Crime President Biden declares Easter Sunday a Transgender Day of Visibility

[Andy Capp]

Also @Mike FTR, if my post seems like a gish gallop that's the reason I couldn't be bothered to give a decent reply earlier. There are just so many different points to address just from that one post you made I had no energy for getting into them all, but that would be the only way to address your post fully and satisfactorily.

How do issues affecting trans people affect you personally: They effect everyone because they are demanding and forcing the restructuring of both shared public spaces and private spaces. I don't agree with men competing against women or being allowed into private women's only spaces.

Why do you think decisions about psychological and medical treatments for children are the responsibility of anyone but a child's doctor and the child's parents: Because performing experimental procedures on children that can't consent is immoral and disgusting. These are growing children who's brains aren't developed. It's incredibly irresponsible to say hey well just load them up with hormones and mutilate their genitals and see if it works out. If not they're scarred for life and can't ever reverse it, so no biggie. How could anyone in their right mind NOT be opposed to it is my question. It's not like we spent a long time doing research and coming to a scientific consensus that this was a good thing to do BEFORE we started doing it. The "it's up to the parents" argument only works if we've already decided that what's going on here is ethical. WE intervene and tell people what they can and can't do with their own kids all the time when what they're doing is deemed abusive.

Why do you think the issues of participation in sports and gender affirming care can't be each dealt with as the individual concerns on their own and not as reflecting upon transgender people generally in a negative way: Because as a group they are arguing that men competing against women is just and fair, or allowing others to make that argument for them. When it very clearly is not.


These people are a vanishingly small proportion of the total population. How do you explain their outsized coverage in the media if not because of the right wing propaganda machine: The government and corporate america creating 5000 different celebration days and festivals and other things shoving this shit down people's throats. Also they have had a much larger presence on social media in recent years. Seen in many videos and clips screaming at people for not using the ""correct" pronouns and generally acting like psychos. They are their own worst pr and publicly portray themselves in the worst light possible very often. You are not the first person to point out the small number of transgenders, as if that in and of itself means they're only capable of causing a small amount of harm or aren't a big issue. I'd argue the complete opposite, the fact that they've had such a strong negative impact on society despite being a very small group is very alarming. and over a very short period of time.

So yeah, this is why I regret engaging on this topic and why I owe you an apology for commenting in the first place. There are just so many different points to address just from that one post you made I had no energy for getting into them all, but that would be the only way to address your post fully and satisfactorily and now that you've responded, it seems even more pointless to engage on them all. I believe you've bought into a bunch of propaganda and anecdotes used as representative occurrences. You believe you've come to a reasoned conclusion based upon what you've seen in the media. I don't have any idea how to disabuse you of that (or, from your perspective, try to convince you something is good when you think it's bad).


So, I give up. Have a nice day. Good luck with this stuff that has no effect on you personally nor anyone over whom you have personal responsibility, and which compels you to opine on the decisions other parents make for their kids.

Here's my two cents though just FTR. I personally don't have strong opinions about the validity of gender affirming care for children other than it's none of my fucking business what goes on between doctors and their patients--or the patients' parents, as the case may be--as long as principles of informed consent are adhered to. Well, that and the availability of mental heathcare for all people should be a fuck of a lot better than it is now.

 

[SKYNET]

@Mike I owe you an apology for my reaction to your initial comment earlier. I have grown tired of repeating the same explanations for my positions on such topics over and over. I should not have taken that out on you. Aside from this topic I have no disagreement with you that I'm aware of.
My issues with your expressed position are as follows:
How do issues affecting trans people affect you personally?
Why do you think decisions about psychological and medical treatments for children are the responsibility of anyone but a child's doctor and the child's parents?
Why do you think the issues of participation in sports and gender affirming care can't be each dealt with as the individual concerns on their own and not as reflecting upon transgender people generally in a negative way?
Incidentally, I agree with you that politicization of this issue is gross and stupid; it casts a bad light on those responsible. The thing is, those responsible are right wing talking heads. It starts with conservative talk radio, expands into social media and the likes of Fox News, Daily Caller, NY Post, etc.
I think that's why you're being accused of repeating far right talking points. I understand if it seems quite unfair because you're taking in what information you have available and forming an opinion on your own, but I submit that some of what you come across is fearmongering propaganda--see the "transgender megathread", just enough to augment anecdotal cases into widespread crises.
In other words, I think the idea that so-called trans activism has gone too far is caused by a lot of exaggeration in media, especially social media, but also sites like the NY Post and Breitbart.
These people are a vanishingly small proportion of the total population. How do you explain their outsized coverage in the media if not because of the right wing propaganda machine?

