I see a lot of stuff that argues over the definition parameters and validity and such, of identities, what they mean, and why people have them. 

On one side, nature.  The idea that people are "born" a certain way due to bran chemistry and neural structures and that conflates with all manner of unproven things, on mostly unproven bases (the brain structure studies aren't as scientifically sound as they would like to think, and haven't been cross-referenced, as far as I can tell, with other studies that invalidate both their conclusions and the entire basis of the initial study.  Nobody knows enough about neuroscience and the meanings of differences in brain scans to be as definitive as these researchers are trying to be.) 

On the other side, nurture.  The idea that people are products of their environments, and environment/socialization is a big factor in making people who they are, the messages they absorb, the behaviors they are compelled to imitate, which presumes all manner of social constructs that don't exist in real life yet are assumed to exist in the same way/same forms because of the general outcome (for instance, the myth of "shared girlhood" and the idea that all small humans absorb socialization of one form or another in the same way as everyone else as these passive receivers of external things that most of them may not even understand.)

What about individual choice?  Why is this not considered in nature vs. nurture debates?  Why is choice seen as less valid and less inherent than either nature or nurture?  Why the assumption that humans are passive recipients of either biology OR socialization?  Does anyone wonder if, maybe, people are the way they are because they personally prefer it, and chose to be?  Is personal choice somehow less a part of inherent being than biology or socialization?

I understand the fear of attributing deep-seated aspects of personhood to choice, i.e, "if you chose to be this marginalized identity, why can't you just choose not to be?" and then trying to alter human choice via brainwashing.  But this is also demeaning the importance and power of choice.  The choices one makes are just as much an inherent part of them as anything else.  Trying to force and finagle someone into making choices that they wouldn't otherwise make is to psychologically mutilate them.  Even if those choices are not the choices someone else would make.  Even if those choices are considered "wrong."

The ability to choose, i.e, agency, is what makes humans human.  We can even alter the evolution of our own species, consciously, via free will and choice.  Humans can make themselves whatever they choose to, because they chose to.  Humans can do this, have had to do this, to compensate for our lack of claws or wings or keen senses.  The spear was invented to compensate for a lack of talons or canines--what humans could not obtain by natural endowment they obtained by invention and tools.  Agency.  Without agency, we would not even be here.

The only "human nature" is the ability to choose and self-define, regardless of circumstance or bio/neurological limitation.

So maybe people are the way they are because they chose to be.  That is just as valid as being "born-this-way," imo.  Their choice is an inherent part of them--why would they have chosen something that doesn't matter to them?  If it wasn't important, why would a choice have been made in the first place?  Why would they have seen green or blue and chosen green, Green Green definitely 100% green, instead of...meh, whichever.

Why focus on imperatives, be they biological or social, with all this agency going on that is capable of trouncing almost any imperative or limitation because that's what it's meant to do?

QuoteDoes anyone wonder if, maybe, people are the way they are because they personally prefer it.

Yes. 

I've got nothing against the idea that some choose a lifestyle or someone actively doing just that.  However, I don't like when people say that we all have a choice whether we are trans, gay, etc.  I can speak with certainty that if I had a choice, I wouldn't of chosen to be trans nor would I have chosen to be attracted to men.  I've tried everything I could to suppress my feelings and be something that I wasn't.  Now, I can't say why I feel what I feel, but it's certainly not a simple thing that I can change.  On the same token, I'm sure there are people that may choose a particular lifestyle and hide behind the "born this way banner" out of fear when they don't need to.  I could care less if I met someone that was trans because of their individual preference.  More power to them.  They are just as welcome in our community.  Still, I'm uncomfortable by those that claim this is a choice for all of us because it denies the individual experience of many people that don't feel this way.   Overall, I think there is room for nature, nurture and individual preference.

I agree with LTL, I dont think its a choice. Why would I choose to be trans and be rejected by my family and peers. It just doesnt make a lot of sense.

This is a fascinating topic to me and one the sages, moralists and psych folks endlessly consider.  I want very much to confidently think I have individual choice.  Making choices assumes we are doing so in the context of a culture that birthed and nurtured us.   The essential tools for this very discussion include a learned language and years of socialization.  We make no choices in a vacuum and being able to parse the influences that make us individuals is a daunting and ongoing tease out not subject to objective verification at this point.  Mapping the brain, interpreting our genetic code and more solid science will contribute more data to consider as we progress.

Numerous studies focusing on the behavior of separated twins and other phenomena can give us clues.  It may just be hubris that allows me to believe that we exercise choices to make the best of what we get from nature and nurture.  Are we assuming another binary ideal in considering it is all nature vs nurture?

Do you feel like being trans was a choice for you, or is this just a philosophical exercise?

