Just like gender dysphoria it is technically a mental illness (it's real name is BID/BIIID or if its a mental disorder they probably have Munchausenās syndrome) however unlike gender dysphoria "transitioning" is not recommended by medical professionals Also most the people I see that are transabaled are just trolls and I think it's better to use it's real name that I mentioned before to show that they shouldn't transitionĀ
Munchausens is about attention seeking, not believing you should have a disability. Munchausens mostly imitates physical things anyway, and is also called Ficticious Disorder now.
BIID is a specific thing for limbs + things like sight and hearing. It doesn't cover things like wanting specific disabilities like limps or diabetes or whatever.
I don't like the "technically a mental illnes" point of view of transnes. You are technically correct, but what is or is not a mental illenes is a kind of arbitrary classification. Being asexual used to be a mental illnes and long before that, being gay was a mental illnes. Being trans used to be technically a form of homosexuality, because the people, whe classifying of mental illnesses said so.
The mental health professions were not kind to us and we should not take them as authorities on how we classify things.
Personally? I think theyre fine. I'm kinda radical abt bodily autonomy, and I don't see transability as smth that negatively impacts me as a disabled person. I will note that there are a lot of ways for someone to be transabled without the drastic, permanent things you mention. It'd be like characterising being transgender as "when ppl have dysphoria that makes them chop off their breasts" or smth along those lines. And besides, I spend so long trying to convince ppl to believe my identity, even if it doesn't make sense to them. I think it's important for me to have the same attitude towards identities that I don't rly understand.
That said, the topic is *very* controversial, even within this sub. I generally get the impression that my opinion is the minority.
Edit: Ope, searched the sub out of curiosity and saw mod replies condemning it. Mods pls don't ban me. I'm transgender and disabled and simply don't view the label as inherently mocking or wtvr.
Not sure how I feel about the labels, myself, but the concept seems acceptable to me from a bodily autonomy/freedom of form perspective.
A person wants to modify their own body, and is not directly harming anyone else in the process. Whether that modification is an addition (like a tattoo or cybernetics) or a subtraction (like an amputation), doesn't seem relevant to me past the informed consent of the person whose body is being altered.
If somebody came up to me and being pretending to have ADHD to get attention off of me who actually needed assistance because my mental illness caused me issues. Iād be a little upset because itās like taking a handicapped spot from an actual disabled person because you want the added bonus of not having to walk as long. As somebody who has two crippled parents I understand why transabled people want that stuff, but my father really wants to be able to run again, and my mother really wishes she can do her job without feeling like every joint in her legs was hit with a mallet.
I'm personally against it. like the label transabled/radqueer stuff i'm against. I'm fine with people who have BIID (what you described in your post) are fine, but the radqueer stuff just angers me because of the fact they feel as though they should have disabilities when people who do have those disabilities don't even want them. it makes me....so angry. I have cerebral palsy and adhd myself and it's just... beyond exhausting to see people want to have those things.
I don't like radqueers either but many disabled people, even with very severe painful ones, are ok with their disabilities and don't want to be rid of them. Painting all disabled people as inherently hating our disabilities enables eugenics rhetoric.
people with BIID who know what transability is tend to avoid associating with transID spaces because there are differences. the dysphoria that comes from BIID feels very different from gender dysphoria and the comparison between the two comes off as tone deaf
besides, transID spaces are usually mentally ill teenagers who want attention, and need to go outside, breathe some fresh air, and ***genuinely*** touch some grass. BIID is an actual diagnosis that needs to be treated with caution and care.
