Transgender Q&A

[Salvijus]

2 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

Typically its society that defines gender.

 

https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1

By reading this in a fast manner i get the sense that their answer is. "gender is what you identify with." 

 

You know... This for me rises a question. In spirituality it is sayed, your true identity is neither male or female. It is pure awareness. Or in buddism it would say your identity is totally nothing. 

 

Then I wonder. Wouldnt that be a much better identity to take on? And a more truthful one?

[Maddie]

9 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

By reading this in a fast manner i get the sense that their answer is. "gender is what you identify with." 

 

You know... This for me rises a question. In spirituality it is sayed, your true identity is neither male or female. It is pure awareness. Or in buddism it would say your identity is totally nothing. 

 

Then I wonder. Wouldnt that be a much better identity to take on? And a more truthful one?

 

Ok so maybe you don't mean it this way, maybe you do, but this is the point where it no longer seems like a legitimate question and more like a back door challenge to transgenderism being a legitimate thing. 

 

I literally just gave you the textbook definition of gender, and your reply is no that's not right, don't you really want to know the truth.

 

So tell me Salvijus, what is the truth according to you, lets just get this over with and state your actual agenda.  

Edited April 19 by Maddie

[blue eyed snake]

1 hour ago, Maddie said:

 

Yeah for real lol. Actually I think what I'm surprised about more isn't that there was a troll but it's that there's a few other people that don't seem to see it and I thought it was very obvious?

 

I almost never talk about trans-people on the internet. 

 

But being chronically ill I am part of a large group of chronically ill people, most of them, bedbound or housebound, like I am.

I habitually block every troll to keep my timeline reasonably clean of them. 

 

Never really analyzed it but I guess the most obvious characteristic is that they gloss over lived experience, talk ( condescendingly) to us instead of with us and generally behave as if we are children that have not tried the most obvious remedies.

 

Now having 2 spirits in your body-mind-system is not an illness, but underlying is that your body-mind works so much different from the mean that they cannot handle the idea that that is true fact. So in the minds of the outliers, whether trans-people or people with badly understood illnesses there must be a psychological faultiness to explain their weirdness.

 

kitchen sink psychology

 

 

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, blue eyed snake said:

 

I almost never talk about trans-people on the internet. 

 

But being chronically ill I am part of a large group of chronically ill people, most of them, bedbound or housebound, like I am.

I habitually block every troll to keep my timeline reasonably clean of them. 

 

Never really analyzed it but I guess the most obvious characteristic is that they gloss over lived experience, talk ( condescendingly) to us instead of with us and generally behave as if we are children that have not tried the most obvious remedies.

 

Now having 2 spirits in your body-mind-system is not an illness, but underlying is that your body-mind works so much different from the mean that they cannot handle the idea that that is true fact. So in the minds of the outliers, whether trans-people or people with badly understood illnesses there must be a psychological faultiness to explain their weirdness.

kitchen sink psychology

 

 

Yes this exactly

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

Ok so maybe you don't mean it this way, maybe you do, but this is the point where it no longer seems like a legitimate question and more like a back door challenge to transgenderism being a legitimate thing. 

 

I literally just gave you the textbook definition of gender, and your reply is no that's not right, don't you really want to know the truth.

 

So tell me Salvijus, what is the truth according to you, lets just get this over with and state your actually agenda.  

 

Please I will try to explain it in the most gentle way i can. Bear with me please. 

 

First i did not dismiss the textbook answer. I actually accepted it. Their definition is that "gender is what you identify with". Okay. I have accepted it. 

 

Now i rised another question. Wouldnt it make more sense to identify with pure awareness rather than male or female? 

 

If you find this question offencive please let me know. Im really trying to ask the question in a most gentle way i can. 

