Special Snowflake Syndrome

Cayce wrote: While I too appreciate humor, memes, and internet culture, I'd just like to also be one to offer a gentle reminder that despite the hilarity of some of these posts or videos, let us be kind in our evaluation of them.

I'm not condoning any type of 'special snowflake' behavior, but instead offering the counterpoint that these individuals may be struggling with their own challenges, and if they do have a mental condition, suffer from past abuse, or just want their voice heard because it hasn't been in the past. Most of the times, acting out or being a 'special snowflake' comes with a hidden reason we're not privy to.

If someone came to me and announced they believed their gender is 'mayonnaise' for instance, I'd want to have a frank discussion on why that is, and see if I can dig a bit deeper to the real reason they feel this way.

Special snowflakes are why america's got a "choice" between Trump and Clinton. Why have discussions with them? You don't have discussions with IS, who have more to say, suffered more abuse, likely have pretty severe mental conditions, and aren't ruining your country like these guys are.

The woman in the first video seems rather insulting. Of any absurdities surrounding gender and sexual identity, one of the most unusual is there being only a male/female or homosexual/heterosexual binary. Our language is being greatly enriched by the ability to more fully describe ourselves and recognition of this diversity is a kind of inclusivity. Maybe some context is lacking (clearly she has more videos about this group which might expand on her position), but there is nothing I saw in there which necessitates "special snowflake=bad".

If someone says some thing is entitlement and another says it is not, or someone says such a thing is absurd and another says it is not, what do we do about it? Maybe the first thing would be to maintain an open-mind, not to dismiss outright, and seek understanding and common ground.

The gender being "Mayonnaise" is humour and argumentatively a hyperbolic fallacy (a claim made with extreme exaggeration).

Introducing language that allows us to be more inclusive is a good thing most of the time, but can also become diluted to a point that none of the words effectively communicate what they are meant to anymore.

George Carlin has a comedy routine that addresses this point. He describes how "Shell Shock" from WWI became "Battle Fatigue" in WWII. By Korea it had turned in "Operational Exhaustion" and after Vietnam it was referred to as "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder". He argues that veterans of the Vietnam conflict probably would have gotten the help they needed afterward if we still called it what it is, Shell Shock. Instead, we have watered it down to sound like something you can cure with a pill.

People are welcome to call me male or cis or hetero if it helps to identify me in comparison to others, but isn't that exactly what Watts warns us against? Just call me Senan. It has worked pretty well so far.

Senan wrote: People are welcome to call me male or cis or hetero if it helps to identify me in comparison to others, but isn't that exactly what Watts warns us against?

Watts talks an awful lot for someone who says so little. The human mind is a place of categories and hashtags; we are always grouping things for ease of identification. They're shortcuts our minds use to help us know what we're talking about, and so labels aren't inherently problematic. Until people make them so.

Senan wrote: George Carlin has a comedy routine that addresses this point. He describes how "Shell Shock" from WWI became "Battle Fatigue" in WWII. By Korea it had turned in "Operational Exhaustion" and after Vietnam it was referred to as "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder". He argues that veterans of the Vietnam conflict probably would have gotten the help they needed afterward if we still called it what it is, Shell Shock. Instead, we have watered it down to sound like something you can cure with a pill.

People are welcome to call me male or cis or hetero if it helps to identify me in comparison to others, but isn't that exactly what Watts warns us against? Just call me Senan. It has worked pretty well so far.

Watts warns against mistaking the symbol of language for the reality it is symbolising. Use whatever language you like.

Langauge reflects the culture it emerges in. PTSD and Shell Shock are symbolising the same state of mind, any lack of medical treatment would not be because of a name, it will be more to do with the wider medical culture present at the time. We have the same name today but it is treated far more seriously.

Kohadre wrote: As far as gender disphoria is concerned, many may believe themselves as having been "born in the wrong body" but my experience is that only the wealthy and privileged have the capacity to do anything about it. Speaking from a biological perspective as well, even if one were to go through treatments or reassignment surgery, they would biologically in terms of chromosomes and internal organs, still be the biological gender they were originally born as.

We actually have many here at the temple who are transgender, and are at varying stages of their transition. Being wealthy eases the process, as it does with anything, but it is not a requirement. Even those dear friends that I know in life locally at varying levels of income find a way to make it happen, and amazing public services exist to help them in their journey.

Not to mention that Gender Dysphoria is officially recognized by the DSM-5, and other worldwide health organizations as well as a treatable condition, by allowing the individual access to healthcare which allows them to fully transition.