QuoteHowever, I don't like when people say that we all have a choice whether we are trans, gay, etc.  I can speak with certainty that if I had a choice, I wouldn't of chosen to be trans nor would I have chosen to be attracted to men.  I've tried everything I could to suppress my feelings and be something that I wasn't.

I believe she's saying you may simply prefer being a woman, not a man. That perhaps the brain chemistry or 'wiring' isn't that of a woman? If you did prefer being a woman because you like the many aspects of it versus that of a man, then I wouldn't think you would feel being transgender is a choice either.

I don't know.

Serious question: Would it matter?

Quote from: Nikko on January 04, 2014, 02:24:01 PM
I believe she's saying you may simply prefer being a woman, not a man. That perhaps the brain chemistry or 'wiring' isn't that of a woman? If you did prefer being a woman because you like the many aspects of it versus that of a man, then I wouldn't think you would feel being transgender is a choice either.

I don't know.

Serious question: Would it matter?

It's not something that matters for the most part.  However, it does bother me when people think we can just switch it on or off and that can be used for reprogramming (not that this is what the op is doing).  It may be that way for some people, but my gender or sexuality is really not something I can change.  I've had these feelings since childhood and most of my life has been haunted with shame and self hatred for having these feelings.  If I could choose to be a straight man and live happily, I really would have done so because I've really tried to reprogram myself.  That's the only issue I have when people suggest it being a choice.   At the end of the day, it really isn't important.  I suspect there are elements of nature, nurture and individual choice that makes up our identities overall.  I have no problem confessing that I have no idea what caused me to be this way, and I may never know.  I'm okay with that, but I know these feelings have been with me despite my attempts to get rid of them.

No, I'm not saying we can turn this on and off at all, to the contrary.

I'm saying we're driven and motivated by our preferences, our personalities, etc., we can't change these, they may evolve on some level, but they're not choices.

When I was a kid, my brothers wanted to go hunting and I wanted to cook with my mom and grandmother in the kitchen. Society raised an eyebrow at that, and I can go down the list and find far many more societal discrepancies than societal fits. Puberty wasn't just hard because I began to look more masculine, but because I lost my preferred friends (girls). This time more than any caused a massive shift in unhappiness in me, I've felt lost ever since.

I've wondered if just who I am (ie, personality, preferences, motivations, etc) just never fit with being male in society's eyes, but had I been born biologically female, all would have fit well and I'd have been far more accepted. I see no choice about that, transition is a choice and perhaps a good one. Again, I don't know if that's it or not, but I'm not sure it would matter, doesn't change my situation or the decision all that much.

Quote from: Nikko on January 04, 2014, 03:02:59 PM
No, I'm not saying we can turn this on and off at all, to the contrary.

I'm saying we're driven and motivated by our preferences, our personalities, etc., we can't change these, they may evolve on some level, but they're not choices.

When I was a kid, my brothers wanted to go hunting and I wanted to cook with my mom and grandmother in the kitchen. Society raised an eyebrow at that, and I can go down the list and find far many more societal discrepancies than societal fits. Puberty wasn't just hard because I began to look more masculine, but because I lost my preferred friends (girls). This time more than any caused a massive shift in unhappiness in me, I've felt lost ever since.

I've wondered if just who I am (ie, personality, preferences, motivations, etc) just never fit with being male in society's eyes, but had I been born biologically female, all would have fit well and I'd have been far more accepted. I see no choice about that, transition is a choice and perhaps a good one. Again, I don't know if that's it or not, but I'm not sure it would matter, doesn't change my situation or the decision all that much.

No, I see what you mean.  I'm talking more about those who endorse conversion therapy.  Those who suggest we can change if we just try.  My own family (mother in particular) has been pushing for me to do some form of conversion therapy and it kills me that they can't understand how this isn't a lifestyle thing for me.   After all, I've already done everything I could to push these feelings away.  Apparently, seeing a straight male therapist should straighten me out and make a man out of me, lol.

The social aspect of being female is appealing to me, but so is the appearance aspect.  Puberty was terrible for me for both it's social expectations and for its biological impact.  At the core of it, some could say there is a "choice" component, but even so, it's not really something we can easily change or reprogram.  It may be true for some, but not most of us. Transitioning I suppose is a choice and to a degree so is our preferences, so I see what you mean and can agree to a point.  It's just those that say "why not choose a different path" that get to me.  It seems they really don't understand.  For example, sexuality is always brought up in this debate.  I don't know many people that really have a say over what they are attracted to.  To a degree, there may be personal preferences that factor into attraction, but a lot of it isn't something we choose or program. That's why there is such a huge backing to the born this way camp.  It's not to say nurture or preferences don't play a role, but it's just not something that can easily be changed (if at all). 

