The costs of trans visibility

I don't think anyone is immune to infinite pressure. Its more likely most people just never experience soul crushing isolation and loneliness at an age where they aren't mentally equipped to cope.

Your line of thinking is essentially victim blaming.

And yeah, some people are just born bi-polar or depressed and will struggle their whole life no matter what. That isn't the standard though

No I am not blaming because I don't attribute any personal responsibility to the person cracking under pressure in the case discussed.

Just a quick note to acknowledge that you ask for more info, but out of respect for ganstaman's comments I'm going to uh, apparently, ghost you again😃

Despite the commonality of the human experience, you mistakenly seem to be under the impression that everyone endures the same burdens and challenges in the exact same manner, frequency and duration and blame those that crack as having some type of defect.

you'll take up the real estate of a post just to post you won't

this is like the 8th time i've asked for examples/clarification and you ghosted...

Are you sure about that? Seems very judgmental to me,

https://www.science.org/content/article/...

That isn't quite the right framing of the genetic influence. Some people are genetically more susceptible to poor mental health. In other words, its predictive rather than deterministic.

No.

1) there is no blame implied
2) people have different willpower thresholds, "weakness" thresholds
3) if the word illness is something you feel is inappropriate, use something else, suggest what else you want to use to describe a real thing we are discussing

Think about stomach/intestine issues. A few people have a completely broken digestive systems no matter what happens in their life. Many people have predispositions to stipsi, diarreah, slow/bad digestion in general.

How would you call someone who can't digest milk? Lactose intollerant. But how would you call someone who has a high probability of digesting badly if he eats a lot of fried food, but wouldn't necessarily have a problem every time he eats fried food? Someone who should be careful with fried food and/or someone who is "weak" to fried food?

For mental issues it's the same. You have some very stressful life event (say the death of a partner or close family member) and you react differently from how other people react to that. Most of that reaction, if not all, is entirely outside of your control, the emotionally part especially.

Now if the emotional reaction is bad enough for your mental health that you start experience mental problem after that event, I am not blaming you if I say you were weak to that kind of event.

I am actually removing any responsibility on your part.

I am just claiming you are built in a way that makes you suffer more than usual if that thing happen, and that suffering can reach a threshold that generates problem in your whole life.

Is calling that condition a disease a thing that you dislike? Help me find another word for that then, instead of thinking I ma trying to blame people who are weak to specific outside pressures.

Thank you for providing exactly the kind of warped misinformation being distributed about fatness in the attempt of being "empathic" and "body positive" which can, imho, cause untold damages to people and which I think is the proper comparison to some of the trans activism I was criticizing.

The article you linked is extremely sad to read

The notion that whether one person is strong and another weak irt their reaction to a traumatic event is exactly what did, and still does stigmatize soldiers who have PTSD from combat experiences. There is the undertone that since you have nightmares or mental health issues from having to clean your teammates intestines off your clothes after an IED blew him up while the soldier next to you experienced the same thing and seems fine, then you are somehow "weak".

i know Delta Operators who suffer from PTSD. They are selected after an incredibly challenging selection process that not only includes physical challenges but a ton of psychological testing. There isnothing weak about any operator. They are likely in the top 1% of people in terms of both physical and mental toughness. So to suggest that they are somehow mentally weak is as far wrong as you can be. Because saying someone is weak implies that if only they were stronger or "toughed it out" they would be fine. And that is a terribke and hurtful falsehood.

again if the word weak is something that for whatever reason we want to dismiss because of negative connotations, let's use another one, i am open to suggestions.

And i am not suggesting a "toughing out" is possible at all.

But you know some war events go way beyond anything people in normal life conditions experience, so it's akin to somebody in full physical health still being heavily injured if a truck hit them on the road.

While if you just get hit by someone walking and fall and your bones get smashed then there is a high probability that your bones were weak before the event, more predisposed to breaking easily, is that a better imagine for what i am suggesting?

Instead the vast majority of us, if not basically everyone, will experience the death of a close relative/friend. That's something we all go through once, often much more than once. If that event incapacitated all of us mentally, we would be done as a species. And in fact, it doesn't incapacitate most of us, but sometimes it does.

Do you want to claim that individuals who experience traumating nightmares because of the stress of their college tests are identical in all aspects to everyone else who doesn't? is your claim that it is completly random who ends up with that stress and who doesn't, given the same pressure/test?

I am simply describing something that we all know exists, different individual predispositions to bad (for the individual) reactions to outside event, with health implications. We are all different and in most cases, those differences can be measured in some way and ranked. And a portion of us for every specific possible traumatic (physical or mental) outside event, will react so badly that it partially or completly incapacites us, for limited or prolonged periods of time. And that is "bad", ie something we would be better off if it didn't happen. And for some people in mental issues , that happens more often.

