Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by Km Anu on Today at 07:34:00 am »
I think you're right on it Liu. I want to present some similar ideas.

cite

Trauma is a gigantic motivating factor in the human decision making process, but also in how we identify problems. Trauma doesnt always occur in a single event and is defined subjectively, meaning there is no minimum or maximum way to experience it.

Repeated traumatic experiences force a form of escape or acceptance to manifest in behavior.

Trauma that benifits from gender dissasociation as a form of acceptance may manifest as transgenderism.

It's an example that fits your explanation nicely and leaves room for other concepts around the phenomenon's validity.

So far as relevance to CoS,

Along the lines of Trauma and PTSD, people who choose to identify as Transgender report that they are not treated fairly,  even discriminated against. (cite)Subversion of will is wrong, regardless of who it happens to. It is a relevant goal.

2
General LHP Discussion / Re: Psychology, Neuro-Psychiatry, etc.
« Last post by Km Anu on Today at 07:00:53 am »
Quote
The irony here is palpable in that I can think of no better illustration of my meaning as to how these dialogues devolve than your very needlessly verbose response, so thanks for that.

The phrase, by the way, was language games. Not word games. Not naming games.

Dismissing remarks as false without consideration is counter benificial in an argument and serves only to stoke your own ego.

If my explanation did not elucidate my responses to your argument, I'm right here and you're more than welcome to ask questions. I'm starting to get the impression that you care more about defending your responses than making a point other than "Unsanity."
3
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by Liu on Today at 06:58:56 am »
No intentional disrespect and not that I think it should matter, but the way you're describing it really doesn't do a whole lot to assuage me of the notion that it may just actually be a neurological disorder.
I didn't claim any different - what else would it be?
Just, it's an unusual neurological disorder in so far as it's best treated by changing the reality to conform to the "delusion" instead of by fighting the delusion as it's inborn and can hardly be gotten rid of.

I always find it strange when e.g. my hormone doctor excuses himself for using medical terminology and stresses that it would not be a disease. But I guess it's understandable that people don't wanna be thought of as mentally ill, especially since most people who call it a mental illness thereby imply that it shouldn't be treated the way it is or that it would be a much easier issue than it is.

Being gender-nonconform on the other hand seems like a much more complex thing, more rooted in psychology than neurology, and more caused by too strict social norms that limit people's individuality.
4
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by IALPRT on Today at 06:47:58 am »
No intentional disrespect and not that I think it should matter, but the way you're describing it really doesn't do a whole lot to assuage me of the notion that it may just actually be a neurological disorder.
5
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by Liu on Today at 06:27:34 am »
Correct. It wouldn't to me. If I am of the belief that man is just another animal, then there is and can only sex. The word gender does not apply to animals. It is only in the sense of human beings being somehow "different" than animals that the whole issue of gender arises in the first place.
I also consider gender mainly a social construct.

As I mentioned before, being trans is about not feeling comfortable with one's physical sexual characteristics, though, which is likely caused by some difference in the physical structure of the brain.
So changing one's physical sexual characteristics should solve those issues.

Nevertheless, even if gender is a social construct, it's a powerful one. It involves a ton of stereotypes and associations that play a role throughout everyday life.
Therefore, it makes sense that if someone can't identity with the gender people take them to be, they will feel misunderstood and will likely behave in gender-nonconform ways that they feel more comfortable with. That also applies to many people who aren't trans.

Since gender has some basis in physical characteristics, it's obvious why transsexuals (i.e. people who want to change their physical sexual characteristics) are often also gender-nonconform as described above. Add to that the stress from having the "wrong" physical sexual characteristics and it's completely understandable why being mis-gendered feels so bad that they make a political issue out of it.
6
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by IALPRT on Today at 06:11:47 am »
Correct. It wouldn't to me. If I am of the belief that man is just another animal, then there is and can only be sex as the word gender does not apply to animals. It is only in the sense of human beings being somehow "different" than animals that the whole issue of gender arises in the first place. An issue that I, personally, believe is complete and utter nonsense.
7
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by Liu on Today at 06:06:54 am »
What I have to go on is in the OP "On one side are Satanists who believe things should stay apolitical and individual" to which I agree.

and

"the other wants take the stand that a transgender individual is objectively the sex they identify with, not their 'physical' gender." [sic] to which I do not agree. Sex is a function of one's physiology.

They are using the terms gender and sex wrongly there, they should be swapped as I pointed out earlier in this thread, and even then things are not well-phrased.
But I guess that wouldn't really make a difference to you.