I think it's absolutely fine that people believe they are exercising their choice to be transgendered. However, I have a problem with this stance for a number of logical reasons. The main problem is that I am a determinist and therefore don't believe in choice or free-will.

For example, what role does choice play in being transgendered? If an agent "chooses" to be transgendered, as suggested, what is motivating that agent to make such a decision? That is, there has to be some kind of influence, biological or environmental, that pushes an agent to "decide" or recognise that they are transgendered. These sorts of decisions do not spring forth from a vacuum (and if they do they are just as likely to evaporate as quickly as they appeared), but are rather based on a progression of external, internal, biological and/or environmental forces.

I say and/or with regard to biological/internal and external/environmental influences, as it's highly likely that all these influences interact to form the brain states with which we negotiate the world today. As I suggested in another thread (based on two research papers), our biological makeup could influence our social behaviour, which could in turn direct the formation of brain structure. If this is the case, it would be a huge challenge to identify where the biological and environmental influences begin and end. Whatever the case, I believe our decisions are predetermined by all influences acting upon past and current brain states, which then determine our next "choice".

IMO no one chooses to be LGBTQ anymore than we can choose our parents or place of birth.  We all know the reciprocal question; so when did you choose to be straight and cisgendered?  Yes, who and what nurtured us and the gifts of nature were not somethings we determined.  Given those inputs how much then do we really choose our behavior?  It seems considerable harm and damage can result from attempts to deprogram or cure us.  It wasn't long ago that people like us were subject to electroshock therapy and other useless attempts to cure what was different about us.

Our stories of heroic individuals who overcome the adversity of humble beginnings and strife are the stuff of legend and song.  We choose to think the individual has free will rather than accept simple destiny for the course of our lives.  We strive to understand, improve and make a difference and are unlikely to accept being merely passive vessels.  I like to think we can choose to be a better person and to create something entirely new.  Pride, hubris or just kidding myself?  IDK  But one worthy secular tenet to consider is; great claims require great proofs.

This seems a fun but, yes, philosophical debate.

If who I was was a choice, I sure made a bad one and stuck to it beyond all reason! Being TS effected my life from childhood into my 20s in every way imaginable and just about killed me numerous times. If I could have changed it, I would have. If I could have passed for a boy, life would have been a hell of a lot better.

Beyond that topic, I was an adopted child and I never knew anyone else like me in terms of temperament, disposition, sense of humour, moral values and everything else. I thought I made a lot of decisions about who I was going to be and what kind of person I would become. I thought I made these choices of my own free will. When I was 40, I met my birth mother and discovered I was an EXACT carbon copy of her! WTF??!! All those "choices" were the same ones she had made 20 years earlier!

I'm fascinated by this topic, I think the OP's thoughts are fascinating.

I feel I did choose to try and make being 100% male work for me most of my life, nearly died trying. 

I chose five years ago to change my gender identity. Since then, it hasn't been much of a choice, but rather I've been pulled down a path I never planned and to this day don't understand all that well. Why? Why am I doing this? The answer is to feel right, to feel happy, to feel more complete. I feel the reason I made this switch is because I exhausted all attempts to be happy with the status quo. I knew about changing genders for years, but this took a long time to be an option. What if in the end I'm not able to make transition 'work'? What if the negatives which so many are out of my control outweigh the positives. What then? Do my choices open up again? What would that choice be? Will I reject the notion of gender all together, gee, how nice would that be for some of us?

Note, through all of this, I don't feel my underlying person has changed dramatically, it has evolved and changed, but not tremendously. But it seems to me nature, nurture, and individual choice are all inextricably linked in all of this, at least for some.

If I could wave a magic wand, I know what I would do, no question. But nature threw me a curve ball, nurture has changed the landscape dramatically, and now my individual choices are causing me angst. Something tells me I'm more common than those who see no other than one choice to make and never look back and live happily ever after. God bless you folks that managed this, I salute you! 

It seems to me no one knows for sure why being trans occurs. There are elegant theories, but we all know what time does to many of these nice theories. They may know one day if there's a gene or some development issue that causes this, but they may find we are no different than anyone in our DNA and development. What then? I've known MtF's that I feel would be troubled by the later. In my case, I accept that nature as well as nurture may be ruled out as causes. I don't see what that changes. I'm good either way I guess. 

I think that, like everything, this varies from person to person.

GQ/GF/CD/TV persons definitely seem to have a higher number of persons who would say that they choose to represent outside the gender binary. For some, it's a philosophical argument. For others, things just seem to make more sense that way.

I know many, many, MANY TS (myself included) who desperately tried to *not* transition (up to and including suicide to avoid it), however. If it were a choice, I'd have been happy and content in my body and physique and never once even heard about Susan's Place. For me and others like me, it really seems much more essential than 'choice'.

