Crime President Biden declares Easter Sunday a Transgender Day of Visibility

[Jack V Savage]

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.

Again, no one cares about your position on trans issues. The point is that you're defining yourself as a rightist simply because you have rightist positions on that one issue, which isn't something an honest person would do.

 

[Mike]

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.

What I mean by that is we don't even know what transgenderism IS yet. Is it a mental illness? Is it a hormonal imbalance? A genetic mutation? Something else? We don't know. Which means we certainly don't know if surgery is a good idea. What if it does end up being a mental illness, seems like doing surgeries on all these young developing people will have been a terrible mistake then. We DO know that among the first gen transgenders that had surgery, it didn't lead to increased odds of positive outcomes at all. Rates of self harm, suicide, and other negative outcomes went UP after surgery. It's wild to me that we have this issue that the science is absolute NOT in on yet, but people are making these declarative statements about what trans is and isn't and giving people hormone treatments and genital mutilation when we don't know if that works and only have evidence that it doesn't, AND we don't even know what the condition is that we're treating yet.

 

[HereticBD]

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.

Do you also submit the mutilated fucked up kids, who regret having any of this bullshit done to them by "experts", when they were too young and stupid to make such a decision?

 

[Mike]

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?

Off topic I know, but this is so funny coming from a guy that maintains Jon jones isn't a cheater. Carry on.

 

[Mike]

Do you also submit the mutilated fucked up kids, who regret having any of this bullshit done to them by "experts", when they were too young and stupid to make such a decision?

Oh you see they can only get gaslit by bad parents and pumped with hormones up until they turn 18. They can't have the surgery until then so that makes it fine.

 

[kflo]

Off topic I know, but this is so funny coming from a guy that maintains Jon jones isn't a cheater. Carry on.

Yeah, you’re proving to be a good faith poster here, Mikey. Way to own your own words. Lol.

 

[Mike]

Yeah, you’re proving to be a good faith poster here, Mikey. Way to own your own words. Lol.

Hahaha ok man.

 

[HereticBD]

Oh you see they can only get gaslit by bad parents and pumped with hormones up until they turn 18. They can't have the surgery until then so that makes it fine.

Not even. Bottom surgery isn't all that common for minors, but doctors be cuttin' them tits off all day long.

 

[Andy Capp]

Do you also submit the mutilated fucked up kids, who regret having any of this bullshit done to them by "experts", when they were too young and stupid to make such a decision?

Show me these mutilated kids. Do they even exist? In how great a number?

 

[Sinister]

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.

Yeah it can be very off-putting to be constantly accused of being someone you're not, or doing things you didnt do. Lolz

 

[Mike]

Show me these mutilated kids. Do they even exist? In how great a number?

Question for you Andy. Why are people automatically taking the perspective that reassignment surgery is a valid thing we should be doing. Why are we starting the conversation from the standpoint that this is a medically valid thing to do? Because we don't know what transgenderism is, and we don't know that hormone therapy or surgery helps those with this condition.

 

[Sinister]

What I mean by that is we don't even know what transgenderism IS yet. Is it a mental illness? Is it a hormonal imbalance? A genetic mutation? Something else? We don't know. Which means we certainly don't know if surgery is a good idea. What if it does end up being a mental illness, seems like doing surgeries on all these young developing people will have been a terrible mistake then. We DO know that among the first gen transgenders that had surgery, it didn't lead to increased odds of positive outcomes at all. Rates of self harm, suicide, and other negative outcomes went UP after surgery. It's wild to me that we have this issue that the science is absolute NOT in on yet, but people are making these declarative statements about what trans is and isn't and giving people hormone treatments and genital mutilation when we don't know if that works and only have evidence that it doesn't, AND we don't even know what the condition is that we're treating yet.

I hear you, but there is not really such a thing as absolute science, and absolutism is almost never constructive or realistic when it comes to human issues that result in restricting of people not harming others.

 

[Mike]

I hear you, but there is not really such a thing as absolute science, and absolutism is almost never constructive or realistic when it comes to human issues that result in restricting of people not harming others.

I know that but when there's such a strong political push behind it, do you not find it concerning that we jumped right into hormone treatments and therapy? When we don't know what transgenders even are yet, and we do have the data to show that first gen trans people fared worse after surgery not better. Doesn't it seem worrisome that we're going full steam ahead like we know what's going on when we very much do not? That's a little different than just the general concept that science is always evolving and sometimes gets things wrongs. That's a general response to a very specific situation.

