Trans women are not women (Part 8)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here we go again. Argument by "I disapprove" and snide insinuation of the iniquity of the other party. Fact and evidence free. "No surprise though."

I mean if the AAP position is a good indicator of the facts and evidence in support of the trans-inclusionary position, I can totally understand why the trans-inclusionists tend not to present them.
 
Oh yes. Also homophobia. There are plenty of cases where parents have confessed to relief that they can have a "normal" daughter rather than a gay son. And quite a lot of them seem to be the classic "right-wing Christian" demographic, funnily enough.

You can coach a young child to believe, and to want, some quite strange things. And a lot of these children seem coached. Mothers who want a "special" child now have a way of achieving that. Maybe even a prime-time TV show.

What an unpleasant - but telling - thing to say. No surprise though.

Careful, Rolfe. He's onto you. He sees through that thin veneer of wokeness to tell that, deep in your heart, you don't actually support the trans rights agenda.
 
I think we get enough of the "Oh look everybody she said something I disagree with, isn't she a terrible person" from ST. We don't need another one.

ETA: I suppose this one is more of a "she pointed out that people I support are doing something unpleasant, isn't she a terrible person." A fine distinction.
 
Last edited:
I'm thinking it might be a cryptic comment about what anyone needs to do before they access any form of medical or surgical "transition".
 
It's D & D night, so I don't have time to fully catch up or fully respond. But I will comment on these two things.

Covenant wasn't aroused by having the ability to be aroused. They were aroused by Lena. One can argue that the unexpected physical manifestation of arousal overloaded their ability to control themself, but it's still not true to say that Covenant was aroused by being able to be aroused.
I disagree. It's a bit complex, but in my reading, Covenant was overwhelmed and sent into a rage by his sudden healing and return to potency.

Lena was just there. Which arguably makes it worse. He quite literally did not consider her a person. Or even an object. (At that point, he thought he was unconscious and dreaming after being hit by a car. A police car, I think. So he didn't consider Lena to actually exist.)

The way I read it Lena wasn't arousing, she was just present.

I guess we could ask Donaldson what he meant, but that's how I read it.
With respect to Dysphoria and AGP... Dysphoria is NOT a cause. A large part of why it was reclassified in DSM5 is that it is a common symptom that can be related to multiple different causes, including a deep-seated psychological disconnect from one's sexed body. AGP, on the other hand, IS a cause of dysphoria. AGP is a primary diagnosis of a mental health disorder under the category of paraphilias, specifically related to transvestic fetishism.

AGP can cause dysphoria, although a great many males with AGP are content to feed their paraphilia with simply cross-dressing and don't experience dysphoria at all.

If I get around to it, I'll do a literature search. But I think you may be misinterpreting DSM-5.
No time now, though.
 
Yes. Then you can forward it to the group of the world's medical experts who've already decided that transgender identity is a valid condition and that gender dysmorphia is not a mental health aberration; and then to the dozens of the world's progressive governments who - after consultation with experts and careful consideration - also consider transgender identity to be valid.


Like Sweden.




Note to newcomers, and anyone who might have been away for a while, not to name any names. LondonJohn likes to repeat the "valid lived condition" thing. Of course, no one disputes that being transgender is a valid lived condition, although, despite that, LJ won't explain what he means. I think it means that these people are predisposed to be transgender by biology, which seems very likely to me, and to most people. It doesn't really address any of the actual questions that get discussed here, but it seems important to him.
 
My conclusion is that "valid lived condition" is a rhetorical dodge, and a placeholder for a scientifically supported argument that will never be presented because LJ has realized too late that such an argument does not actually exist.
 
I wonder if blocked puberty is a valid lived condition. I wouldn't think so, but without a definition it's hard to say.
 
Yes. Then you can forward it to the group of the world's medical experts who've already decided that transgender identity is a valid condition and that gender dysmorphia is not a mental health aberration; and then to the dozens of the world's progressive governments who - after consultation with experts and careful consideration - also consider transgender identity to be valid.
I'm sure they'll be pleased to have the opportunity to get a "critical thinking" check from a bunch of nobodies on the interwebs.


(And, by the way, it's entirely feasible, rational and acceptable that some children - not all, but some - will have a clear understanding of their gender identity at least by around the time they reach puberty. Just as some children know with confidence that they are gay by that age. Many other gay people only come to a full realisation of their sexuality once they are into adulthood - some, deep into adulthood. Exactly the same happens with transgender identity as well.)

You keep on saying this as if it means something. It doesn’t.

Governments make decisions that further their desire for re-election. They implement Brexit and control immigration to increase their vote. They enact transgender supportive laws for the same reason. Your argument that they make decision (presumedly only those you like) guided by some higher purpose and guided by the best evidence is wrong and laughable.
 
Texas courts granted a temporary injunction against Texas trying to criminally investigate the ACLU's unnamed plaintiffs. It's a narrow emergency order until further litigation on the constitutional merits of the issue can occur.