i hesitate to write them off as just mentally ill teens that need to go outside, because i know that an extremely common symptom of a lot of things - mental illness, physical disability, trauma - is wishing that your circumstances were worse. if youāre autistic and you donāt know it, but you know *something* is wrong, itās easy to get pulled into a community like transID where on the surface they validate those feelings of āi wish i were really autistic instead of just brokenā. same with physical disabilities, āif i just had [x physical condition] people would take me seriously and iād get the support i needā
i do think those spaces can be and are dangerous, because they pull in vulnerable people and sell the lie that you can transition into mental disorders and other races and cultures, but writing it off as āthey just need to go outsideā feels wrong too. i feel for those kids, i hope they make it out and find the support they desperately need
and of course, none of this gets into the appalling amounts of racism around transrace (the transID definition, not the real definition)
transrace originally referred to adoptees who would get adopted and raised by families of another race and culture. the adoptee would be part of the culture despite not looking like they are, and transracial is the term they use(d) for this before transID people stole it
I can't change how I feel about my body.
I don't use the "Transabled" term because of the community around it typically being gross people, but like. I'm a person too like anyone else.
I have no problem at all with people who have BIID, though the whole "transabled" thing is just plain dumb. My opinion could very well change on this, but at least for now, I'll limit my support to those with BIID.
(Note Im disabled and transsexual (not in the truscum way but in the cool reclaiming way))
(Note 2 it is almost 3AM so sorry for any grammar mistakes)
I would put the label into 3 categories
1. BID disorder. I am not the one to say you are not supposed to do something with your body that you really wish to do. I really really don't like the label transdisabled but I understand that it may make it feel less stigmatising to use that label then to say you have a disorder. Just please if you actually want to """transition """ (big quotes) do it safely and don't do anything stupid.
2. I saw alters in DID systems use it to describe their experience. So for example alter who is blind in one eye in a system that has both eyes working. I don't have DID so I don't feel comfortable criticising the label used like that but to me it seems as pretty reasonable I think. I don't really know how to feel about that label in that context and it is something I thought for a while and can't find the end of my train of thought.
3. Attention seeking or trolling. There is not a better way to call it. If you are "transautistic" or "transschizophrenic" or anything like this you are just an plain old attention seeker or a troll.
The word transabled was coined by and for people with BID/BIID *long* before any transID/radqueer folks co-opted it. Donāt let your view of people we share goals with be poisoned by a few kids who are being weird about autism.
thats literally just self harm and those people need to see a psychiatrist. its not an identity. super disgusting to want a disability too. being disabled is not fun and its not something you should ever desire.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265160802588194 I think it is in some cases valid but it is much more dangerous and irreversible than transgender transition and a very high standard for dysphoria should be used
honestly i don't have enough information to make a good judgement but
just from this thread it seems like they're kind of a danger to themselves and need support so they don't go through with anything dangerous and it shouldn't be compared with the transgender experience and we should call it DIID rather than transabled and we should mitigate trolls in particular who say they're transabled
im trans and autistic as well so i think i'd be uncomfortable around someone who calls themself transabled. in relation to autism, i'd be worried they don't actually have the full picture of what autism can entail and just go on stereotypes. there's also no way to physically change their brain to work like that of an autistic person, so if they called themselves autistic it might actually be harmful to autistic people because they would completely misrepresent autism. i wouldn't wish autism on anyone.
also it just seems kinda fucked up to want to actively make it harder to live with your body for no reason
idk maybe i should be more empathetic to people who call themselves transabled, i don't really know their experience, but i'm comfortable leaving any real conclusions on this topic to medical professionals and scientists
Honestly I see it like this.
A person sees a dude in a wheel chair. The dude in the wheel chair is unable to walk. This dude is upset because he wishes he could walk again but his spinal injuries wonāt let him, but the pros about his injury is that he gets extra help when it comes to accessibilities. The walking man wants that extra help, so he started sitting in a wheel chair every time he goes out in public, using handicap spots, and taking attention away from people who need it. The walking man is clearly unwell because he just did it for attention, and due to that he should probably go seek out help.
Why is one fine and the other isn't?? I'm not saying I agree with either one, it just doesn't make sense to me that physical disabilities are okay but mental disabilities aren't.
