I don't want to overdo it here because I don't actually oppose Isaac's point. But because of family ties, I want to offer some kind of balance. It is clear that some folks are confused about what gender role they wish to portray. As long as we can agree that in many cases there is actually no confusion at all (i.e. they ARE gay and have no doubts about it), I am OK. Some people's gender as viewed by an "outsider" or stranger might not match their appearance. Some cases ARE biological in origin. Some are not. Peer pressure is not ruled out. Nor can we rule out pure, plain, and simple confusion. There is no uniformity in the origins of people's feelings on this subject, and therefore I want to avoid generalizations.
I return to three people I know or knew as gay, all of whom had different but close relationships with me. They were at least my friends and never once expressed any doubts about being gay. They further expressed that their gender orientation manifested itself before they were 12 (all three of them.) One was my college bridge partner from 50 years ago; one was a four-year participant in a D&D variant game run by one of my co-workers from about 40 years ago. The third person is my step-daughter. They were three people from three different time periods, three different vocations, three different families; none of whom knew each other, and all of them told the same kind of story about WHEN they realized they were different from their peers.
I think the most important part that I want to emphasize is that they are people first. Two of them, I am absolutely sure, were NOT candidates for gender reassignment surgery. I strongly doubt the D&D participant was thinking of "making a change" because in that case it was never a subject of discussion. But all of them are people who deserve consideration regardless of any gender-related confusion they might have.
Yeah, I can get on board with all that, Doc
There seems to be a continuum with complete confusion/fantasy being on one end and complete and total reality of some kind on the other end, with a fair amount in between. It does seem worrisome that the "in between" is becoming a big deal, but I grant you there are both ends of the scale so to speak.
And I especially agree with, 'they are people first'. We are to love people with the love of God that is within us and has been 'shed abroad in our hearts by the holy spirit" as the Bible says. I see no person as higher or lower than another. I do NOT see the sin of homosexual activity whatsoever 'worse' (etc) than each time I explode with anger at my spouse. As such, I admit, I differ from a number of other Christians on the topic, but that's the way I see it.
To Adam's point and well put, I think, is that that IS something "good" that has come out of this: More clarity. More people are beginning to realize that there are, in fact, environmental and social and cultural influences that have had a drastic impact on people's choices. Not that everybody was in that category.
Once we take the first step of admitting that cultural and environmental influences have, in fact, shaped people's gender and sexuality-related outcomes, we can then take the next step of deciding what to do, if anything, ABOUT those cultural and environmental influences.
The very least that
most people in the US can and do agree on, I believe (intellectual elitists' opinions notwithstanding, but I'm referring to the majority of the normal population), is we agree that it's OK for parents to help shape those influences and guide their children toward either more or less of this or that. When we completely lose that, then our children become products of whatever the latest fashion is, and I've heard a number of testimonies recently from formerly trans men (i.e. original women) who were egged on for the slightest and totally insufficient reasons when they were adolescents and now greatly regret, and have gone through hell to try to reverse, their decisions. But the knowledge of experiences cannot be totally undone.
There is no reason we shouldn't have compassion on them, too.