Are there any philosophical implications to "Transgender-ism"

  • Thread starter Thread starter DLH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DLH

Guest
I’ll call this a philosophy question regarding the transgender thing. I think there is a false idea (I will call it a “philosophy”) of the human person behind it. Bear with me: I only dabble in philosophy .

Here is how I see it: we are made up of body and soul. We are not just a soul that happens to occupy a body, we are a soul that IS a body. My body and soul are one. After all, when the finger on my hand gets cut, I say “I cut MY finger” not “my BODY has a cut finger”. We are the best-version-of-ourselves when we can be comfortable, even joyful, in our body. Health lies in becoming an integrated whole of the soul that we are plus the body that we are.

The “transgender-ist” philosophy as I see it goes like this: we humans are made up of body and soul. So far so good: I start here also. But then the “transgender-ist” and I diverge: the “transgender-ist” says that the human person consists of an inner “me” that is soul, the “real me”. My soul, the real me, occupies my body in the same way as a camper occupies a tent: the tent is not the real me, it is just the container. The tent has no value of its own because it is not the real me: the real me is the soul that resides in the body (in the tent). The real me (the soul) is the important part. It does not really matter about the body, since it is not the real me. In this philosophy, if the real me (the soul) is female (or wants to be female) and the body is not: well, the body is obviously incorrect. The right thing to do is to force the body to confirm to the “real me”.

So, can anyone comment: is there actually any philosophical implications to “transgender-ism”? If so, have I stated it well? How would you state it? Is there any truth to be had in this vein?
 
I find that when dealing with opposing views, it really helps to not try and come up with what they might be thinking, or what their reasoning is. There’s mountains of writings about gender studies that we can read already. Best get the information first hand.

For what it’s worth no gender studies I’ve come across deal with the soul. It usually involves gender roles and the distinction between gender and sex. (The latter being the real bone of contention I find)

We read a lot in philosophy of biology but the philosophy aspect was more about methodology and language regarding gender, not ontology.
 
Last edited:
DLH said:
I’ll call this a philosophy question regarding the transgender thing. I think there is a false idea (I will call it a “philosophy”) of the human person behind it. Bear with me: I only dabble in philosophy .
Click to expand...
It is given connection to Homosexuality… as in LGBQT (did I leave anything out)?

And it is seen as a mental disease by many…

Such as those males who “think” they’re female and are not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top