But you're just outright lying about this. That's what *I'm* talking about.
No one saw it because you're making it up. I represented your position accurately, and your response was personal attacks, running, and then kind of talking behind my back like a little girl.

Look I get it, and I've been called every name in the book by right wingers and "enlightened centrists" here regarding some stances I've argued on this issue. I used to be a lot closer to the right position on trans issues, separate spheres ideology, etc. At the end of the day it really comes down to where different people draw the line, and having something in society that is against accepted tradition always gets messy this way. The guy I mentioned earlier who is anti-abortion speaks of abortion in the same way you mentioned trans issues in another post. He just cannot find it in himself to ally with something he considers immoral, he specifically called it a stain on our humanity. If I ever appeal to him on it again, which I'm sure I will at some point because he likes to talk to me about these things, we're just going to explore what informed that perspective for him. Why this particular ideology is so cemented.

We dont like kids getting hormone treatments, and yet kids can get hormone treatments for a plethora of medical issues, with parental consent of course. We like parental rights and the State not telling them how to parent, except in this case...where we want to tell parents they cannot treat their kids for a condition as opposed to other times the State intervenes if the parents dont treat their kids for conditions. We want separate spheres that protect gender norms under the guise of women's safety...and yet Historically separate spheres have been used to confine women to private/domestic spheres that kept them devoid of both political and economic power (something the right also espouse, as many more are suggesting women shouldnt even vote), and put them at much much higher risk of being abused (abolishment of no-fault divorce, no spousal rape laws, reproductive decisions requiring husband approval, all a result of this).

All these issues can muddy the water because its societies working out how to integrate a relatively new group of people who have always been present, but never put at the center of political strife in this way. I used to be very weirded out by the idea of trans kids and always felt parents should definitely "wait until later" and "let the kids be kids." My wife and I had home births, and she had a friend who lent us the birthing tub for it, and eventually gave it to us. They're a very "all natural" and even anti-vax Family, but they had a Son who was always, unusual. Not going to go I to details but at first I just thought they maybe coddled him too much. That kid is a lot older now, but is trans, and at first being bewildered by it, I thought about my gay Cousin. Anyone with half a brain knew what he was when he was little. He was just very different from the 4-5 boys he was always around. The world tried to interact with him all the ways it would a normal boy, and it just didn't work. He is what he is. I started to think maybe it's more complicated than my understanding. And being as I work with problem kids all the time, I realize that pointing a finger at them and demanding them to be as we want is quite often a losing strategy. What was that old David Bowie quote?

"And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations.
They're quite aware of what they're going through."

That's not what I said and I even explained at length why that's not the case. You can be a left leaning liberal and argue for certain right wing positions like how I aruge for school choice and gun rights. And within any party there will be some folks who are relatively to the right and relatively to the left. Within the Democrat party you have people like Manchin who are at the right wing end of the party and people like AOC on the left wing of the party. There's plenty of space between them and its important to defend that space so that an electorally viable coalition can operate at the national level.
I'm not going to answer for JVS, he can answer for himself. If you imply I'm a partisan zombie then yeah I'm not going to assume you're arguing in good faith, is that really unfair?
I can't be that specific because that would apply to lots of areas and each would requires it own approach. With sports I'm more inclined to accept a blanket ban of transgenders but with prisons you have to weigh the fact that while a transwoman in a female prison might be a risk to the other prisoners if she is put in a male prison she is at serious risk herself.
Its not really "whatboutism" because if we're talking about the wider political landscape then we should to take into account the wider party platforms. Like I said I agree with some of the right wing critiques in regards to certain transgender issues but overall I think the Democrats are far better at the national level.
I have nothing to do with voter outreach, I'm a mod on a karate forum arguing politics with anonymous strangers. The fact that you're so quick to assume I'm trolling in an effort to dismiss my POV doesn't really come off as good faith. I don't doubt that people really care about this issue, I just think they're wrong to center it so much in light of everything else. But you doubt that I might feel the way I say I do for some reason, its just strange to me.
Some people care a lot about a single issue, that's your prerogative. For some its gun control, abortion, or Israel and clearly for an emerging subset of voters its transgenders. If you're one of those that's fine but can't you see how some folks like myself aren't single issue voters and look at the party platforms and their norms and tendencies as a whole? Is it really hard to believe that someone might genuinely feel the way I say I do?
Where did I accuse anyone of being a Nazi? Where did I even say that you have to accept "degeneracy" or even transgenders? Don't you see how I might feel you guys are a bit bad faith when I try to put some effort into my takes here only for it to get boiled down to these kinds of strawman arguments? Mike here is complaining about trolling on my part but I think your posts here come far closer to that than anything I've posted.

