10

Transability: Becoming Disabled By Choice

Posted by khalling 8 years, 10 months ago to Culture
67 comments | Share | Flag

don't these people have to work for a living? Pictures!

I am interested in an O argument for for the psychological standards of "normalcy" and if they have been changing over the last 50 years and what the next 50 might bring as far as standards go.
SOURCE URL: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/becoming-disabled-by-choice-not-chance-transabled-people-feel-like-impostors-in-their-fully-working-bodies


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Snezzy 8 years, 10 months ago
    Got another: "transfunded"

    I just invented that, and it means the person has too much money and desperately longs to be stricken with unrecoverable poverty.

    Furthermore, I propose to help those people, if any should turn up. I'll willingly take all their money and other wealth. No loose body parts, though. Don't want those.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 10 months ago
      excellent, snezzy. Gates, Buffet are two I can think of with that complex. Problem is-they want others to be transfunded against their wishes. reminds me of that Twilight zone where everyone on their 18th birthday had to choose to look like three different types of people
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 10 months ago
    Humanity has progressed to the point that evolutionary survivability no longer has the priority in determining life and succeeding genetic traits. This is just an extreme example of an abnormality that couldn't survive at one time in our history, without the state to enforce that society support and accommodate such atrocity.

    Although at the fringes, someone will yell eugenics, the fact is that nature and biology and the species that inhabit those realms, have been throughout the long trail from single cell things in the mud to us, unforgiving of too extreme a divergence from the norm of a species. Whether these people suffer from a genetic abnormality or a developmental problem or just an obsessive desire to belong to some group that seems to get the attention--they're not compatible with life. For centuries, babies born with tails had those removed immediately by the midwife or Dr. In more recent years, a morphandite was 'assigned' a sex by the Dr., sometimes without the parents decision process, and babies born with detectable abnormalities that wouldn't normally survive were pronounce still born by the midwife or Dr.

    As ethicist, sociologist, psychologist, social workers, and minority rights groups became more and more involved in our lives, they've fought to find an acceptability foothold in community through the abuse of altruism by humanizing the abnormal. I think to a large extent, this desire to understand the abnormal probably began to really gain steam with Freud and his contemporaries and the socialist of the late 19th century and has simply progressed. It will continue and as the ability to join technologies with biology increases, there will be more abnormals trying to survive and those dissatisfied with their humanity or seeking uniqueness, will search for satisfaction in more atrocity supported by socialist striving to alter the perceptions of normalcy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 10 months ago
      well that was fancy. interesting point about groups of people fighting to get a foothold in our lives with their own agendas and causes. Socialists are one thing-but when Libertarians argue that there are limits to reason, how could one make a moral argument that to support these individuals in their quest to maim themselves, or just hamper their abilities by playacting? I think one could make the moral argument that until such time as we know there is a physical reason for people having strong feelings about doing something like this, we treat it as a mental issue. after all, that's a disability too. :)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by XenokRoy 8 years, 10 months ago
        My view is let them do whatever they wish to themselves so long as no one but them has to pay for it, or support them after it.

        If we are paying for it as a society that is where the problem lies, not in letting people mutilate themselves in some way. If they had to pay for it and still had to get their bread through their own sweat, tears and blood this would not be happening.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 10 months ago
        Several years ago, in a conversation with a Zen practitioner in mental health, he offered a definition that seems to fit this normality question:

        "It's OK to be a human being and make all the mistakes humans make, as long as one doesn't intentionally harm another--or as importantly one's self."

        Objectively, that seems to provide to me a perfect definition of mental normalcy, incorporating a pretty broad range of human thought and action within the normal range. Saying that, there are certainly situations in which the amputation or alteration of limb or organ, improves the living or ability of an individual, i.e. cancerous limbs or organs, or crippled limbs that a prosthesis can correct or improve on, etc. But I can't, ethically accept any imposition that requires that I support another in his normal and/or not normal activities or choices. Ethically and logically, I can accept the principle that such individuals, or groups, can be allowed to make their own choices and suffer from the consequences and further, that even individuals that have a mental or nervous system defect or physical defect beyond their control, be allowed to live or die in that condition, excepting where parents or other source voluntarily provide sufficient support for such individual.

        But the Objectivist has to ask, can there ever exist a condition that requires of himself, from his own production, support (physically-financially-emotionally), of any individual or group. I can think of only one, the case where my choice of action directly harms another and I had reason to believe or know beforehand that my choice would harm that other, to the point that the other can, as a result, no longer support himself, with no contributory fault on his part.

