has its roots in Covid.
It exasperated it, but the hatred of going into the office has been a thing for far, far longer. Ever watch Office Space? (Interestingly, the number of software engineers who actually say Office Space, in spite of being a comedy, accurately reflects the hell they feel trapped in surprised me.)
Workers simply do not want to satisfy the job requirements, which includes set hours and physical presence. I also want to get paid without showing up or producing, but that's not the job.
TEr... not wanting to go to an office isn't "not producing," work from home is still working. You're combining two statements (one that is Captain Obvious-ing that people are taking issue with some of the office requirements, and then misconstruing them (while also, I'd argue, missing that the requirements ARE the point of contention and some can be out of date depending on the job).
Not a red herring. You're looking at your ability to make a measurement and determination by observation. The individual, however, knows their own context is not the gender they were assigned by observation at birth.
Post-adult maturation, the hormonal levels can have an influence, but as mentioned up-thread, these are more edge cases, rather than the resting state of the individual experiencing gender dysphoria.
Your definition of dysphoria also is in err.
Please take your own anecdotal samples of what this feels like, by talking with an individual experiencing the effect. There are commonalities you'll soon become aware of. Digest those commonalities; the dysphoric are often frank about what they're feeling. Remember, they're feeling this; you're not. I'm not. They are. For them, it's real. Perhaps you'll start to feel/understand what's going on, and the possible paths that lead to the desire for gender change. I'm not God; I don't judge those whose physio/psychological path let to the need. Most all (there are exceptions) who affirm by surgery/etc their desired gender do very well in life, subject to rejection by those unable to understand their context.
These relate to the experience of gender. All of us experience what gender is to us, manifest in obvious through very subtle sensation and navigation through a normal day.
There are primary and secondary hormones that are pretty obvious in how they manifest from conception through puberty. Some people don't get the right doses, according to what might be termed a "normal" life cycle through those 23+ years.
This happens during periods of stress, malnutrition, trauma, the reasons can be many. A dose or two is missed, or conversely, overly-expressed for same/similar reasons.
A sufficient body of research evidence demonstrates that the brain will develop differently based on doses rendered through that period.
Let's go back to the perception by each individual of their gender and gender identity. This is a mixture of physical manifestation, perception of gender association (and therefore also, rejection). These have varying degrees of identity strength.
I'm also leaving out physiological mismatch, where hermaphrodite physiological manifestation enters into play, or ovaries found in men, or manifestations of other-gender physiology. That's not in the picture I'm describing; not enough data exists for evidence of trends in this discussion, which focuses on hormonal dose periods from conception through adult maturity.
The King of Atlantis is not real, but gender dysphoria is real, documented, and exists, just as varying degrees of sexual attractiveness preference exists, and is all around us.
It wasn't self-hypnosis, self-deception. There are those that feel that they are not their gender assigned at birth, and it's real to them, and therefore, it's a reality for them. This dysphoria is difficult for those experiencing it, because it's out of the norm. It's real to them, and has physiological and psychological origins.
Before the gender dysphoric are permitted to surgically affirm an alternate gender, it's requisite, at least in the USA, to go through quite a bit of psychological testing to ensure that the origins of the dysphoria doesn't have origins in other neurosis or psychosis, or physical manifestation in hormone over-expression.
The shape of the brain is a data point to help people understand that the sentiments and expression of dysphoria have real origins in physio-psychological realities; what they feel is real to them, and we're not necessarily the gender assigned at birth; that XX or XY at birth indeed can go sideways from "the norm" and create individuals who are gender-different from the norm.
In rare cases, the dysphoria can be detected as a physiological problem and "corrected" to strengthen the desired gender identity of an individual. Hormone replacement, augmentation, tumor removal, and more can be used to strengthen gender identity. Far more often than not, there's no physiological problem-- and it's not often a psychological problem, either-- although it can be. Every individual is different.
Some gender dysphoria comes at the hand of sexual trauma. And there is a preponderance of those with gender identity needs that has neither a physiological or psychological origin. None at all. Somehow, their body gender needs modifications to match their minds.
Much media furor has injected fabulousness and worse into the discussion, with instinctive reaction instead of skepticism and advocacy where it's needed. If an individual faces gender dysphoria, their lives can become very difficult because of the instinctive rejection they're subject to, and the hostility of those that can't accept them in what appears to be a non-normal societal role.