Has this thread turned into another struggle session?

 

[Andy Capp]

Come on man, don't do this lol. Gender reassignment on children is not just typical medical care and you know this. Many feel it's mutilation done on people not mature enough to consent to it.

It's also not done. That's the point.

 

[Mike]

It's also not done. That's the point.

Oh sure you can just start them on the hormone treatments while they're still going through puberty, I'm sure that's not harmful at all.

 

[Andy Capp]

Has this thread turned into another struggle session?

Do you ever have anything useful to contribute?

 

[Mike]

Has this thread turned into another struggle session?

It has for me


I feel like I'm in the twilight zone with writing by Orwell. "Why are you opposed to doctors and parents getting medical treatment for their children" Is... is this real life?

 

[Islam Imamate]

It's not just the right-wing position on *that* issue. His own claim was that his agreement with the right on the issue makes him a rightist overall--that the issue is so important to him it defines his political identity. What I think a lot of people don't understand is that that's the modal rightist overall view. That is, most Republicans don't agree with the GOP's fanatical focus on tax cuts for the rich. They vote for them because they see them as the default party and they disagree with online leftists about social issues, and then imagine that that's really what politics is about.

More than that, if you call yourself a rightist and say that that's because the left only cares about some issue that most of the left doesn't actually care about, people will think you're a rightist.

I think if you asked him he'd call himself a centrist at worst and a leaning liberal dissident at best. I see people on the left who are committed to not voting for Biden over the Gaza issue and I wouldn't call them right wingers. In the context of this issue he's arguing the right wing POV, which as I've said I agree with to an extent, and maybe he's a single issue voter when it comes to this which is fine in and of itself, I just don't appreciate the strawman arguments and the accusations of trolling on my part.

Yeah to try to be fair to you, it just rubs me the wrong way when a mod jumps in seemingly cheerleading a poster that was doing nothing but making personal attacks and misrepresenting statements. Then acts as if they didn't see any of that. You know I don't have any particular issue with you, but the what do you mean what trolling pissed me and others off lmao. It was very, very obvious trolling. Maybe I shouldn't have taken it out on you. The zombie thing seems to have really offended you so I'll take that back, that was kinda dickish.

I wasn't that offended, I just think that insults like that aren't a sign of good faith discussion. Certainly I've been called much worse than that over the years here.

I think some folks are way to quick to accuse others of trolling instead of assuming that, despite however much you might disagree or find their presentation obnoxious, its actually their sincere POV. As far as cheerleading the misrepresenting statements you did just that in this post, should I assume that you're trolling?

Has this thread turned into another struggle session?

 

[Mike]

Always the cherry on top for this topic: I've known more trans people and read more peer reviewed research on transgenders than anyone here I'm quite sure. But every time the topic comes up people wanna tell me I don't know shit and shouldn't talk about subjects I know nothing about. Ah, sherdog.

 

[HereticBD]

I love watching the left all come to the same conclusions of:

"Why do you care?"
"It's only an issue because of FOX News!"
"I don't question (insert authority figure here)"

When forced to defend the indefensible coming from their side. Big walls of text...same three talking points.

 

[kflo]

Come on man, don't do this lol. Gender reassignment on children is not just typical medical care and you know this. Many feel it's mutilation done on people not mature enough to consent to it.

But either you’ve been duped or you’re doing this intentionally. Gender reassignment on children doesn’t happen. You may find some isolated cases of 17 year olds globally, but it’s so rare the fact that you’re even using the word “typical” shows you’re not really educated on the topic (or it’s intentional).

 

[Andy Capp]

Oh sure you can just start them on the hormone treatments while they're still going through puberty, I'm sure that's not harmful at all.

What do you know about whether it's harmful or not? When did you acquire your medical license? Or perhaps you've done the double blind studies on so-called puberty blockers to be certain there are negative effects? I'm guessing not.

I submit patients, parents, and doctors, are all trying to do what's best for the patient. I think decisions are best left to them and to the standards of treatment established for them by the State.

Having said all that, from what I have seen though, no, they aren't harmful. If the drugs are withdrawn, puberty will proceed apace. I think you may be able to agree that if a person were certainly transgender--from their point of view and after having received psychological counselling which is the norm for such cases, it is extremely harmful to be forced to go through puberty only to have to then engage in surgical changes that would not have been necessary had puberty blockers been permitted.

