News and Events => Opinions & Editorials => Topic started by: Shana A on January 15, 2011, 09:10:09 AM Return to Full Version
Title: Existing beyond Theory
Post by: Shana A on January 15, 2011, 09:10:09 AM
Post by: Shana A on January 15, 2011, 09:10:09 AM
Existing beyond Theory
by rserven
Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 03:37:19 PM PST
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/14/936417/-Existing-beyond-Theory (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/14/936417/-Existing-beyond-Theory)
Today's item is a research paper published in the Graduate Journal of Social Science this past December. I'm not quite so prompt in reviewing this one because of my time in the hospital. But I have gotten there eventually.
I read the pdfs so you don't have to. In this case the article is by Natacha Kennedy and Mark Hellen and is entitled Transgender children: more than a theoretical challenge.
Kennedy and Hellen took the unusual approach of realizing that transgender children become transgender adults in most cases (provided, for instance, they reach adulthood), and moreover, that most transgender adults claim to have recognized their gender variance in childhood.
by rserven
Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 03:37:19 PM PST
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/14/936417/-Existing-beyond-Theory (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/14/936417/-Existing-beyond-Theory)
Today's item is a research paper published in the Graduate Journal of Social Science this past December. I'm not quite so prompt in reviewing this one because of my time in the hospital. But I have gotten there eventually.
I read the pdfs so you don't have to. In this case the article is by Natacha Kennedy and Mark Hellen and is entitled Transgender children: more than a theoretical challenge.
Kennedy and Hellen took the unusual approach of realizing that transgender children become transgender adults in most cases (provided, for instance, they reach adulthood), and moreover, that most transgender adults claim to have recognized their gender variance in childhood.
Title: Re: Existing beyond Theory
Post by: spacial on January 15, 2011, 10:35:25 AM
Post by: spacial on January 15, 2011, 10:35:25 AM
Interesting review.
I am somewhat puzzeled by the persistant inclusion of, at least one of the feminsits so vocally opposed to transgender, n most of these articles. This time is was abrief mention of Raymond.
In any reasoned discussion, all sides must, of course be considered. But objections of the politically religious are generally dismissed in passing. The reason, their objections are singular, doctrial and immutable. However, their objections are invariably based upon textual references, albeit, dubious.
Yet there persists a tendency to reference these radical feminists. Their objections are equally singular, doctrinal and immutable. Moreover, their objections are based upon a paranoid belief in conspiracies by males.
Many of us can identify with this dscription. Are these children all to be dismissed as part of a large, male conspiracy, to castrate themselves, so they can infultrate the women's movement and return the sisterhood to repression?
Even the little ggirls?
But on the other hand, failure to include the feminist position would no-doubt, result in accusations of deliberate exclusion as part of a large, male conspiracy, ........
Since it is deemed acceptable to include these paranoid feminists, what is the justification for the exclusion of the equally paranoid supreminists who view almost everything as part of a Jewish conspiracy?
These writers many claim scientific credentials, but their intelectual integrity is questionable.
I am somewhat puzzeled by the persistant inclusion of, at least one of the feminsits so vocally opposed to transgender, n most of these articles. This time is was abrief mention of Raymond.
In any reasoned discussion, all sides must, of course be considered. But objections of the politically religious are generally dismissed in passing. The reason, their objections are singular, doctrial and immutable. However, their objections are invariably based upon textual references, albeit, dubious.
Yet there persists a tendency to reference these radical feminists. Their objections are equally singular, doctrinal and immutable. Moreover, their objections are based upon a paranoid belief in conspiracies by males.
QuoteAre these children not actually transgender unless they are engaged in doing something which relates to that identity? Do the acts of crying themselves to sleep, praying that they will wake up as a girl or boy, for example, count as (trans)gender expression? What about the acts of wishing they can wear dresses, ties, skirts, trousers, or play with dolls or trains?
Many of us can identify with this dscription. Are these children all to be dismissed as part of a large, male conspiracy, to castrate themselves, so they can infultrate the women's movement and return the sisterhood to repression?
Even the little ggirls?
But on the other hand, failure to include the feminist position would no-doubt, result in accusations of deliberate exclusion as part of a large, male conspiracy, ........
Since it is deemed acceptable to include these paranoid feminists, what is the justification for the exclusion of the equally paranoid supreminists who view almost everything as part of a Jewish conspiracy?
These writers many claim scientific credentials, but their intelectual integrity is questionable.