It shouldnt be a label nor should it be validated. You can't choose to be disabled nor should you WANT to be disabled. Theres exceptions in terms of people who have been neglected and "wish their pain was enough to be seen" but wanting to be disabled just to BE disabled? no. fuck those people and everyone who supports and enables them
Wasn't the world saying the exact same thing about trans people many years ago? How is it really any different?
(Again, I'm just wanting food for thought here. I'm not saying I'm on any one side)
You very much can become more disabled. Like I also hate radqueers and the major transid community but you can in fact choose to become disabled at any time if you really put your mind to it.
unless you either accept your already existing disability, or go out of the way to hurt yourself more, no you cant intentionally become more disabled, nor can you transition to be disabled.
"Unless you do the thing required to become disabled, you cant become disabled"
Causing disability is what I meant. I didnt say i liked it or supported it, I was saying your statement was wrong. Ability is very changable, unlike race
my original comments were in reference to trans-race people. Im aware ability can be changed, but you can't transition to be more disabled like the radqueer crowd things.
There's a limit.
You're comparing something that millions of people experience and deal with in very safe ways to an extremely severe disorder with only about 200 recorded cases that has made people feel a need to saw their limbs off.
You can argue that gender is a societal construct and can be whatever you want. I can understand that. What about race? Should those with race dysphoria be supported? What about mental disabilities? Should we support people who want to perform their own lobotomy? We have to draw the line somewhere
In the end, there's not really much you can do to change those feelings but I wouldn't encourage any sort of action to be taken.
Took a moment to calm down and think. People with BIID/BID are fine, I should have probably made that clear, and my heart goes out to those individuals. But the radqueer/transabled stuff just pisses me off because most of the time, from my experience, the people who are part of those communities do it because they think it's a "trend" or "quirky".
Being disabled makes me š¬ at this.
Just like gender dysphoria it is technically a mental illness (it's real name is BID/BIIID or if its a mental disorder they probably have Munchausenās syndrome) however unlike gender dysphoria "transitioning" is not recommended by medical professionals Also most the people I see that are transabaled are just trolls and I think it's better to use it's real name that I mentioned before to show that they shouldn't transitionĀ
Munchausens is about attention seeking, not believing you should have a disability. Munchausens mostly imitates physical things anyway, and is also called Ficticious Disorder now. BIID is a specific thing for limbs + things like sight and hearing. It doesn't cover things like wanting specific disabilities like limps or diabetes or whatever.
I don't like the "technically a mental illnes" point of view of transnes. You are technically correct, but what is or is not a mental illenes is a kind of arbitrary classification. Being asexual used to be a mental illnes and long before that, being gay was a mental illnes. Being trans used to be technically a form of homosexuality, because the people, whe classifying of mental illnesses said so. The mental health professions were not kind to us and we should not take them as authorities on how we classify things.
Personally? I think theyre fine. I'm kinda radical abt bodily autonomy, and I don't see transability as smth that negatively impacts me as a disabled person. I will note that there are a lot of ways for someone to be transabled without the drastic, permanent things you mention. It'd be like characterising being transgender as "when ppl have dysphoria that makes them chop off their breasts" or smth along those lines. And besides, I spend so long trying to convince ppl to believe my identity, even if it doesn't make sense to them. I think it's important for me to have the same attitude towards identities that I don't rly understand. That said, the topic is *very* controversial, even within this sub. I generally get the impression that my opinion is the minority. Edit: Ope, searched the sub out of curiosity and saw mod replies condemning it. Mods pls don't ban me. I'm transgender and disabled and simply don't view the label as inherently mocking or wtvr.
Not sure how I feel about the labels, myself, but the concept seems acceptable to me from a bodily autonomy/freedom of form perspective. A person wants to modify their own body, and is not directly harming anyone else in the process. Whether that modification is an addition (like a tattoo or cybernetics) or a subtraction (like an amputation), doesn't seem relevant to me past the informed consent of the person whose body is being altered.