Anyway, I could get into a long discussion about Transgender rights, but overall I just wanted to say that we should always ensure to respect those on such a journey. If you have questions, I'm sure there are many who would answer / delve into the details of psychology versus biology.

Akkarin wrote: The woman in the first video seems rather insulting. Of any absurdities surrounding gender and sexual identity, one of the most unusual is there being only a male/female or homosexual/heterosexual binary. Our language is being greatly enriched by the ability to more fully describe ourselves and recognition of this diversity is a kind of inclusivity. Maybe some context is lacking (clearly she has more videos about this group which might expand on her position), but there is nothing I saw in there which necessitates "special snowflake=bad".

If someone says some thing is entitlement and another says it is not, or someone says such a thing is absurd and another says it is not, what do we do about it? Maybe the first thing would be to maintain an open-mind, not to dismiss outright, and seek understanding and common ground.

A very good observation. Sometimes here, we jump from the "word" to the association we have. In the specific case of the first video, it might have been funny, but it did not present the problem that I tried to narrate when I spoke of entitlement. The video shared by Khaos more clearly represents the point, and is related to the idea of SJW that has also been presented in these forums before.

Cayce wrote: but overall I just wanted to say that we should always ensure to respect those on such a journey

Agreed.

Kohadre wrote: Speaking from a biological perspective as well, even if one were to go through treatments or reassignment surgery, they would biologically in terms of chromosomes and internal organs, still be the biological gender they were originally born as.

There is a dozen of ways that an individual may have sexual chromosomes abnormalities and still be assigned "full" biological male or female at birth (excluding here the intersexual spectrum) . There are even "perfect" XX who are assigned males and "perfect" XY that are assigned females. What dictates ones genital and other typical male or female development are HORMONES, and they are not always linked to the sexual chromosomes.

Some examples: http://anthro.palomar.edu/abnormal/abnormal_5.htm

Also, there are many types of genital reassignment surgeries. Some of them include the removal of one's internal sexual organs completely. A MTF transgender person doesn't have an uterus or ovaries of course, but so a female who's gone through a complete hysterectomy. Does that make them biological males?

Biology is not an exact science, people.

Cayce wrote:

Kohadre wrote: As far as gender disphoria is concerned, many may believe themselves as having been "born in the wrong body" but my experience is that only the wealthy and privileged have the capacity to do anything about it. Speaking from a biological perspective as well, even if one were to go through treatments or reassignment surgery, they would biologically in terms of chromosomes and internal organs, still be the biological gender they were originally born as.

We actually have many here at the temple who are transgender, and are at varying stages of their transition. Being wealthy eases the process, as it does with anything, but it is not a requirement. Even those dear friends that I know in life locally at varying levels of income find a way to make it happen, and amazing public services exist to help them in their journey.

Not to mention that Gender Dysphoria is officially recognized by the DSM-5, and other worldwide health organizations as well as a treatable condition, by allowing the individual access to healthcare which allows them to fully transition.

Anyway, I could get into a long discussion about Transgender rights, but overall I just wanted to say that we should always ensure to respect those on such a journey. If you have questions, I'm sure there are many who would answer / delve into the details of psychology versus biology.

I don't remember saying anything about infringement as far as the rights or equal treatment of transgender persons was concerned.

I'm well aware of what the DSM says regarding gender disphoria and it's treatment, however it's contents change quite frequently and not that long ago homosexuality itself was a defined illness as well.

I know and interact frequently with people who identify as transgender, and though I have no hatred or repulsion towards them I will often remind them during discussion "I don't get it, it's too much for me to process".

In this I mean, do what you want if it makes you feel comfortable in your own skin, but don't expect me to completely understand it or even invest the time and energy into researching those conditions and everything associated with them. I've already got enough on my plate and sifting through other people's complicated baggage is a non-interest

Leave me out of the finer details if you would please and kindly.



Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Edit: Tapatalk makes it incredibly busy difficult to respond to thread and answer but quoted posts, so I'm not intentionally ignoring or skipping material.

Kohadre wrote: In this I mean, do what you want if it makes you feel comfortable in your own skin, but don't expect me to completely understand it or even invest the time and energy into researching those conditions and everything associated with them. I've already got enough on my plate and sifting through other people's complicated baggage is a non-interest

Leave me out of the finer details if you would please and kindly.

I was simply replying to your post with further insight based on my experiences, and it sounds like we're actually rather in-line with our views for the most part. Plus, I totally understand not wanting to deal with others journeys.

It was merely meant to be educational.