        As to a Libertarian argument of limits to reason, that's nonsense. There are limits to current knowledge, but reason is infinite within that current knowledge and logic doesn't change, the more information or knowledge becomes available. There are groups of Libertarians that are socialists, pacifist, communalist in their basic understanding of individual and community responsibility and altruism to others, but they lack a philosophical understanding of freedom. They want freedom from government, but not from each other.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 8 years, 10 months ago
          I cannot discount that the Americans With Disabilities Act might encourage some of this behavior-but I note the individuals in the article are either from Europe or Canada. They are farther along the socialist scale than we are, and I think it could definitely be a factor. If one would perceive disabled individuals as having separate and distinct rights from everybody else, that is.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 9 months ago
            It's a sick mental process, regardless of cause. Attention grabbing or group acceptance or sex change. Lack of self esteem and/or confidence. And there probably are some that are looking for the disability.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 8 years, 10 months ago
    I want to sit around and eat donuts all day, hundreds of them. I want you to pay for it, too. I have a problem. Don't be a hater.

    I do love donuts...down to about one every few months now...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 10 months ago
      ok, I'll bite :) which kind of donut, abaco?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Abaco 8 years, 10 months ago
        Old fashioned chocolate, apple fritter, maybe a maple bar. There's a place near my house that his this chocolate monstrosity that's got melted chocolate in the middle and chocolate chips on the top. I have about one per year.

        I have always felt that, deep down, I needed to eat donuts all day. I'm trapped in this body. I'm forced to live a lie. I'm a victim and society should pay for it. When my weight hits four bills I should be given any job I want, too. (thanks Kaitlin Jenner)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Genez 8 years, 9 months ago
          I have the same issue with what's called a "Ron's Chili burger" here in OK. A friend and I used to visit Ron's for lunch about once a month because we know that's all our arteries could handle. Luckily we've both moved on to other jobs and I haven't been to Ron's in several years... Still, whenever I pass by, I can hear the chili burger calling me....
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 8 years, 10 months ago
    Sorry KH, I can't give you an objectivist argument for the psychological standards of normalcy. There is virtually nothing objective in the standards or definitions in the standards.

    Normalcy is at best a vague and tenuous concept.

    I do however feel confident of one thing. Those of us here discussing this would not fit a moocher/looter definition of normal...not even close.

    The people spoken of in the article however, will be embraced as normal by the looter/moocher society as yet one more cause that warrants a very expensive and never ending government program to "help" them.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gaiagal 8 years, 10 months ago
    Imagine if the "transabled" redirected their determination and skills toward more fruitful endeavors, like entrepreneurship.

    I believe that the tossing away of "spare the rod, spoil the child" philosophy has had a significant impact on the development of real adults. We've now had a few decades to notice the difference.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Genez 8 years, 9 months ago
      Exactly. Why behave like an adult when you don't have to. If society will support you in your right to act like an idiot, might as well. That's the problem with all powerful government providing. People don't get killed off by their own stupidity...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Radio_Randy 8 years, 10 months ago
    The desire to become a "Trans-anything" is a psychological disorder. It could probably even be cured. What I simply can't wrap my head around is the fact that there is an entire society of people (including a large number of politicians) who are willing to accept this as "normal" behavior. There MUST be a hidden reason for this.

    I watched an episode of one of those dumb crime shows (my wife is an addict) where there was a support group for pedophiles. Not a group to "cure" them, but to encourage their behavior as "normal". Why should any of us believe that this couldn't, eventually, become accepted as well? Imagine your 60 year old neighbor molesting your 7 year old daughter and being protected by the law because he was "born" this way? Believe me...unless something is done, this is a real possibility.

    P.S. I don't mean to pick on 60 year old folks...it just seemed that "dirty OLD men" (I'm almost there, myself <grin>) seem to be more frequently targeted in these instances.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Genez 8 years, 9 months ago
      This has been my argument about a whole host of issues that are accepted today. The "slippery slope" concept is not invalid even though so many of various political opinions tend to disparage it today. All you have to do is look at TV and Movies to see that when we accept a greater level of violence, sexuality, etc as normal then even greater levels/extremes of such things push the "limits".
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by WilliamCharlesCross 8 years, 10 months ago
    Thanks (I think) for adding this new and exciting term to my vocabulary. I'm torn between thinking these folks must be attention seeking or looking for a way to get disability payments--but I suspect that there are some truly troubled individuals out there, in need of medication and counseling, who will get a hug and a ton of "understanding" while they sharpen their saws.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 8 years, 10 months ago
    It seems to me to be neurotic at best, and, at
    worst, downright evil; a sort of masochistic eleva-
    tion of deformity over healthiness. Someone who
    deliberately does this to himself (absent an emer-
    gency, such as cutting off his own leg to escape
    from a burning car) does not deserve any help
    in his disability (unless he does it out of some
    kind of insanity).One sympathizes with the
    Hunchback of Notre-Dame; but then, he did not
    ask to be that way. I would have much preferred
    not to have epilepsy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 8 years, 10 months ago
    Yes, my opinion is this is pathological and not normal.