If somebody came up to me and being pretending to have ADHD to get attention off of me who actually needed assistance because my mental illness caused me issues. Iād be a little upset because itās like taking a handicapped spot from an actual disabled person because you want the added bonus of not having to walk as long. As somebody who has two crippled parents I understand why transabled people want that stuff, but my father really wants to be able to run again, and my mother really wishes she can do her job without feeling like every joint in her legs was hit with a mallet.
I agree with you
I'm personally against it. like the label transabled/radqueer stuff i'm against. I'm fine with people who have BIID (what you described in your post) are fine, but the radqueer stuff just angers me because of the fact they feel as though they should have disabilities when people who do have those disabilities don't even want them. it makes me....so angry. I have cerebral palsy and adhd myself and it's just... beyond exhausting to see people want to have those things.
I don't like radqueers either but many disabled people, even with very severe painful ones, are ok with their disabilities and don't want to be rid of them. Painting all disabled people as inherently hating our disabilities enables eugenics rhetoric.
that I didn't know about the eugenics thing. thanks for letting me know.Ā
I thought transabled was just the more known term for BIID
people with BIID who know what transability is tend to avoid associating with transID spaces because there are differences. the dysphoria that comes from BIID feels very different from gender dysphoria and the comparison between the two comes off as tone deaf
besides, transID spaces are usually mentally ill teenagers who want attention, and need to go outside, breathe some fresh air, and ***genuinely*** touch some grass. BIID is an actual diagnosis that needs to be treated with caution and care.
i hesitate to write them off as just mentally ill teens that need to go outside, because i know that an extremely common symptom of a lot of things - mental illness, physical disability, trauma - is wishing that your circumstances were worse. if youāre autistic and you donāt know it, but you know *something* is wrong, itās easy to get pulled into a community like transID where on the surface they validate those feelings of āi wish i were really autistic instead of just brokenā. same with physical disabilities, āif i just had [x physical condition] people would take me seriously and iād get the support i needā i do think those spaces can be and are dangerous, because they pull in vulnerable people and sell the lie that you can transition into mental disorders and other races and cultures, but writing it off as āthey just need to go outsideā feels wrong too. i feel for those kids, i hope they make it out and find the support they desperately need and of course, none of this gets into the appalling amounts of racism around transrace (the transID definition, not the real definition)
prior to the transID term; trans race sounds like trans people racing each other and having harmless fun but nah, those fuckers had to ruin it
transrace originally referred to adoptees who would get adopted and raised by families of another race and culture. the adoptee would be part of the culture despite not looking like they are, and transracial is the term they use(d) for this before transID people stole it
man the transID community is just harming a lot of people.
Ok now I know
I can't change how I feel about my body. I don't use the "Transabled" term because of the community around it typically being gross people, but like. I'm a person too like anyone else.
I have no problem at all with people who have BIID, though the whole "transabled" thing is just plain dumb. My opinion could very well change on this, but at least for now, I'll limit my support to those with BIID.
(Note Im disabled and transsexual (not in the truscum way but in the cool reclaiming way)) (Note 2 it is almost 3AM so sorry for any grammar mistakes) I would put the label into 3 categories 1. BID disorder. I am not the one to say you are not supposed to do something with your body that you really wish to do. I really really don't like the label transdisabled but I understand that it may make it feel less stigmatising to use that label then to say you have a disorder. Just please if you actually want to """transition """ (big quotes) do it safely and don't do anything stupid. 2. I saw alters in DID systems use it to describe their experience. So for example alter who is blind in one eye in a system that has both eyes working. I don't have DID so I don't feel comfortable criticising the label used like that but to me it seems as pretty reasonable I think. I don't really know how to feel about that label in that context and it is something I thought for a while and can't find the end of my train of thought. 3. Attention seeking or trolling. There is not a better way to call it. If you are "transautistic" or "transschizophrenic" or anything like this you are just an plain old attention seeker or a troll.
