Talk:Transmedicalism/Archive1

Topic
Is this a thing anywhere other than Tumblr? A Google search returns almost nothing of consequence.--TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 13:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This is more of a cultural term, or we might have invented to describe some of our views. Dandtiks69♪♫ (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It's a thing that's pretty common in some countries, but it often doesn't get named by any particular term. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 23:33, 12 September 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * I guess that can go in there. Dandtiks69♪♫ (talk) 07:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What can go in where?--TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 07:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The fact that this term is loosely defined. Dandtiks69♪♫ (talk) 07:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Isn't this sort of the tumblr version of gate keeping? The medical professionals have long insisted on what exactly makes for a trans person, much of it silly "gate keeping" stuff (f'ex, defining what gender roles have to be filled for life experience as your target gender) -- do we already have an article on all that? I tried searching and got a whole lot of fuck all, but it's late, and I'm tired. In any case, medical gate keeping is definitely a real world thing, and "truscum" both seems to be limited to tumblr, and is directed at trans people by trans people -- the former I can probably dig up stuff on, the later I'm not touching, and I'm not sure what the article here is after (or whether it needs its own article instead of a subsection under the trans article [whose title escapes me], but that's not a thing I'm gonna ponder at 2am!) Argenti Aertheri (talk) 06:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I sweep through pages of web pages yet still can't find any real article. Just some angry transgender folk. We should change the article to gatekeeping policies in the transgender community. We can then include transmedicalism, Harry Benjamin Syndrome, and separatist transsexuals. 110.21.26.117 (talk) 08:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Good idea.ClickerClock (talk) 11:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Found something
http://www.crossdreamers.com/2013/12/truscum-and-transgender-war-of-words.html http://www.crossdreamers.com/2014/05/survey-of-truscum-transsexual.html http://www.crossdreamers.com/2014/05/on-various-shades-of-transgender.html http://www.crossdreamers.com/2010/01/transgender-and-transsexual-glossary.html

Someone please do something with these? 211.30.178.254 (talk) 08:08, 9 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The irony is that I was going to do the same thing as you. ClickerClock (talk) 04:07, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Merge
I propose this be merged with transphobia and have transmedicalism redirect to the appropriate sub-section. Dandtiks69♪♫ (talk) 05:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Good idea! ClickerClock (talk) 03:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Major sexes
I wonder what the "minor sexes" are. Any input on this?145.64.134.245 (talk) 14:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those less well-endowed...? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Good job
What was a stub is now a well-researched article. Good job, editors. Dandtiks69♪♫ (talk) 22:34, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

:(
This article is ideological nonsense, distortion and goebbels-like propaganda. Sorry wiki shouldn't be used for forcing ideological beliefs especially when used to attack some unpopular Tumblr community form USA-reductionist perspective.
 * How so? What specific sentences and statements do you disagree with? Why do you think the article is biased, and who do you think it is biased towards? What is your personal view on transexuality? I need more information for anything to be done. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Am I crazy?
As you can currently see on the wiki page, I went a bit crazy with the citations needed. If you think one is over the top, feel free to get rid of one of the citation needed or find a citation for that. Urban dictionary might be a good place to start. ClickerClock (talk) 11:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nah, I think it's fine. A lot of this article reads as very biased in favor of anti-transmedicalism. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 71.222.19.190 / talk 03:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Tucute as a self-identifier?
I always thought that tucute was an insult made by transmedicalists, and that anti-transmedicalists didn't call themselves that. Also, transtrender, as it is defined by transmedicalists, doesn't apply to all anti-transmedicalists as some anti-transmedicalists are cis and some are transsexual. Snokw (talk) 08:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Tucute ("too cute") originated as a term invented by trans woman to counter Transmedicalism. It was a cute self-identifier only meant to annoy transmedicalists. Then truscum took the term and used it as an attack against any trans people who aren't truscum. You're right: the term "transtrender" only applies to so-called fake trans people. —ClickerClock (talk) 03:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

MRAs vs gender-related disorders
I was just casually reading this article and the following sentence stuck out to me:

"The existence of a medical condition known variously as transsexualism, gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria is not medically or scientifically controversial, although it is widely opposed by various religious groups, trans-exclusionary radical feminists, MRAs, the anti-psychiatry movement and Illuminati conspiracy theorists."

