Thread replies: 9
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: 1462060169190.png (115KB, 598x889px) Image search:
[Google]
115KB, 598x889px
Transgender acceptance is the forefront of a social current that is setting the stage for greater biological manipulation.
When we talk about 'transgender rights' what we are really discussing is the morality of the practical application of extreme bodily modification. The progressive school of thought is that it is only right for someone to determine who they truly are and that it is immoral for them not to be afforded the opportunity to make their physical self represent that.Our technology directed to this endeavor at the moment is gruesomely crude. Sexual reassignment surgery is plainly cosmetic genital mutilation in a crude imitation of the opposite sex. Despite how ghastly this elective procedure is, the prevailing social attitude towards it is that its availability is a right to those who seek it. What then, will the attitude be when technology becomes sophisticated enough for a seamless gender transition, or to accommodate even more extreme forms of bodily modification or augmentation?
Adding to this is the corollary idea that your nature given form does not define 'you'. That 'you' are your thoughts and feelings and not your fleshy husk. Even today you see dregs on the fringes of society who identify as 'otherkin', many of the arguments used to defend transgender rights could easily apply to these individuals.
The natural progression of this idea is that it is only right to choose whatever vessel 'you' feel most feel comfortable in. That not only should one choose their own gender but they should be able to fashion their own entire likeness to fit their desires.
Wanting to change genders is only the tip of an iceberg. The root is the dissatisfaction that all harbor on some level to the cards that nature hath dealt and the immutable right to correct biology's indifferent injustices.
>>
I agree with you OP, but I don't see what's wrong with it aside from the possibility of opening up very scary methods of exploitation and punishment.
Ideally everyone would be able to choose who they are so that they can experience the full variety of life before they die, so long as it's voluntary.
>>
>>34635888
>what we are really discussing is the morality of the practical application of extreme bodily modification.
I guess, but it's really a case of asking:
>If someone is mentally ill, should we allow them access to treatment?
Certainly it's more extreme than, say, treating schizophrenia with antipsychotics. But ultimately reassignment surgery is a way to treat an illness.
>What then, will the attitude be when technology becomes sophisticated enough for a seamless gender transition
What do you mean by this? I don't think it's going to get much more seamless. It'll always be extremely invasive surgery.
>Adding to this is the corollary idea that your nature given form does not define 'you'.
It's actually the opposite of that. There is some innate biological component of gender (cf. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer).
>>
>>34635888
>What is magnetic resonance imaging
>>
>>34636194
>>34636309
The issue with this line of argumentation is that no 'biological proof' of gender dysphoria is required other than the patients own insistence. The only requirement in a sex change surgery is the patient's insistence that it is necessary for their condition.
>>
>>34636589
>no 'biological proof' of gender dysphoria is required other than the patients own insistence.
That is a problem. And it should be that, in the case of children, parents raise their children as their biological sex, if later on they still believe that they're trans then it's up to them to make their own choice.
>>
>>34636655
That's your opinion of the matter, but the post in the OP was the direction the current line of thought is heading towards
>>
>>34635888
Here's the problem: when people talk of "transgender rights", they're not talking about individual rights because as citizens they already have those. They're specifically referring to the drugs they choose to take and th surgery they choose to have -- making it free or of little cost to them.
Ultimately though, there is a cost. The medicine costs money, the surgery costs money, and these mentally ill people want special exception because of their mental illness. And that is morally wrong and referred to as indentured servitude: forcing someone else to service you at little to no cost to you.
>>
File: surrogates-banner-woman.jpg (33KB, 584x170px) Image search:
[Google]
33KB, 584x170px
>>34635888
>What then, will the attitude be when technology becomes sophisticated enough for a seamless gender transition
Imagine a world where you could choose your body as easily as you choose your clothing.
Thread posts: 9
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2