 

[Mike]

If, for example, the science was in that gender dysphoria WAS caused by them having the brain of one gender and the body of another we would have something to work off of. But so far we have NOT determined that is the case. The data is all over the place and there isn't that much of it because it's a tiny population that we've only been studying for a few decades.

 

[Jack V Savage]

This thread really shows how this cheap propaganda works. Starts attacking Biden for some total bullshit, and then even after that is debunked you have some true believers clinging to it, and then you have hacks like Mike who want to argue about gender reassignment for kids, which is something that almost never happens and no one supports, and saying that it's like the key issue in politics.

 

[Andy Capp]

Oh you see they can only get gaslit by bad parents and pumped with hormones up until they turn 18. They can't have the surgery until then so that makes it fine.

Bad parents will fuck up their children in all kinds of ways. In what way do you propose that preventing others from accessing the healthcare they seek when fully informed will lessen the potential harms to those other unfortunate kids?

Medical treatment is about doing more good than harm in the long run. It's never perfect. Having said that, long before any sort of pharmacological intervention, the standard is for the child to receive mental health care throughout (IIRC) and this should help filter out kids who have been "gaslit" by their parents, and in the absence of any data whatsoever, I'd say their number is extremely low.

Regardless of the number, where those standards aren't being met, that's clearly an issue with process rather than gender affirming care itself and doesn't invalidate it. Good things can be implemented poorly; I have no problem agreeing with that.

On the other hand, you have presented zero evidence that the children themselves who have received what I would call proper treatment (as defined above) are worse off for it.

I hope you will re-examine your logic on this issue, but in the end you seem to have made up your mind so take it FWIW. I'm pretty much done here. Again, I beg your pardon for jumping in in the first place.

 

[Andy Capp]

Question for you Andy. Why are people automatically taking the perspective that reassignment surgery is a valid thing we should be doing. Why are we starting the conversation from the standpoint that this is a medically valid thing to do? Because we don't know what transgenderism is, and we don't know that hormone therapy or surgery helps those with this condition.

I'm not automatically taking a perspective and you answered my question with a question. That is not an argument. I thought you wanted a good faith discussion. Do you have any empirical data or not?

 

[kflo]

This thread really shows how this cheap propaganda works. Starts attacking Biden for some total bullshit, and then even after that is debunked you have some true believers clinging to it, and then you have hacks like Mike who want to argue about gender reassignment for kids, which is something that almost never happens and no one supports, and saying that it's like the key issue in politics.

And when he’s confronted with the fact that he was wrong (or lying), he doubles down on the topic. Now it’s gender reassignment for adults……

 

[Jack V Savage]

Medical treatment is about doing more good than harm in the long run. It's never perfect. Having said that, long before any sort of pharmacological intervention, the standard is for the child to receive mental health care throughout (IIRC) and this should help filter out kids who have been "gaslit" by their parents, and in the absence of any data whatsoever, I'd say their number is extremely low.

Side topic: "Gaslit" is not accurate here (I understand that you get that), and in probably at least 95% of online mentions. It's a form of abuse involving convincing someone you know that their perceptions are not accurate in order to control them. It's not just disagreeing with people for any reason or even outright lying.

 

[Mike]

Bad parents will fuck up their children in all kinds of ways. In what way do you propose that preventing others from accessing the healthcare they seek when fully informed will lessen the potential harms to those other unfortunate kids?

Medical treatment is about doing more good than harm in the long run. It's never perfect. Having said that, long before any sort of pharmacological intervention, the standard is for the child to receive mental health care throughout (IIRC) and this should help filter out kids who have been "gaslit" by their parents, and in the absence of any data whatsoever, I'd say their number is extremely low.

Regardless of the number, where those standards aren't being met, that's clearly an issue with process rather than gender affirming care itself and doesn't invalidate it. Good things can be implemented poorly; I have no problem agreeing with that.

On the other hand, you have presented zero evidence that the children themselves who have received what I would call proper treatment (as defined above) are worse off for it.

I hope you will re-examine your logic on this issue, but in the end you seem to have made up your mind so take it FWIW. I'm pretty much done here. Again, I beg your pardon for jumping in in the first place.

Yeah me too. Pointless discussion. Have a good one.