The subject of 'transgenderism' or simply 'trans' is one that interests me a lot and I've talked about it a lot lately, mostly because it relates directly to the question... 'what is the nature of self?'
It often strikes me that the dysphoria that trans folks experience, which is essentially a severe and unpleasant identity crisis, is an invitation to the existential question of 'who/what am I?' Sadly, without spiritual background, or even philosophical education, most folks that experience this crisis end up in a very serious game of identity poker, and once the stakes are high, it can be very difficult to 'fold'.
To clarify, I would describe being 'trans' as having an inner experience that is incongruent with a biological/empirical category. Being 'trans' is only limited by the limits of 'mind' (and in one sense, there is limitless potential). Someone can be middle aged and experience themselves as much younger, and announce to the world that they are 'trans-20'. And there are people out there now identifying as cats and dogs, based on their inner experience....in this sense, 'trans-cat' or 'trans-dog'. But it can apply to any experience we have. One could be physically healthy, but 'feel' sick and be 'trans-sick'. One could be British, and experience themselves as American, and be 'trans-American'.
As said, the concept of 'trans'...in its simplest form, simply describes experience that is in contrast to our empirical or biological category.
The point at which trans-ideology gets very tricky, is the point at which a trans-person posits an actual 'inner identity'. You will hear folks speak of their 'authentic male self' or their 'inner female identity', or their 'true gender identity'. They accept the idea of a 'self/identity' as a concrete physical 'thing' (I often ask these folks if they can find this self/identity under a microscope), but they go further, and believe this 'self/identity' has actual quality. It could be sexed-gendered, racial, it could have an age. As said, the only limits are the ideas we create.
Today, a message caught my attention. Written by an articulate and mature 'trans-man', this person is someone I pay attention to because there is clarity in their use of language, even if they misunderstand the deeper existential issues. This person was explaining that they felt like a 'boy' from a very young age. I suggested that one could only feel like they are a 'boy', if they ALSO had a comparative reference for what it felt like to be a 'girl'. All dysphoria is dualistic and comparative in this regard. One must feel old, in order to also feel young. One must feel fat, in order to also feel thin. One must feel black, in order to also feel white.
And a humorous question arose within me, which I didn't ask (I aim to be tactful and sensitive in my communications with folks).....As both feelings must exist (one feeling of being a 'girl' and one feeling of being a 'boy), does this mean there are 2 inner selves fighting with each other to be the 'true' and 'authentic' one?
Anyway, the forum is quiet, and so I thought I'd share some random thoughts that I'd rather share here than on twitter.
Today's world is really where the spiritual rubber meets the road. The invitations to ask the existential questions seem so abundant these days.
), but the dialogue typifies the public conversation. You can see the futility of honesty as it plays out. It's same theater that played the Ivy League Presidents: say anything except answer the questions.
), but the dialogue typifies the public conversation. You can see the futility of honesty as it plays out. It's same theater that played the Ivy League Presidents: say anything except answer the questions.