[liminal_luke]

Seems to me Salvijus is trying to go about spirituality backwards.  I´m sure there are texts where it´s written that our true identity is beyond gender or that the self is an illusion.  Fair enough.  But these are conclusions that some people have come to near the end of their journey towards enlightenment.  Nobody reads that the self doesn´t exist and then tries to live as if that´s true.  Well, maybe some try but it doesn´t work.  Ya gotta get enlightened before ya can act enlightened.  This is not a project that can be reverse engineered by reading books.  None of us can be sure, before the fact, what enlightened action would look like anyways.

Edited April 19 by liminal_luke

[Maddie]

11 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Seems to me Salvijus is trying to go about spirituality backwards.  I´m sure there are texts where it´s written that our true identity is beyond gender or that the self is an illusion.  Fair enough.  But these are conclusions that some people have come to near the end of their journey towards enlightenment.  Nobody reads that the self exists and then tries to live as if that´s true.  Well, maybe some try but it doesn´t work.  Ya gotta get enlightened before ya can act enlightened.  This is not a project that can be reverse engineered by reading books.  None of us can be sure, before the fact, what enlightened action would look like anyways.

 

I think that was an excellent assessment of what is probably going on. 

[Maddie]

25 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

Please I will try to explain it in the most gentle way i can. Bear with me please. 

 

First i did not dismiss the textbook answer. I actually accepted it. Their definition is that "gender is what you identify with". Okay. I have accepted it. 

 

Now i rised another question. Wouldnt it make more sense to identify with pure awareness rather than male or female? 

 

If you find this question offencive please let me know. Im really trying to ask the question in a most gentle way i can. 

 

May I ask you what you identify as? Is there a pure awareness restroom in public I wonder? 🤔

Edited April 19 by Maddie

[Salvijus]

4 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

May I ask you what you identify as? Is there a pure awareness restroom in public I wonder? 🤔

That's a difficult question. I think i identify myself with my ego. And ego is a weird thing. It can be either male or female. I believe ego is a made up thing after all. 

 

For practical purposes i identify as a male when I go to the bathroom. 

[Salvijus]

19 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Seems to me Salvijus is trying to go about spirituality backwards.  I´m sure there are texts where it´s written that our true identity is beyond gender or that the self is an illusion.  Fair enough.  But these are conclusions that some people have come to near the end of their journey towards enlightenment.  Nobody reads that the self exists and then tries to live as if that´s true.  Well, maybe some try but it doesn´t work.  Ya gotta get enlightened before ya can act enlightened.  This is not a project that can be reverse engineered by reading books.  None of us can be sure, before the fact, what enlightened action would look like anyways.

That's actually good point. And thank you for putting the effort to undetstand my question without overreacting. It makes sense that we cant be our true self until enlightenment. 

 

But what do you propose is the best thing to do in the meantime?

[Maddie]

Look maybe you were just getting way too metaphysical for me and if you were sincere then I am sorry for suggesting you were a troll. But I don't identify as pure awareness that doesn't even make any sense to me. I identify as a woman. I tried to not identify as a woman for a long time and the longer I tried that the worse my mental health got. Maybe the concepts you are speaking about are just too out there for me to relate to. Maybe you can explain what you mean by identifying with pure awareness because I have no idea what this is?  

 

** I live stream a lot and get bombarded by trolls asking cheeky questions if that helps to put things into context. 

Edited April 19 by Maddie

[Maddie]

4 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

But what do you propose is the best thing to do in the meantime?

 

Do the only thing that there is to do, be in the present moment. 

[Salvijus]

Brb. Shopping now. I want to make sure i give quality response

 

5 minutes ago, Maddie said:

live stream a lot and get bombarded by trolls asking cheeky questions if that helps to put things into context

🙏

[blue eyed snake]

57 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

Please I will try to explain it in the most gentle way i can. Bear with me please. 

 

First i did not dismiss the textbook answer. I actually accepted it. Their definition is that "gender is what you identify with". Okay. I have accepted it. 

 

Now i rised another question. Wouldnt it make more sense to identify with pure awareness rather than male or female? 

 

If you find this question offencive please let me know. Im really trying to ask the question in a most gentle way i can. 

 

 

 

as a small kid I identified as a boy, whole society told me I am weird, nice start in life.

