John/Joan in fictional television

[lindiril]

I just watched an episode of Law and Order: SVU that borrowed heavily from the case of John/Joan, a case in which a gender identity different from biology was forcibly assigned to one of a pair of twins. Having read about that case fairly recently online, I could see the major "plot twist" for the episode coming a mile away (the sister confessed to

Comments

[anonymous]

I wonder what link there is between species and gender dysphoria.

[bradbeattie]

Again with the forgetting to log in.

[lindiril]

Lately, it seems that normally if I try to comment anonymously, it tries to ask me to interpret the text on one of those humanity-testing distorted text images. Does it not do that for you?

[lindiril]

That's an interesting question. My understanding of gender dysphoria is that it often has to do with a discomfort with the gender role assigned to a person. I'm not certain that the other species with which we are familiar, being other animal species native to our planet that we typically consider less advanced than ourselves, have complex gender roles that extend beyond reproductive duties.

Actually, I guess that's not correct; there are cases where other animals assign typical gender roles to areas outside of reproduction. In lion prides, I believe, females are responsible for hunting for food. So it would be interesting to know if other species experience that disconnect between physical sexual identity and gender identity, and how it's expressed.

[bradbeattie]

Species dysphoria is just what it sounds: one who believes they aren't psychologically human. Two wiki articles to look at would be Therianthropy and Otherkin. I wonder why some are accepting of transgenderism, but not transspeciesism. It would seem to me that the two are very similar. *shrug* Just an interesting parallel to look at.

[lindiril]

I apparently misunderstood what you meant.

I suspect it may have to do with transgenderism leaving one inside the species, while transspciesism takes us outside "our kind" entirely. Consider the so-called "uncanny valley"; we don't like things that are not-quite human, or things that appear or seem human but have non-human characteristics or behaviour.

I think it's probably easier for some people to accept someone wanting to take a different role in our society than wishing to leave its confines altogether.

[bradbeattie]

Personally, I think it's easier to take a pragmatic approach and just say "Tautologically, I am who I am, regardless of external classifications". In that sense, I don't so much see the need for either notion, although I gather some would say I'm oversimplifying the issue.

I'm not saying don't go running around in the woods, or go dressing up in clothing associated with the opposite sex. Ignoring the social stigma is a-okay with me. I mean, woman are wearing pants. Pants! I agree that we need to be flexible with our roles.

At the same time I'm still a human and I still have a penis. Sure, surgery can alter the appearance of both, but I figure it's the confines imposed by the stigma that's the real issue. Again, opinions may differ, but that's how I see it.