I don't need it explained to me why some religious groups, TERFs, the anti-psychiatry movement, and conspiracy theorists might oppose a medical diagnosis of gender identity disorder (there really ought to be citations for them anyway), but what are the grounds to include the MRAs in this list? This seems to me to be a completely unrelated issue for MRAs, and a glance at their rationalwiki page yields no information on their opposition to transgender people at all. It doesn't seem to me that there is a cohesive anti-transgender opinion among MRAs. What examples are there to demonstrate this, and should they be appended as a citation? And if there isn't a convenient or accurate source that asserts this, should MRAs be removed from this page altogether, not really having anything to do with transmedicalism? --72.190.102.39 (talk) 02:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Evidence: We Hunted the Mammoth's blog category transphobia. —ClickerClock (talk) 07:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * There is some conflation of undesirable qualities here. Surely some MRAs have opinions about transmedicalism. I imagine that most people, MRAs and feminists alike, can not even define it. Ariel31459 (talk) 15:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Correct. Transmedicalism is mostly an intra-community drama within the trans community. There are cis people who identify as truscum however they cannot be truscum as truscum is a trans-only term. —ClickerClock (talk) 03:29, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Scientific evidence
As someone who leans transmed I’m curious You say experts disagree because of statements on websites for the APA (with no scientific research attached) where is the scientific research that proves that you can be trans without dysphoria. Transmeds use the hard scientific research on gender dysphoria (including brain scans https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/ ) as hard evidence for why trans people are the way they are. I’m curious where is the hard scientific research confirming non dysphoric trans people? If you can be trans with no dysphoria what makes being trans anymore than a choice in those cases?
 * I assume non-dysphoric trans-individuals merely believe that gender is a social construct and perceive their own transitions as being a matter of personal preference rather than being necessary for their physical and mental health--Hastur! (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that’s where the disconnect comes from transmeds view being trans as something that’s biological that you were born with that manifests as gender dysphoria (which we have plenty of scientific evidence for) and not that gender is a social construct and they don’t like being trans to be viewed simply as a choice (something the gay movement fought against and was proven false that being gay had biological origin)
 * Why can't it be a choice? Choice is good--Hastur! (talk) 22:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Why can't being gay be a choice? Choice is good, right? Well it isn't a choice because there's a scientific basis for homosexuality being biological, the same way being transgender is. If it's a choice and somebody transitions and later changes their mind and realizes they made the wrong decision for themselves, then they have caused irreparable harm to their body. Preferences change, the biological factors do not. 2600:1700:42C4:700:2DA6:9FD1:B6A0:4BCF (talk) 02:44, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, in the context of transmedicalism, aren't we talking about people who don't undergo reassignment surgery? And if they do, I would argue that it's between them and their doctor.  Anyways, I see it as logical to respect the peoples' choices so long as those choices do not infringe on others' rights.--Hastur! (talk)  02:52, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

This article is horribly biased
The fundamental definition of a transmedicalist/truscum is the belief that dysphoria is necessary for one to be transgender; equivalently, that transgenderism is a definable medical condition.

This article claims that:
 * Transmedicalists are critical of "transgender people who haven't medically transitioned". There are many reasons why a transgender person may not want to or be unable to medically transition, such as the associated costs, difficulties, risks, or perceived unsatisfactory results. Truscum are not, as a group, critical of that. Truscum are critical of people who feel no desire whatsoever to transition because they are satisfied with their bodies i.e. they do not have dysphoria.
 * Transmedicalists "perhaps" are so wrapped up in their own pain that they attack people who don't appear to be suffering. This weasel-worded statement has no basis in fact and the source is a apparently an opinionated, biased article and a random tumblr post.
 * Transmedicalists believe there is "nothing positive about being transgender" and "feel contemptuous" of non-dysphoric people. The language of these statements is so biased and loaded it is not even approaching a rational explanation. Again, truscum believe being transgender is a medical condition; something to be treated. Like any condition, it can lead to positive experiences, but in itself it is not something desirable.
 * Transmedicalists "carefully police the trans community". This statement is so laughably wrong. There are very few truscum friendly spaces, relative to tucute friendly spaces, online (as of 2019 at least), and truscum are more likely to be immediately banned for "gatekeeping" if they even suggest that dysphoria is necessary for being trans.
 * Transmedicalists regularly bully others. Again, in 2019, it is truscum who are far more likely to be insulted, banned, and bullied in supposedly trans-friendly spaces, even when they try to engage in positive conversation about how they perceive transgender experience.

Can we not do better? 204.225.215.56 (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Transmedicalism is fundamentally a rejection of self-determination over identity, and morphological autonomy. This little paragraph-list reeks of "why are you so bigoted against conservatives" bullshit, equating opinions with fundamental aspects of identity. Truscum get banned because their opinions are inherently exclusionary, and in practise, leads to the support of gatekeeping - a process that is both invalidating, a violation of morphological autonomy, and in the case of many trans people, the bureaucratic delay involved can be lethal, and disproportionately harms those who don't conform to the gatekeeper's biases - in modern society that means poor and nonwhite and disabled trans people being hurt the most.


 * Also in practise, the used definitions of "dysphoria" by truscum are entirely arbitrary and also completely do not account for the fact that dysphoria for some trans people manifests in non-obvious ways, like general depression. The rhetoric of "you need dysphoria to be trans" harms any trans person who may have dysphoria that manifests in a hard to identify manner, harms those who don't have "enough" dysphoria, for some arbitrary definition of "enough", and of course is harmful to those who do not experience dysphoria, for it is a fundamental rejection of a part of their identity by an external source.⏣sapient_cogbag⏣ talk  05:56, 24 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Bias? In my RationalWiki??? It's more likely than you think. Dumbass. Hypomaniac (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Some basic logic
If we assume that gender identity (identifying with different sex) is the cause of the gender dysphoria and implies person have gender dysphoria ( GI = >GD ) then 1) someone who doesn't have gender dysphoria can't be transgender person ( ( GI => GD & ~GD ) => ~GI ), 2) there can be gender dysphoric people who aren't transgender people ( ~ ( ( GI => GD & ~GI ) => ~GD ) ).

If we assume that gender dysphoria (suffering because wanting our body do be of a different sex) is the cause of the gender identity and implies gender identity ( GD => GI ) then 1) someone who isn't transgedner person can't have gender dysphoria ( ( GD => GI & ~GI ) => ~GD ) so a) every detransitioner was a true trans before and there's no difference between true and fake transgenderity, and b) you can fix the identity by curing a dysphoria, 2) there can be transgender people who have no gender dysphoria ( ~ ( ( GD => GI & ~GD ) => ~GI ) ).

In other words, logical assumptions of tucutes are identical with logical assumptions of transphobes. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 83.31.79.45 / talk 23:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)