Now that I am grown people still call transpeople weirdo's

 

 

then you ask whether it would make more sense to identify  with pure awareness..

 

well... 

 

I do not identify as a boy or as a girl, i identify as a human, that took me about half a century.

further you cannot identify with pure awareness, the moment "you" "Identify" there is "a you" doing something ie "identifying"

 

so mostly I identify as human, on rare moments "I" am gone and there is only pure awareness.

Edited April 19 by blue eyed snake
typos

[Maddie]

7 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

 

 

 

as a small kid I identified as a boy, whole society told me I am weird, nice start in life.

Now that I am grown peole still call transpeole

 

 

then you ask whether it would make more sense to identify  with pure awareness..

 

well... 

 

I do not identify as a boy or as a girl, i identify as a human, that took me about half a century.

further you cannot identify with pure awareness, the moment "you" "Identify" there is "a you" doing something ie "identifying"

 

so mostly I identify as human, on rare moments "I" am gone and there is only pure awareness.

 

To me personally the idea of identifying with something abstract like "pure awareness" sounds like identifying with "world peace" or "Taylor Swift's guitar". It just doesn't make sense in the real world. Not trying to be mean but it seems like its too abstract to be useful or relatable. 

[blue eyed snake]

6 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

To me personally the idea of identifying with something abstract like "pure awareness" sounds like identifying with "world peace" or "Taylor Swift's guitar". It just doesn't make sense in the real world. Not trying to be mean but it seems like its too abstract to be useful or relatable. 

 

yup, but this after all, is the Daobums 

[Maddie]

In Buddhism the idea is to not identify with anything. So trying to make ourselves identify with something such as pure awareness is a type of grasping which is the opposite of what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught letting go. 

   I don't identify as a woman as the culmination of a goal but simply because that's where I happen to be at the moment. I tried to reject this identity and that did not work for me because it was motivated by control which again isn't letting go.

[liminal_luke]

44 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

But what do you propose is the best thing to do in the meantime?

 

If you feel an affinity with the idea that the "self" doesn´t exist then you might explore a nondual tradition, such as Buddhism or Bon.  Reading is good but will only take you so far.  Better to actually find a teacher and do the actual practices.  There are many Bums who have traveled this road a long ways (not me!) and they can lead you in the right direction.  When you have actual experience, as opposed to just book learning, you might have a better idea of how or if these ideas relate to the transgender experience.  

Edited April 19 by liminal_luke

[Salvijus]

21 minutes ago, Maddie said:

In Buddhism the idea is to not identify with anything. So trying to make ourselves identify with something such as pure awareness is a type of grasping which is the opposite of what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught letting go. 

   I don't identify as a woman as the culmination of a goal but simply because that's where I happen to be at the moment. I tried to reject this identity and that did not work for me because it was motivated by control which again isn't letting go.

I'm familiar with this teaching of buddha somewhat aswell. Does buddha mention that identity is a made up thing and ultimately unreal and in truth there is no you, just emptyness? 

Another way to phrase it. Does buddha say that every identity is not real? 

Edited April 19 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

56 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

 

 

 

as a small kid I identified as a boy, whole society told me I am weird, nice start in life.

Now that I am grown people still call transpeople weirdo's

 

 

then you ask whether it would make more sense to identify  with pure awareness..

 

well... 

 

I do not identify as a boy or as a girl, i identify as a human, that took me about half a century.

further you cannot identify with pure awareness, the moment "you" "Identify" there is "a you" doing something ie "identifying"

 

so mostly I identify as human, on rare moments "I" am gone and there is only pure awareness.

But you exist as something right. Even if you have no identity. You still exist. As what? The spirituality that I follow would say. As existence. Or as pure consciousness. Which is the same as Buddha's emptyness. But we don't need to go down that road. I think this topic would be a distraction. 

