedia.

>>2185895
>Elaborate
Developed states, spoiled societies, people have all their needs met and more, but still need to look for anything that could be called a problem to complain about.

>>2185911
>Because there's a form of transgenderism where you're a male who literally has the physical brain of a female.

That is the entire basis of Transgenderism, fool.

>>2185893
>>Your bias savagery and plagued my political party long enough.

Lol you guys invited them in by getting in bed with Bible thumpers a generation ago. Enjoy your exile. But I do agree with your feelings on this subject.

And I gotta respect you for admitting you're a Republican, unlike all the guys going around saying "I'm a Libertarian" or "I'm an Independent" which means, they're afraid to admit they're Republicans because they think it'll make them look like old stodgy religious guys.

Anyway, back on topic...if there's not a genetic reason for transgender behavior, does that mean it isn't happening?

>>2185929
If it's not genetic but happens anyway, it's probably developmental or environmental. We'd need to show it's not genetic before saying that, though.

>>2185931
No we don't, nigger.

>>2185922
This is a poor argument that crops up quite frequently. Transsexuality is not a product of the first world. It has been witnessed for centuries the world over. The idea of the modern transsexual, one who was has hormones are surgery and looks like the gender they feel themselves to be, is a relatively modern concept brought about by advances in medical technology, but people who have lived opposite their assigned gender have been around forever.

>>2185938
Sorry, meant
>who has hormones AND surgery

that's the dxm typing

>>2185902
Yep, that's why he wrote all those books defending C. of E.-flavored Christianity...but he was a gigantic pervert and English people are a little perplexed as to why American Christians think he's such hot shit. Same thing with Winston Churchill, English people, who had to live with him, have a much more nuanced view of the guy as a weirdo who was a huge ass failure but who managed to score once for the team.

Oh, here's some giant tits.

>>2185938
Name one famous transgender person in history, you bloody chink.

>>2185940
Why do I wish to be the girl in chains?

Also, how do you know when you suffer from GID or have a gender change fetish?

>>2185945
Uh, if it sexually arouses you, then it's a fetish.

Transgender people just have a certain view of how they look and should act, and they're not allowed to look that way and act a certain way. It's not about what's hot or what's not. There's still "gay" transgender people, as well as "straight".

also
>autogynephilia

>>2185942
How far back?

Also, why does it have to be a famous person?

I actually have a few good books on the subject, but most accounts of individuals being identified as transsexual begin in the 1800s, outside of cultures with third gender and transgender traditions.

>>2185938
>one who was has hormones are surgery and looks like the gender they feel themselves
wut

Still haven't shown gender isn't a bullshit concept. Is gender just something you have or is it something you have to identify yourself with?

There are guys with some traits/hobbies normally associated with women, and there are girls with some traits/hobbies normally associated with men. It's ALL gray area since there's nowhere to draw the line.

>>2185949
Therefore, all people who have experienced sexual arousal are fetishists, I know I am

>>2185955
>implying there's any default sexual arousal material determined by genetics
>implying everything isn't a fetish

>>2185949
Fetish: a form of sexual desire in which gratification depends to an abnormal degree on some object or item of clothing or part of the body

>>2185951
See>>2185939

And I know what you're getting at, but it's not about stereotypical traits, as much as they get the point across.

And I was going to type something else but now it feels like my hands are floating. I think I'm officially too high for this discussion. Sorry guys.

>>2185950
Cannot name one.

You just admitted defeat. Science loses. Sorry. Bye-Bye.

Wait
Wait a second

Is OP's image the image of a transexual?

Is that a delicious trap

Wasn't there an attempt to add female reproductive organs to a male and they died of organ rejection?

That alone should be a sign you never temper with God's work.

>>2185963
A trap and transsexual are two different things, r-tard.

>>2185962
http://www.computerconsultingservices.net/mensworld/images/FTMRulers.htm

>>2185965
>implying when I'm molesting/raping a child I care about what it feels it wants to be

>>2185962
no u

>>2185964
>That alone should be a sign you never temper with God's work.

Explain why every single pre-transition transgender person looks like a very feminine small beta male? Is this some kind of cruel joke by God if he doesn't want them to transition into a body they're more comfortable in? Why are I even speaking to you?

Gtfo of my party or else you will be hurt!!! Don't fuck with me. I will find and hurt you.

>>2185967
Uh oh, looks like we have a defective human being in our presents.

Please watch this video to see why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g

>>2185970
Internet tough shit detected and why would a Republican care about sinful freaks?

>>2185973
Oh look, it's that bullshit video again.

>>2185970
Because for men who don't already look somewhat feminine, the transition would yield too masculine-looking a woman to be worth doing?

Of course, all of this is determined by genetics, not by gods.

>>2185970
I'm 6' 2"

>>2185979
I've seen plenty of masculine men turned into a real beauty thanks to the Internet.

>>2185982
Height is irrelevant.
Pic related.

OI Transgenders, your 'genetic illness causing your entrapment in a wrong sexed body' DOES NOT EXIST! You ARE what you ARE. Live with it or kill yourself, fags.

>>2185992
Biology is duty! Do not use your brains, your thoughts are getting in the way of your duty!

Shit, that would eliminate lesbians! Who wants to live in a world without lesbians? Jeez!

Back to /b/ with you
And me, for that matter

>>2185992
Christian detected, gtfo of my political party NOW!!!

>>2185997
Lesbians and gays don't pretend to be something that they aren't, and deserve respect because homosexuality isn't abnormal. Thinking you're a woman when you are a man however IS

>>2186004
You seem to be less of a dickhead than normal republicans.

Why are you a Republican then? Or just sick of Democrat shit?

>>2186005
>Homosexuality is a sin.
Enjoy Hell, faggot. You just disgraced your fucking Lord.
Oh, and I will be your own personal Hell.

>>2186006
Don't you ever fucking call me a Democrat again, faggot.

>>2186013
Read what I said again.

>>2186013
>Then Proud Republican was the Christfag

funny how you keep on projecting even though I'm an atheist :3

>>2186020
Who says I'm either an Atheist or a Christurd?

I just hate Christians and anyone who is a retard like them.

Why do transgender people get more respect and more support when we furries get Jack's shit?

>>2186059
Because they have more science to support their case while you're just a bunch of brain dead retards with a fetish. If you want to be taken seriously. Try to find some biological reasons to support you.

>>2186059
If you're a furry then you don't need anything to just say 'I like to fap to this shit because it is hot to me.'
Now if you're talking about transforming into an anthropomorphic vixen or some shit, I'm pretty sure there's no surgery even currently close to doing that.

>>2186016
>Or just sick of Democrat shit?
>implying I am or ever was a Democrat.

>>2186077
That's actually not what I was implying but I now see how it could be taken the wrong way.

>>2186013
What about that post made you think he was a christfag? Why did you just throw a red herring instead of actually trying to argue a position?

proud republican confirmed for trolling and/or retard.

>>2186096
And you get to troll your way on out of my fucking party.

Here's the door.