Gender confusion a symptom of borderline personality disorder

Not analogous. The discomfort with those who refuse to accept that sexual orientation is something we're born with, is due to simple observation: of the laws prohibiting it, of the persecution of those born that way, of the battle for such people to attain equal rights in many ways. Historically, even in the US, the level of persecution against those who "choose to be gay" has been distressing. In some nations, the punishment for being gay is death - and people are STILL born gay in those nations. All because of a mere "different opinion"!

To show as emphatically as it's humanly possible to do so, that this is NOT a choice. This isn't armchair speculation, this is genuine sincere effort to be "cured" with harmful results.

There is some evidence that the propensity to become addicted is genetic, but the analogy you're looking for would be with "crack babies" who are born addicted. And where your analogy breaks down is, heroin addicts CAN clean up and stay clean. Drug addiction is reversible. Sexual orientation is not.

I'm sorry, but this is simply flat WRONG. Therfe is NO such evidence. However, the evidence that it is genetic is weak at best. The best current evidence, as far as I've seen, is that prenatal conditions are a strong contributing factor - things like pH in the womb, etc. So the genetic component would be indirect.

These possibilities are being ruled out through exactly the sort of unfettered research you champion. I'm all in favor of such research. I'm also aware that research results do not translate directly into public policy. All those laws intended to punish gays every which way have never arisen from or rested on any research, and those laws aren't being eliminated piecemeal because of research results either.

The compelling policy arguments have revolved around equal rights under the constitution, not around developmental biology. In other words, even if sexual orientation WERE a reversible choice, those who chose any given orientation would STILL deserve equal rights.

 

1) That's not correct. Addicts remain addicts, even when sober/not using. They remain addicts for life. This is fairly broadly and well understood in the fields involved with treating addiction. Also, there is still considerable debate on whether addiction is learned. I believe it is - absolutely.

2) I didn't say there was evidence it's no more genetic than addiction, I said there is no evidence demonstrating that it is more genetic than addiction. There's a difference - a big difference.

3) The trouble with the research you're referring to is that it wandered from clear and unbiased to fundamentalist in the space of a few decades. Once papers had been published suggesting homosexuality might be innate, the shutters slammed down on any further enquiry. No questioning of this dogma is now tolerated.

 

I don't think I have seen anything frank and open on this forum, not here anyway, there is a lot of shutters being slammed down when the topic makes people react to what is posted as far as what anyone here is willing to accept.

 

The water here is getting muddy. Sexual orientation is NOT an addiction, and this analogy is simply useless.

If you wish to discuss addiction, then I think you are being inconsistent. If someone is an addict for life even if they never again touch a drop (or whatever), then the question is, were they an addict before they touched their first drop? Was it the first drop that caused the addiction, all by itself, or were there biological factors leading to a greater innate propensity for addiction to a particular drug? If it's a combination of propensity and use, then drug addiction is only partially learned, and partially pre-existing.

Sexual orientation is not learned, it's not an addiction, it's not something someone "doesn't have until they try it once." Very different category.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "genetic" here. But if you are trying to say there is no more evidence that one is born with SOME sexual orientation than that one is born an alcoholic, then I can only disagree. I'm with you in saying that nobody is born an alcoholic, though they may be born to more easily become one. But one IS born gay or straight. And yes, there are most definitely gay virgins!

Now, what role genes might play in this is not close to being determined yet.

This is a fallacy called "poisoning the well." You have basically pre-dismissed any and all research that refutes your beliefs, on the grounds that it MUST have somehow become unquestionable dogma, rendering research untrustworthy -- unless you agree with the findings, of course.

Seriously, assume for the sake of discussion that sexual oientation IS innate (gay or straight, doesn't matter). Now, since you have already discredited all current and future studies finding this to be true, how could you ever learn if you were wrong?

I hope you aren't trying to say that YOUR orientation is innate, but HIS orientation is a learned addiction!!!@

 

Please don't quote authoritatively on issues which you are not educated. BPD is not a form of depression, it is a behavioral disorder which in a majority of cases has a traumatic experience or abuse/ adverse childhood experiences, which results in an individual with a stunted, negative or unstable sense of identity & self. I've never heard of any study or mention of a correlation between gender dysphoria, transgenders, & BPD. The linking factor is that in Gender Dysphoria there is a dissatisfaction or distress of the individuals self-perception of their identity as it links to their sex and the perceived gender roles which there culture expects. BPD is a behavioral pattern personality disorder in which a person is often unable to self-validate, has difficulty regulating emotions, and is often dependent on others for their sense of self image. They can also be perceived as extremely manipulative by some, but in reality this comes from not having developed the adult trait of self-regulation of emotions... and as a result they are dependent on their environment to be positive as they aren't producing their own self-validation.

I come at this as a family member of someone who is in the hospital right now as a result of a suicide attempt. This person doesn't have any signs of gender identity issues, it's actually related to a partner who broke up with them. BPD can be very serious.

Some people believe that there are similarities between BPD and Transgender on the basis of the need for external validation and what some might say is a shared unstable personality. Those claims haven't been studied in any study I'm aware of, although I admit I have been researching BPD issues because that's what my family member has.

To reduce BPD to "simply as (a) form of depression" is both inaccurate and insensitive to the families of those who are living with these issues.

I've linked a Youtube Documentary by a Ph.D. that may help clear up any confusion.

Border _ : A compassionate documentary on Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)

FULL MOVIEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikl4GjQHPz4&t=294s

 

I believe homosexuality is environmental ENTIRELY, but not a choice. That environment begins late in gestation, but is primarily affective in early childhood. I believe the same is true of addiction.

I receive no benefit in believing this, and regard it as quite burdensome (after all, life is easier if "it's not my fault, I was born this way"). But much research and observation deny me the luxury of calling it genetic.

 

I suspect we are quite close here. I do not know the exact biological basis for sexual orientation, or for propensity to become addicted to anything (and by observation, any given addiction doesn't imply any other unrelated addiction.) So either of these could originate (and surely do) during gestation, but nobody can say WHEN during gestation. There is no evidence I'm aware of that early childhood exposure to the outside world has any influence, but the brain is still maturing and adapting rapidly during this period, so anything is possible.

"Genetic" does not mean "innate", you realize? Something can be innate without being genetic. For sexual orientation and propensity to addiction, if there is a genetic component, that component is highly indirect, perhaps a side effect of a side effect of a side effect of something ultimately influenced by some constellation of genes. I doubt a full molecular-level understanding is even possible.

 

When I say late in gestation, I mean very late. And only resulting from maternal action and/or 'mood'. However I believe there is very little influence at this point. The primary influence would be from birth to the age of reason.

 

I would say homosexuality is the result of "poor" hormonal development in the womb. For example, it is well documented that most homosexuals have an older sibling and the second pregnancy is always a little different from the first; the first-born kind of "steals" the hormones. So...Yeah.

Obviously, sexuality is not a choice. Anyone who thinks this is an idiot and above, I am not implying homosexuality as a disease, but rather as a "deviation"; the norm, biological and societal, is heterosexuality, but sometimes nature creates homosexuals. I realise it may sound as if I am being a d-ck here, but I am really not putting any moral value into my view on this matter.

 

On what evidence do you believe this? I read of some hints otherwise. For example, most gays are raised in households with non-gay siblings, though the early childhood environments are about as close as it's possible for them to be. For another example, statistically the probability of being gay increase with each additional child a woman bears. The first hint makes "early household experience" less viable a candidate, while the second strongly points to prenatal conditions in some way. I know of no indications that sexual orientation is a socialized condition. Do you?