Edited April 19 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

40 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

If you feel an affinity with the idea that the "self" doesn´t exist then you might explore a nondual tradition, such as Buddhism or Bon.  Reading is good but will only take you so far.  Better to actually find a teacher and do the actual practices.  There are many Bums who have traveled this road a long ways (not me!) and they can lead you in the right direction.  When you have actual experience, as opposed to just book learning, you might have a better idea of how or if these ideas relate to the transgender experience.  

What I was really asking is. If we accept that some spiritual traditions say our true identity is pure awareness/presence(advaita) . Or if we accept that all identity is false (buddhism). Or that our true nature is love(Christianity). The question I want to ask. How much importance should be given to our ego male/female identity. How much should we fight and defend our ego and try to convince everyone to be regarded as an identity which is ultimately false, and arguably is no different then our ego. (the last part is debatable tho, I'm not sure if it's true) 

Edited April 19 by Salvijus

[Maddie]

43 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

I'm familiar with this teaching of buddha somewhat aswell. Does buddha mention that identity is a made up thing and ultimately unreal and in truth there is no you, just emptyness? 

Another way to phrase it. Does buddha say that every identity is not real? 

 

The Buddha taught that we are not the five aggregates. So basically what ever we think we are, we are not that. He was basically teaching that the ego is not really us. 

 

But to say then why identify with what the ego is telling us in the here in now? is because the Buddha realized the difficulty of liberation and taught the gradual path. The gradual path includes acceptance of where we are in the present moment. This is why there are lay people and not just monks, even though the monastic life is the ideal for one example. 

 

So in anticipation of your next question, why don't I just not identify as a woman or man or anything? It's because I'm not there yet. I might want to fly but until I get on the airplane I'm still on the ground. To tell myself and others that I'm not walking on the ground when I am indeed walking on the ground is denial and delusion, and these are the hinderances to liberation. The path to liberation is knowing the present moment as it is. In the present moment my mind identifies as a woman.  

[liminal_luke]

38 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

What I was really asking is. If we accept that some spiritual traditions say our true identity is pure awareness/presence(advaita) . Or if we accept that all identity is false (buddhism). Or that our true nature is love(Christianity). The question I want to ask. How much importance should be given to our ego male/female identity. How much should we fight and defend our ego and try to convince everyone to be regarded as an identity which is ultimately false, and arguably is no different then our ego. (the last part is debatable tho, I'm not sure if it's true) 

 

How much importance should be given to our ego male/female identity? 

 

I don´t think any of us should stand in judgment over the degree of importance somebody else places on their gender identity.  We´re all in different places -- spiritually, psychologically, karmically -- and it makes more sense to focus on our own development rather than critiquing others.

 

It´s like this.  Suppose you accidentally plunged your hand into a pot of boiling water.  Would you keep your hand in the water because you´re pure awareness and you know that your hand doesn´t really exist?  It´s possible that there are people on the planet who don´t care if their hands are immersed in boiling water because they are totally beyond grasping and aversion. For them, suffering isn´t a possibility.  But I´d wager that neither you or me or Maddie are at that level.  We´d probably get our hands out of the boiling water as quick as we can.  I sure would.

Edited April 19 by liminal_luke

[Salvijus]

5 minutes ago, Maddie said:

So in anticipation of your next question, why don't I just not identify as a woman or man or anything? It's because I'm not there yet. I might want to fly but until I get on the airplane I'm still on the ground. To tell myself and others that I'm not walking on the ground when I am indeed walking on the ground is denial and delusion, and these are the hinderances to liberation. The path to liberation is knowing the present moment as it is. In the present moment my mind identifies as a woman.  

I see. It's what Luke sayed as well. We can't identify with our true self because we're not enlightened yet. I totally agree with that idea. 

 

I even raised the question to him already. How much effort should we put on defending, decorating, advocating our false temporary identity then? 

Edited April 19 by Salvijus

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, Salvijus said:

I see. It's what Luke sayed as well. We can't identify with our true self because we're not enlightened yet. I totally agree with that idea. 

 

I even raised the question to him already. How much effort should we put on defending our false temporary identity then? 

 

My question would be why do you see it as something that needs defending in the first place as opposed to something that just is.