How do you want to call that higher personal propensity to get incapacitated mentally by outside events?

I also don't exactly like all of the "body positive" stuff, but I also don't think body shaming of fat people is likely to help them to lose weight, and neither is nagging generally going to work. I thought the article linked seemed to be fairly balanced; it basically says that for most people obesity does cause serious health problems, but for some people it may not, and even for those for whom it is causing problems they may be able to be helped by things other than just losing weight, and some of those things are not always offered to them.

Ye imagine an article on tobacco related health problems, saying that there are people who smoke 2 packs a day that reach 90 years old in fairly good health so society shouldn't push people to stop smoking

Do you really believe that if women knew they had the same chances to land a good partner if they were fatter, young women weight on average wouldn't grow more than the counterfactual?

Do you think that the relative demise of sports as the core source of pride for young men played no role in young men weight?

do you think people have 0 control of their body weight, or that they won't bend to societal pressure in behaviour in general?

This is getting pretty off topic, but no, I do not think societal pressure does much to get people to lose weight, at least not the people who I have known well. It mostly just makes heavier people angry. Personally, I tend to want to do the opposite of what society seems to want from people (though in other things than body size).

I hate sports and think any demise of it is a good thing, so I don't really feel qualified to answer anything about that; I hadn't noticed any demise of sports among young men.

If people believed being fatter would help them in desirable ways, yes I think many people would get fatter. But gaining weight is far easier than losing weight for at least 90% of the general population. Humans have evolved to want to gorge themselves on sweet and calorie heavy foods because the opportunity to do that was until recently very rare and likely to be followed by times of food scarcity. Losing weight is fighting against what the human body wants to do and is very difficult for most people who are significantly overweight.

I don't think it's off topic because a major contention about "what's the proper societal way to deal with the existence of trans people" is about the purported damage society deals to trans people by "not accepting them" in full , so discussing if that isn't as intuitive and obvious as trans activists say is proper i think.

As for sports participation for young people, this is from France, i use it because i think it's the best study on the topic methodologically, but i saw similar numbers in observational studies (polls over time and the like) for the USA

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1335

Jesus Christ, you talk like we can just send Trans people to a 'Pray the Gay Away' camp

I find your starting assumptions to be incredibly flawed on the topics covered in this thread.

I mean, the fact that you have to engage in this kind of wild hyperbole just shows everyone how dogshit your argument is.

You're reduced to recharacterizing a literal statement of fact as 'wild hyperbole' which shows how far gone from reality your position is.
What he said is true, you know its so grotesque you can't stand by it despite it being your actual stated position, so you just... deny its true, I guess?

I never knew "WE JUST WANT TO BE TREATED LIKE HUMAN BEINGS" was narcissistic absurdity. Thanks for learning me today

Its not.
Its when you narrate your 'good intentions' to advance an otherwise awful personal or political agenda that you're a first class ticket on the Narc-Train.

Allowing children to mutilate their genitals is not in service to anyone 'being treated like human beings', nor is forcing a weird sexual belief system many want nothing to do with on them because something-something 'treated like human beings'.

Treating someone you dislike or disagree with cordially and with basic respect and dignity =/= a personal obligation to allow their belief system be mandated taught to children, or codified into laws.

Did it ever occur to you that Trans people "just want to be treated like human beings" and you are making up the whole awful personal / political agenda mumbo jumbo so you can villainize an entire class of people that you think are icky?

I know it sure occurred to me!

It isn't an hyperbole when we are told by prominent politicians that gender care for minors is warranted up to and I clouding full transition before adult age, which is what I am contesting should be treated as a very rare occurrence (like needing several years of living as the other sex as an adult before being allowed, at a very minimum).

My argument is that permanent changes should be treated with extreme carefulness, and never even discussed as a possibility for someone who can't legally drink, it's incredible to even think about a society where you are deemed not mature enough to have a beer but mature enough to decide to permanently mutilate yourself.

Absolutely incredible we even have this conversation tbh.

It's also not an hyperbole when the above is literally what happened in the UK with the tavistock clinic: minors being prescribed puberty blockers (another form of permanent change) with just one visit.

No, please check the conversation from the beginning. I am talking as if we could talk many trans people about the idea that they can be happy trans people, actually happier, without becoming sterile and/or losing access to orgasms.

But at the end adults paying with their own money should be obviously allowed to do anything they want with their body.

But if i have to pay for it , i feel i have a right to decide when and how and why it is reasonable to pay for it, don't I? and no, i won't let that decision be made by "experts", you don't delegate fiscal matters to expert.