I think that choosing is fine and if someone wants to choose to live as the opposite sex for whatever reasons, that's okay but I don't think in any way that it's always a choice.

A fun bit of philosophy for you to consider, however: If nature and nurture combined do not define the choices that we make, what does? Do you consider a person's psychology to be somehow independent of these factors?

I dislike thinking that it's merely a choice because that suggests that I had a say in this matter and that I don't suffer dysphoria.  If I could just be content in my body and as a female then I sure as heck would have, but that's not an option for me if I want to keep my mental health under control and stick around on this planet.  At the moment I'm "choosing" to live as a female because of my job, and it's one of the most damaging things I've ever done in my life, but it was a necessary evil at the time.

I can choose to outwardly pretend that this doesn't exist, but I definitely can't pretend that I'm not male to myself.  It's not really a choice when it's do or die, it's do or insanity (in more than one way).  Maybe your way of being trans is different and it is a choice for you, but for me, not at all.

Thinking about it another way though, is anything a true choice?  I can think that almost anything can be taken back to either nature or nurture.  You choose what you want to eat everyday, but is that a choice?  Part of it seems to be nature, for example hating brussel sprouts is dependant on whether or not you have the TAS2R38 gene that allows you to taste the bitter PTC in them, but other parts of it are nurture.  I can't stand hot sweetcorn because of having a really bad piece when I was in primary school.  The political party we choose to support is influenced by the people we know and the experiences in our lives which shape what we find most important to us, our religion can change depending on what experiences we have with it.  There's not much that we actually choose in this life, both the sets of genes that make us, and the environment we grow up in influence us in many, many little ways.

I don't think we have as much control over our lives as we thing we do at all.  Yeah, we could ignore a potential partner, or take a certain job, but the sort of person we've been born/grown up to being plays a part in that too.  In my company there are 5 different disciplines, some are more electrical, and some are more mechanical.  Nine times out of ten you can tell who is part of the most mechanical and physical discipline, Track, simply by looking at or talking to someone.  Even that's not so much of a choice.

Quote from: Victoria Mitchell on January 04, 2014, 06:27:15 PM

If nature and nurture combined do not define the choices that we make, what does? Do you consider a person's psychology to be somehow independent of these factors?

That would be some form of dualism, so no.

I thought this was very interesting, kinda fits the topic, worth watching...

I am inclined to frame the matter the idea of choice/identity in a way that does not throw away the former without selling-out on nature.  Identity is our sense of self, and it simply is who we feel we are.  We can't choose it any more than us any of chooses to like pink or like basketball -- our attitudes towards them can change over time, but as we acquire greater understanding of them and their nuances, our feelings will be increasingly tied to our nature rather than the "nurture" that dictates our first/second/third/etc impressions.  "Conversion" programs, incidentally, are geared towards presenting a maximally-skewed message to rig things so nurture can drown out nature.  What makes resources like Susan's and WPATH great is that while they're opening a whole array of possibilities many of us hadn't considered before, they're not *pushing* us to defy social expectations, either -- we are encouraged to determine to see just where we are.

Choice, I believe, is how we respond as our identity interacts with social norms.  If there's a conflict, do we affirm ourselves or do we conform?  Society's moral obligation is to make both options possible without retribution (while "allowing" us to conform doesn't seem like an appealing "choice," we should still be able to "come out" on our terms).  The only time society should intervene is when it has a good reason to do so... and I think the heart of the matter is "when is it appropriate for society to intervene in what we do?"  Ultimately the burden falls on society to justify itself, and the push to deny TG/Q rights basically rests on intellectually-lazy grounds that simply cannot meet the requirements of a "good" infringement.

Quote from: Jenna Stannis on January 04, 2014, 07:33:41 PM
That would be some form of dualism, so no.

I'm going for alternate universe as a third option

Quote from: Kaelin on January 04, 2014, 11:52:05 PM
I am inclined to frame the matter the idea of choice/identity in a way that does not throw away the former without selling-out on nature.  Identity is our sense of self, and it simply is who we feel we are.  We can't choose it any more than us any of chooses to like pink or like basketball -- our attitudes towards them can change over time, but as we acquire greater understanding of them and their nuances, our feelings will be increasingly tied to our nature rather than the "nurture" that dictates our first/second/third/etc impressions.  "Conversion" programs, incidentally, are geared towards presenting a maximally-skewed message to rig things so nurture can drown out nature.  What makes resources like Susan's and WPATH great is that while they're opening a whole array of possibilities many of us hadn't considered before, they're not *pushing* us to defy social expectations, either -- we are encouraged to determine to see just where we are.

Quote

Nice summation