Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Found this video on DSM V and GID.

Seems the North Americans are continuing to dig themselves into a hole while they try to work out how to continue their destruction of individualism by incorporating Transgender into its manual of mediocracy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch#v=nVuVEXiFsW8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch#v=nVuVEXiFsW8&feature=related)

He's Canadian, so don't blame us for him.  He is also a douche.  Really, he bases all this on toy play?  That's some dazzling academics at work there Ken.

I realise he's Canadian. Also that he has been appointed to the board to review the US policy on what will be socially unacceptable this year.

But if you watch the video, you will realise that it isn't about him. It's actually a rather interesting annalysis of where No America stands at this time.

At least now we don't have Gender Identity Disorder, now we can say we have Gender Incongruence.  And that way it does not sound so bad.

We didn't murder the person, we terminated with extreme prejudice.  We didn't kill innocent civilian by-standers, they simply suffered collateral damage.

"War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," "Ignorance is Strength."

It will be interesting to get some feedback from someone who can spare the 10 minutes it takes to watch the whole thing.

There are two extremely important points being made. Both, essentially, concerneing N Americans.

I have watched it twice now and the only concern I have is the stigma is still there because it is in the DSM.  By having medical connection I think it will allow for insurance companies to begin covering it.

QuoteI originally wrote this reply last night, before I went to bed. I woke about 1am with the thought on my mind that I had possibly been unduly blunt risking alarm rather than discussion. Since I couldn't sleep with that on my mind and was too tired to re-write it then, I decided to delete it and repost, with revisions, this morning.

I apologise for this and for last night's effort.

The inclusion in the DSM is needed so Americans can have any hope of claiming the costs on their medical insurance.

But the inclusion means you run the risk of being recommend for inpatient treatment in a psychiatric hospital.

I'm wondering if you are playing a dangerous game here. The 5th edition is due out in 2012. The same year as your election which seems likely to have someone of the ilk of Palen elected.

Playing with such dangerous people seems to me to be a hell of a risk. Especially when insurance companies might decide it's cheaper to lock people in psychiatric hospitals than pay for reassignment surgery.

The second point is that, there are, seemingly educated, trained professionals who take very different attitudes to the same issue. Both appear very certain of their positions. Since the positions cannot both be right, either, one is wrong, or the positions are based upon their subjective judgements and not upon any scientific justifications.

If it is the latter, then trusting your very liberty, not to mention your brains to such people seems an incredable risk.

Especially with the very real possibility of the likes of Zuckerman and a Palen type taking some of the most senior positions in American society.

I wonder if anyone has any observations here?

which seems likely to have someone of the ilk of Palen elected\

Nope, you could get a child molester elected faster than Sara, she's just preaching to the faithful.  And it's not just that she will not win, it's highly unlikely that she will even get the nomination - assuming she doesn't quit halfway through.

Understand tekla. The perception on this side of the pond is Obama is unpopular, has apparently accepted he won't be re-elected and Palen or someone lik her probably will.

Hopefully, the influence of the likes of Zucker will be just as fleeting.

Apologies also, I've been referring to the guy as Zuckerman, when he is just plain Zucker.