    But, no, I do not think that it is anyone's business except that of the person handicapping themselves - as long as (as LetsShrug says) we do not have to pay for their self-mutilation hobby.

    This is not just a modern phenomenon - self mutilation has been part of society for millennia (Ceres - self-castration). So perhaps there have always been outliers who felt this way about themselves.

    The trouble with not-accepting these people's right to self-mutilate is that anything that regulates them may effect the ability of people to have trans-human changes made to themselves. For example, I have sometimes toyed with the idea of having a bodymod: a tiny magnet inserted into the tip of one of the fingers on my left hand. This allows you to 'feel' magnetic currents - you can, for example, tell if an electrical cord is live or not just by passing your hand over it.

    So I would ignore these people and let them sort it out with their loved ones, shrinks, and consciences. But I would not pay them a cent or grant them any handicapped status.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago
    In the military and according to the exemptions in many insurance policies 'a self inflicted wound'' punishable by......etc. etc. etc.

    Same level as Attention Deficient Disorder - an excuse to retain self esteem when one has no self respect. Another is using alcohol or drugs as an excuse for anti-social behavior.

    Claiming right of freedom for not wearing protective gear such as helmet whern riding a motorcycle is yet another example. The answer there is in the above post. Your stupidity you pay the bill.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 10 months ago
      now, Michael, I would enjoy riding my hog without
      a helmet. . and I have insurance. . it's so strange that
      the logic of my actions costing society allows social
      demands of me. . I am ruled by others way too much
      already!!! -- j

      looks like this::: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=2007...
      .
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago
        you doing it right. without the insurance it's left to others to pay. PS I use or don't use helmets but I have insurance and airmedevac. Now your only problem is choosing a real bike. You know one that starts and runs and so forth.

        GRIN

        BMW 900 and at the current cost I'm not replacing it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 10 months ago
          I had a choice in '71 between a BMW 900 and
          an FX (first factory "chopper" by Willie G Davidson);;;
          bought the harley for $2544.18 .......

          and sold it in 2011 for $10k. . then applied that to
          the '07 hog. . it's a reallllllly comfy machine, as long
          as I keep it within 20 degrees of vertical !!! -- j
          .
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by brkssb 8 years, 10 months ago
    Normalcy aka normality aka Warren G. Harding allusion to WWI combat veterans returning from war to peacetime and to "normal" occupations as farmers, businessmen, etc. I found no reference to psychological standards of normalcy except by abnormality. One wonders, however, about PTSD aka shell-shock and if that has become a normalcy rather than an abnormality, and if transgender-ites and "transabilitites" are being integrated into normalcy. Miss Rand was adamant when she stated that words have an exact meaning (Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, lecture series, NYC, 1970). If Harding's concept is to be applied to psychology, then I submit that proposed standards should be advanced and defined in Oxford, Webster, and/or Wikipedia. I don't agree with Technocracy that the concept is vague and tenuous -- I think it can be readily defined in terms of values, and the boundaries of what is rational and irrational. I agree that normalcy might exclude moochers but some would argue that that is no longer the norm (sic).
    [BTW, is the prefix "trans" being used to imply transitional, transitory, transfer, a state of change (aka transObama)...]
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 10 months ago
    If you want to define "normalcy" from an Objectivist standpoint, I would posit this:

    "Objectivism defines normalcy as actions that lead to the furthering of individual achievement, individual productivity, individual rights, and logical thought. Actions which lead to restrictions upon individual achievement, individual productivity, individual rights, or logical thought are to be vigorously opposed."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 10 months ago
    These people need mental help. And doubly so if they expect the rest of us to pay for their choices.

    Here's my argument: if you are intentionally seeking looter status, you need mental help. If you don't want to be a participant in productive society and seek to disable yourself either mentally or physically, you also choose to allow the rest of us to completely ignore you. I'm not against voluntarily helping people (of my own free will - NOT through taxation) who have _temporarily_ fallen on hard times. I draw the line at condoning this kind of willful act in ANY form.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 10 months ago
    There are some very gruesome mental disorders, but this one's near the top of the list. I don't really care what body parts a person chooses to cut off of themselves, long as I don't have to pay for it. But, I do.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 10 months ago
    isn't normal just a setting on the clothes washer? -- j

    p.s. Yes, they are changing -- fast! . just look at the
    worldwide view of LBGT... no longer "scandalous."
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MinorLiberator 8 years, 9 months ago
    A few of my earlier comments were along the order of "black humor".

    This one is more of irony, in particular in terms of the article in this posting and timing. The link below describes how scientists (you know, those intelligent, sometimes geeky and ruthlessly moral people who are the producers of solutions to problems instead of making more of the latter) have created the first lab-grown limb. Hope for those disabled "not by choice", and further shame on these crazies...

    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/06/04...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo