Several Points to Make

You’re going to have a hard time talking to people with your current thought processes, although some of these were far more common at the turn of the current year, and since become less so.

  1. It is pointless to postulate about whether you can cure a condition in a century. In a century, you could wave a magic wand and cure cancer and trauma. In a century, you could create human-like androids, and sentient AI full dive VR. Getting stuck on this step in itself is to escape reality. It might even become a fun kink which most people engage in, because there is no harm in it, particularly if they have an android to play with, or have the ability to transfer someone’s consciousness from one body to another. You might even reverse the ageing process with sophisticated nanobots.

  2. The reason I dislike comparisons to films is that it highlights a fundametnally flawed approach, and there is an idea “it is just a movie” which suspends thought about what an idea would actually entail. Minority Report is real in the form of predictive policing. It sucks. Tweaking something inside your head is real. It likely doesn’t work and is harmful. Where do people get ideas for these from? Movies. Very recently, a paper got published which questions whether the concept of impulsivity as we know it even exists.

  3. It is preferable to throw someone in the mental hospital for a short time, if it makes it certain an “intervention” won’t be used on the majority, and when all avenues are exhausted. I have serious doubts it can’t be dealt with. This is actually my opinion on the matter. A mental hospital isn’t as bad as some people make it out to be. We use them for suicidal individuals. Lock up a few to save the many. It is also the case some interventions are not worth exploring. While, they might be useful for transgender individuals in a non-map context, no one should suffer as a guinea pig for it. This is one of the reasons treatments for transgender individuals take so long to develop, it is nearly impossible to do, because to do so would be an ethical issue in and of itself which would cause a national scandal.

  4. Have you considered that someone doesn’t actually want to be “cured”? So, you live a life without the flavor of sexuality, romance, aesthetics, emotional attachments? Isn’t that 90% of the reason for someone to live for? What is there of motivation? Often, nothing at all. Nevermind, that this is a flawed notion, as it always relates to the Year 2500 where none of these problems are actually problems, and it might as well be a parallel universe. It promotes cure mentality, rather than thinking about how to actually practically handle a problem, in both people with the problem, and society around them. In theory, it would be better if someone enjoyed different things, and were attuned to different things. They’re not. There is no value in thinking about it. It is what it is.

  5. Continuing on the notion of a cure. Ripping out the majority of someone’s identity effectively turns them into a different person. You could say you are “killing” them. A correct argumentation is to add an attraction, rather than to simply take one away and leave them with nothing. Someone might be open to a new experience. Someone’s neurology shapes who they are, without that they are a different person. And they can clearly still remember what it is like, it is a spice. In any case, making someone’s life more empty is hardly a way to win favors from anyone. It is also tied to someone’s sense of self in ways you can’t even begin to imagine. It is hard to say where someone ends and it begins, although they think, breathe and behave much like anyone else.

  6. A map has an automatic sense of revulsion to anyone who implies the idea of being cured. No joke. It also makes maps depressed and suicidal to think about it. The obvious exception is when you’re so mentally disordered to be outside a normal thought process, however that is a cognitive distortion. Psychologists don’t understand what constitutes a cognitive distortion and normal thought in maps.

  7. If someone is abused, some claim they will respond to certain stimuli, but not actually be map. Unfortunately, these waters are muddied as there are ones who are also map, which makes it hard to trace the delineating borders, especially as you could find someone who is map, but in a temporary unusual state. It is an open research problem.

  8. I challenge you to find a case with a heterosexual (remember that ex-gay therapy is a thing) adult attracted person where they feel dystonic and you decide no sexuality and anything that comes with it in the mental department would be best. If you can’t, that shows the double standard pretty clearly. How would you handle such a problem? Therapy?

These are my philosophical ramblings, I should open an AMA.