Let's take a base XX or XY pair. Given an equal distribution of hormonal dosing from conception through puberty (ending at roughly age 23), That brain goes through well-known, periodic hormonal doses as it develops.
It's proven that given high/low/absent doses through these regular periods, the brain's shape will turn out measurably different in size.
Additionally, primary and secondary sexual characteristics will express until the initial adult phase manifests.
This means that there are 17 different types of brains possible, this having been measured with a good S=. What can be learned from this is that given no other anatomical influences, the same brain can have 17 diff outcomes. In terms of other anatomical expression, there are other variations. These variations in combination with neurological expression then comprise different people from the same gene pairs.
How are they different people? They know no differently, just as you're sure of your own body, sexuality, perhaps mental state.
The dysphoria manifests in different ways, often social comparison, but additionally sexual attraction, sexual sense of being, These brains and bodies are different combinations. Measured against attraction, sense of being, and the basic instinct of sexual interaction, dysphoria can ensue. People desire to live in their sense of dignity, and that extends to sexual identity. A clear number of apparently male and female people believe their gender is different from their anatomical appearance.
For them, they're right. And we're right to believe them. Denying this amounts to a mistake on the part of the observer. Socially, this may be a grievous mistake, if one believes in civility.
I have plentiful neurological research references to backup what I contend. You perceive your gender in your brain and body. The experience of gender dysphoria is real for those that experience this. It's provable and has been proven that differing hormonal doses from the same base XY or XX set produce differently shaped brains. It's real.
It's not a rationalization, it's a reality for those that sense this. What and how they deal with it in various cultures has a historical basis that's part lore, and part documentation of the individual, and those perceiving the effects on the individual.
Some will get it, others will not. We try; some have open ears, others do not. Closed ears are still worth it, as they might not be totally closed. For some, it requires a repeated effort. I can be thick at times, too.
Bias is a moveable feast.
Go deeper.
Understand the hormonal doses, and what they do, from conception through late puberty. What happens when they're out of norm. How this forms up to seventeen different brain types from the same 23 pairs of chromosomes-- and that's IF these are normal XY or XX pairs.
Brain and body sex are threaded, and the hormonal doses you get from conception through age 23 can alter the path of how you sense your gender. A standard issue XY, as an example, can have brain-development-altering consequences from the numerous normal doses of hormone mixtures as that XY person grows. XX is similar, if with fewer found permutations. And that's for normal pairs.
Abnormal pairs are another tangent. Neurodiversity caused by other factors will amplify perceived alteration in the standard variance of hormones.
The tl;dr is it's not that easy. People who sense dysphoria really feel it. Other people can't feel it, and have no context to understand the possible permutations through these cycles. XX and XY are just the starting points towards gender development and subsequent identity.
Worse, this isn't journalism. This is quid pro quo influence peddling. Bribed, grifted, marketed. It's not journalism in any meaningful way.
Story telling is a broad branch of writing involving various elements of fiction.
Journalism should never be involved in fiction.
In one glib post, you dun thousands of researchers, not to mention those that don't fit a mold of strictly male and female. It's not only science, but proven science. Open your eyes, please. Accept that there are people who are not like you. Their reality is not necessarily your context or experience. And yours, is not theirs.
I've seen what happens when atheists take power in a country. Anyone care to relate what the usual outcome is?
Yes, they become an economic superpower and they slowly take the place of the USA on the world stage.
A very nice country, with very nice, hard-working but still fun-loving (take that, calvinists!) people, thank to them not having religious hangups and neuroses.
It was so early that it actually was printed by some service and (snail-)mailed to me...
If this means retraining the model then so be it. The difficulty to remove the benefit of using copyrighted works shouldn't have any bearing on this.
IMO the focus on "using copyrighted works" - making copyright **STATUS** the important part - feels like a hell of a red herring - vs if permission is needed, or granted if it is needed. Anything created in a country where copyright is automatic, and not put in the public domain explicitly, is copyrighted, even works where people would encourage using it in X way or Y way, or want it only used in other ways, if used at all.
For every bloke who makes his mark, there's half a dozen waiting to rub it out. -- Andy Capp