Quote
Even so: it is up to the Satanist to assert their own identity. It is not up to the Satanist to insist the world pander to it.
If the Satanist in question considers it the easiest way to their own mental well-being then why not?
I can agree that it's more mature to develop coping strategies about being mis-gendered than to just get angry or depressed about it. Easier said than done, though.
8
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by IALPRT on Today at 05:45:56 am »
What I have to go on is in the OP "On one side are Satanists who believe things should stay apolitical and individual" to which I agree.

and

"the other wants take the stand that a transgender individual is objectively the sex they identify with, not their 'physical' gender." [sic] to which I do not agree. Sex is a function of one's physiology.

Having read the actual article just now, though, https://www.churchofsatan.com/a-redhead-named-peggy/
I see I was hastily optimistic in my assumptions. They've gone soft.

Even so: it is up to the Satanist to assert their own identity. It is not up to the Satanist to insist the world pander to it.

Tangential after-thought: how the C/S' vision of Satanism which at least was at one time predicated on the idea of man as "just another animal" manages to reconcile speaking to matters of "gender" - a term reserved exclusively for human animals whereas with nonhuman animals there is only sex - at all would be, I suspect, highly amusing to hear
9
General LHP Discussion / Re: Psychology, Neuro-Psychiatry, etc.
« Last post by Liu on Today at 05:36:18 am »
Quote
So you may want to clarify that a bit further what you mean by sane and what you count as spiritual experience.

I see no particular reason to, do you?
Well I pointed out in which ways I don't understand you - if you aim to be understood you should try and clarify these aspects.
If you don't aim to be understood then it seems a bit strange that you are posting in a forum, but well, to each their own.
10
Satanism / Re: Some CoS inside information
« Last post by Liu on Today at 05:24:36 am »
It seems there's a storm coming for CoS, and at the center of it is the question of transgenderism. On one side are Satanists who believe things should stay apolitical and individual, and the other wants take the stand that a transgender individual is objectively the sex they identify with, not their "physical" gender.

The issue is that Peter, Peggy, and Blanche all side with the latter, including many high ranking CoS members.

And Peter, Peggy, and Blanche happen to be right about this particular issue.

As a wise man once said "facts don't care about your feelings". Men who feel as if they are women are still men. Women who feel as if they are men are still women. This is just biological fact. That it is an objective fact of nature is key. Neither surgery nor hormone replacement changes what is true at the chromosomal level.

Depends on the definition of "man" and "woman". If you mean "person of these respective chromosomes" or "person who was born with the respective kinds of genitals", then sure.
But the 3 CoS members in question were quite obviously talking about the mental gender, not about the physical sex.

Quote
I don't think they're arguing that one shouldn't be free to modify their body in anyway they so choose. What they're arguing is if doing so is sufficient to objectively change one's gender or that others should be forced to act as if it has. I'm with them on this. That it isn't.

This, in and of itself, is not a political issue at all except inasmuch as some transgenders choose to make it one. Fact is I don't care what laws are or are not on the books, as far as I'm concerned, if a dude who went through all the trouble of surgery and hormone replacement to "become" a women insists that I call him a "she", I will tell "him" specifically and in no uncertain terms, "to go kick rocks, sir".

Why would you do so if you agree with them? I think you mis-read something, they are saying that being transgender objectively means being of the opposite gender of one's physical sex. Which likely also means that they are in favor of treating people as their preferred gender.

And in most cases of encountering a trans-person after transitioning you wouldn't even know they are trans - why go out of your way to address someone according to their chromosomes if you know their chromosomes, if in 99% of cases you won't?

Quote
Moreover, if people happen to find it creepy, gross, and possibly symptomatic of some underlying psychological issue, they are more than free to do so. They do not have to play along with another person's delusion. However, I should stress, I do not disapprove of another's free choice to engage in self-deception even to that radical extent. It is a choice just as all body modifications are. That is not the issue. The issue is when I am forced to accommodate what I know to be untrue in order to spare another human beings feelings.
I don't know about other trans-people, but for me transitioning has nothing to do with any self-deception that it would physically make me a male. Physically, I'm basically an intersexual now. Transitioning is about feeling more comfortable in one's body. It also is, to a certain degree, about influencing how others perceive you, and I do feel much more comfortable being considered a guy and being referred to as a he (even though I don't really identify with either gender). But it's the less important aspect.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10