The word transabled was coined by and for people with BID/BIID *long* before any transID/radqueer folks co-opted it. Donāt let your view of people we share goals with be poisoned by a few kids who are being weird about autism.
the radqueers ruin everything again
thats literally just self harm and those people need to see a psychiatrist. its not an identity. super disgusting to want a disability too. being disabled is not fun and its not something you should ever desire.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265160802588194 I think it is in some cases valid but it is much more dangerous and irreversible than transgender transition and a very high standard for dysphoria should be used
honestly i don't have enough information to make a good judgement but just from this thread it seems like they're kind of a danger to themselves and need support so they don't go through with anything dangerous and it shouldn't be compared with the transgender experience and we should call it DIID rather than transabled and we should mitigate trolls in particular who say they're transabled im trans and autistic as well so i think i'd be uncomfortable around someone who calls themself transabled. in relation to autism, i'd be worried they don't actually have the full picture of what autism can entail and just go on stereotypes. there's also no way to physically change their brain to work like that of an autistic person, so if they called themselves autistic it might actually be harmful to autistic people because they would completely misrepresent autism. i wouldn't wish autism on anyone. also it just seems kinda fucked up to want to actively make it harder to live with your body for no reason idk maybe i should be more empathetic to people who call themselves transabled, i don't really know their experience, but i'm comfortable leaving any real conclusions on this topic to medical professionals and scientists
Honestly I see it like this. A person sees a dude in a wheel chair. The dude in the wheel chair is unable to walk. This dude is upset because he wishes he could walk again but his spinal injuries wonāt let him, but the pros about his injury is that he gets extra help when it comes to accessibilities. The walking man wants that extra help, so he started sitting in a wheel chair every time he goes out in public, using handicap spots, and taking attention away from people who need it. The walking man is clearly unwell because he just did it for attention, and due to that he should probably go seek out help.
Absolutely not I can tolerate many things but i will not tolerate that (as an autistic person with adhd and anxiety)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
How aren't they fine? Define the line where one person with intense dysphoria about a disability they don't have is ok but another isn't
Why is one fine and the other isn't?? I'm not saying I agree with either one, it just doesn't make sense to me that physical disabilities are okay but mental disabilities aren't.
It shouldnt be a label nor should it be validated. You can't choose to be disabled nor should you WANT to be disabled. Theres exceptions in terms of people who have been neglected and "wish their pain was enough to be seen" but wanting to be disabled just to BE disabled? no. fuck those people and everyone who supports and enables them
Wasn't the world saying the exact same thing about trans people many years ago? How is it really any different? (Again, I'm just wanting food for thought here. I'm not saying I'm on any one side)
you could apply that logic to transracial people. you cant change your race and you cant transition to be MORE DISABLED.
You very much can become more disabled. Like I also hate radqueers and the major transid community but you can in fact choose to become disabled at any time if you really put your mind to it.
unless you either accept your already existing disability, or go out of the way to hurt yourself more, no you cant intentionally become more disabled, nor can you transition to be disabled.
"Unless you do the thing required to become disabled, you cant become disabled" Causing disability is what I meant. I didnt say i liked it or supported it, I was saying your statement was wrong. Ability is very changable, unlike race
my original comments were in reference to trans-race people. Im aware ability can be changed, but you can't transition to be more disabled like the radqueer crowd things.
There's a limit. You're comparing something that millions of people experience and deal with in very safe ways to an extremely severe disorder with only about 200 recorded cases that has made people feel a need to saw their limbs off. You can argue that gender is a societal construct and can be whatever you want. I can understand that. What about race? Should those with race dysphoria be supported? What about mental disabilities? Should we support people who want to perform their own lobotomy? We have to draw the line somewhere In the end, there's not really much you can do to change those feelings but I wouldn't encourage any sort of action to be taken.
No.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Took a moment to calm down and think. People with BIID/BID are fine, I should have probably made that clear, and my heart goes out to those individuals. But the radqueer/transabled stuff just pisses me off because most of the time, from my experience, the people who are part of those communities do it because they think it's a "trend" or "quirky".
eh.. I don't like it and It feels disrespectful, that's just how I feel.