It's a complicated question and one best left to the medical community and not politically motivated virtue signaling conservative fearmongers.

 

[kflo]

Always the cherry on top for this topic: I've known more trans people and read more peer reviewed research on transgenders than anyone here I'm quite sure. But every time the topic comes up people wanna tell me I don't know shit and shouldn't talk about subjects I know nothing about. Ah, sherdog.

How many of them had their “genitals mutilated” when they were children?

 

[Sinister]

There's a really big difference between various medical treatments that have already been fully researched with their efficacy known, and mutilating the genitals of children and calling it a medical procedure without any longterm research into it's efficacy or any side effects. That's kind of the point people like me are trying to make. They're trojan horsing this stuff in like it's established medical science and we should give it the respect we give other established science, when it isn't and we shouldn't.

There's a really big difference between "transgender healthcare" and "mutilating the genitals of children." And to be fair, religious groups have mutilated children's genitals for so long it became a cultural practice for those who weren't religious, which is only recently getting any push-back. Bottom surgery for minors, to my knowledge, has almost zero means of medical approval in any State currently and I'm only aware of legislation to ban it altogether, none to allow it.

Also it's a bit odd to distinguish science from "established science." Its not as if established science has never been wrong or manipulated (see: dietary fat vs carbohydrate) to the degree that it cost lives, and new science has had to come along and correct it. It's almost as if science is also a messy discovery and acceptance process and not synonymous with adhering to extraneous dogma.

 

[Mike]

But either you’ve been duped or you’re doing this intentionally. Gender reassignment on children doesn’t happen. You may find some isolated cases of 17 year olds globally, but it’s so rare the fact that you’re even using the word “typical” shows you’re not really educated on the topic (or it’s intentional).

No you're right they can just start them on the hormones at 14, and then after they've completely messed up the natural course of puberty they can go get the surgery at 18. Even though our brains don't finish fully developing until our mid 20s. And I'm sure parents that would allow their children to be mutilated even though there's no science whatsoever saying that's beneficial in any way, won't exert any sort of control or pressure over that descion making process. Yeah you really got me there.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

It has for me


I feel like I'm in the twilight zone with writing by Orwell. "Why are you opposed to doctors and parents getting medical treatment for their children" Is... is this real life?

you're not in the wr much so you aren't used to the constant gaslighting.
in time you will figure out which posters do that all the time, and you can just ignore them completely. like, not even read their post when they quote you. life's much better like that.

 

[HereticBD]

it is extremely harmful to be forced to go through puberty

ROFL!

Holy shit.

 

[SKYNET]

It has for me
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone with writing by Orwell. "Why are you opposed to doctors and parents getting medical treatment for their children" Is... is this real life?

Dude, I was represented as a far right radical or some bs in a thread created by a person that was later caught posting with multiple accounts (also caught liking their own posts) which was about active WR posters and their assumed political leanings. No one bothered to ask me what my political leanings are, he/she/they just decided that I was far right and everyone went along with it.

 

[Andy Capp]

ROFL!

Holy shit.

Holy out of context! Bite my arse.

 

[kflo]

No you're right they can just start them on the hormones at 14, and then after they've completely messed up the natural course of puberty they can go get the surgery at 18. Even though our brains don't finish fully developing until our mid 20s. And I'm sure parents that would allow their children to be mutilated even though there's no science whatsoever saying that's beneficial in any way, won't exert any sort of control or pressure over that descion making process. Yeah you really got me there.

But at least that’s a more honest take than discussing gender mutilation of children.

So, yeah, I do got you there. Start with an honest statement and then discuss that, instead of starting with a dishonest one just to try to make a point. You see?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think if you asked him he'd call himself a centrist at worst and a leaning liberal dissident at best. I see people on the left who are committed to not voting for Biden over the Gaza issue and I wouldn't call them right wingers. In the context of this issue he's arguing the right wing POV, which as I've said I agree with to an extent, and maybe he's a single issue voter when it comes to this which is fine in and of itself, I just don't appreciate the strawman arguments and the accusations of trolling on my part.

But it's not a single-issue discussion. When the argument is that "the left" (already kind of a mistake describing a fissiparous coalition as a monolith) is single-mindedly focused on the issue and thus you can't be considered to be ideologically aligned with them, that's clearly a rightist argument in a general sense. That is, his position on trans people is irrelevant to the broader point that he's choosing to define the left by the issue in the process of rejecting their position on it. And then, yes, weirdly acting offended that people believe his own words.