QT: If anorexics identify as underweight, is it wrong to give them weight-restoring treatment?

submitted by assignedcopatbirth from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BayHorseGender Critical 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (75 children)

In one of the above commentaries, you've said :

A trans person (absent other conditions) properly percieves their body. That body just makes them uncomfortable and they have realized the body that would make them more comfortable. It’s not a delusion that in some divine ephemeral sense that they are actually a woman and this body is a lie, it’s an understanding that this broken car is broken and knowing how to fix it.

What if said person does know that they're not physically Napoleon, but they feel they should be, because else their body makes them uncomfortable? Why is that delusional, but a man knowing he should have a woman's body isn't?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (74 children)

If they don’t literally think they are Napoleon then it isn’t delusion, just preference or fixation. They can change their name and get plastic surgery. They can dress in that style where possible. Why not?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (73 children)

And that would make them Napoleon Bonaparte? Or would that make them someone who altered their appearance to look like him?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (72 children)

If they changed their name to Napoleon boneparte they would literally be Napoleon boneparte. Whether they were crazy or just odd is determined then by whether the believe they are literally the historical figure of the person they have made themselves into from where they were.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (71 children)

Sure, they can legally change their name. But you’re well aware that I’m asking you if that would make them the actual Napoleon Bonaparte that they identified with? So would this person who has surgically altered their appearance to resemble a famous historical figure actually be that figure? Or would they be someone who took drastic steps to resemble them? Clearly, we are saying that this person identifies as the actual man, Napoleon. Because, you would have to think that this person is literally Napoleon to say TWAW. Otherwise, there’s contradiction allover.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (70 children)

That specific person? No it’s an individual so obviously not the Napoleon boneparte but A Napoleon boneparte.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (69 children)

The whole question is what if someone thinks they are Napoleon. As in the historical figure. That was the whole premise of this discussion. So if you’re saying that this person is not Napoleon, the actual Napoleon Bonaparte that they were identifying themselves to be, but you’re still claiming that TWAW because of how they identify themselves, you’re not making much sense. Everything you’ve said about this hypothetical Napoleon Bonaparte contradicts what you say about transwomen and their identity.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (68 children)

The whole question is what if someone thinks they are Napoleon. As in the historical figure.

Then they’re delusional because that’s factually wrong. As distinct from identifying as a woman which is a matter of using a different popularly used definition. They aren’t the same thing. Trans women are women, not female and that doesn’t mean the same thing to you as it does to me. It’s only contradictory because you are acting like I ascribe to a definition that I don’t.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (45 children)

Since when is “woman” only popularly defined? If anything, transwomen and the people who think of them as women are using a made up definition. Not an actual one. So they would be “factually wrong”

I’m not acting like you ascribe to a definition that you don’t. What I’m saying is that your definition is not concrete or universally understood. Even people who think TWAW understand that the reason others disagree is because of the actual definition that even they understand even if they reject it. You don’t really have a basis for redefining woman other than your personal need to do so. So you seem to be operating under the assumption that Your definition is concrete. I haven’t even seen you offer a definition of woman that doesn’t include “woman”. So you’re defining a word with itself and don’t see that that doesn’t make any sense and doesn’t define anything. And if you can’t even explain it logically, I don’t see how to take it seriously. How do you define woman?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (44 children)

All definitions are made up. It’s collective and enough people accept us that it’s at least linguistically relevant. You disagree and I accept that. Why can’t you?

Your definition isn’t universally understood either because it excludes trans woman and many people hear woman and assume it includes us.

It’s not easily defined. As I said it’s an amalgam or factors.

[–]BayHorseGender Critical 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

And what if I say that my definition of Napoleon Bonaparte is different than yours, and so this person litterally is Napoleon, according to me. Trans Napoleons are Napoleon!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

An individual identity as opposed to class membership with multiple accepted definitions isn’t the same thing.