The temporary injunction only applies to these specific plaintiffs. Another hearing is scheduled for March 11th to argue a statewide injunction.
 
An opinion piece exploring the political crisis that Texas AG Paxton is facing that is almost certainly motivating this state attack on trans families.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/25/texas-transgender-youth-directive-abuses-children/

Paxton failed to get enough votes in the Republican primary to avoid a runoff. Plagued by scandal, including what appears to be an ongoing FBI investigation into credible accusations of bribery first reported by his own assistant AGs, Paxton is right to fear he won't survive the primary challenge.

Extremely public declarations of state repression of trans people may become more common for Republicans trying to fend off challengers to their right. It remains to be seen if this is effective for Paxton.
 
Last edited:
They really are messing this up quite spectacularly. That still doesn't mean that preventing a child from going through puberty is anything but an absolutely terrible idea that does in fact amount to child abuse.
 
They really are messing this up quite spectacularly. That still doesn't mean that preventing a child from going through puberty is anything but an absolutely terrible idea that does in fact amount to child abuse.

"messing up" implies a belief that overt cruelty was not the intended effect, which it obviously is.

This policy is little more than red meat for the transphobic right wing base.
 
A bit of a crossover from the Trials and Errors section here.

One of the miscarriages of justice that comes up from time to time is the tragic case of Stefan Kiszko, wrongly accused of the murder of Lesley Molseed. Stefan was not mentally retarded. He had done well at school, was considered to be fairly bright, and had a good job as an accounts clerk or something like that. He drove his own car. But there was something strange about him. He lived with his mother and didn't socialise with lads of his own age (23). He didn't have a girlfriend. His behaviour patterns were a bit odd. For example he had a habit of writing down the registration numbers of cars whose drivers (he believed) had "cut him up", although there's nothing recorded about altercations or anything resembling road rage. His hobbies were juvenile.

This all makes sense when we understand that Stefan had a form of hypogonadism. (I think it might have been Klinefelter's, but don't quote me on that.) He had never gone through puberty. He was intellectually functioning as an adult, but emotionally he had not matured. He couldn't relate to his peers and he wasn't interested in girls.

The tragedy was that he had only just been diagnosed when he was falsely accused of the murder (loner, a bit weird, no girlfriend, the sort of person who is suspected). He had started treatment to induce puberty by testosterone injections, and was slightly overwhelmed by these new sensations he hadn't known existed. He had just found out how to masturbate. The cops used this to claim that the couple of testosterone injections he'd had had made him go banjax and murder Lesley. He is one of the sad cases (like Brendan Dassey) who was induced by the cops to make a false confession "so he could go home to his mother". His childlike naivety when he did this landed him in prison for 16 years.

Anyway, he's an interesting example of the puberty-blocked adult, and obviously there are more such people around, although fewer than at one time thanks to diagnostics and HRT. Bright enough to hold down a good job, perfectly able to function at most levels, but "a bit odd" and not relating well to people his own age who have been through puberty.

Puberty-blocked adults are at a disadvantage. They may learn to function in society, they may learn not to appear strange, and if they're having to learn to LARP the opposite sex at the same time then the mental effects of having been denied puberty may not really show. But it's not a good place to be and nobody should be encouraging any inexperienced and obsessed children down that path.
 
Last edited:
"messing up" implies a belief that overt cruelty was not the intended effect, which it obviously is.

This policy is little more than red meat for the transphobic right wing base.


Governments are idiotic, right-wing governments doubly so. Hold the front page.

That tells us nothing at all about the rights (non-existent) or wrongs (extensive and horrific) of preventing children from going through puberty. A government can mess up when doing something that's fundamentally right, just as much as they can mess up doing something that's fundamentally wrong.
 
An opinion piece exploring the political crisis that Texas AG Paxton is facing that is almost certainly motivating this state attack on trans families.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/25/texas-transgender-youth-directive-abuses-children/

Paxton failed to get enough votes in the Republican primary to avoid a runoff. Plagued by scandal, including what appears to be an ongoing FBI investigation into credible accusations of bribery first reported by his own assistant AGs, Paxton is right to fear he won't survive the primary challenge.

Extremely public declarations of state repression of trans people may become more common for Republicans trying to fend off challengers to their right. It remains to be seen if this is effective for Paxton.

What would your posts look like if you never discussed the political implications of trans rights, but simply looked at the related issues, such as whether males ought to compete against females, or whether males ought to be allowed in women's locker rooms? Or whether puberty blockers ought to be allowed, or tightly regulated?

If you never discussed which politicians support which things, and just focused on whether or not they were good things or bad things?

Your focus never seems to be on trans people. It's always that Republicans might use this as a wedge issue.

It's not that you're wrong. Yes, they might. I think they already have, successfully. I think that issue gave us President Trump. They will definitely use it. And?


But, if you must focus on the politics, can you do some research into the government of Sweden? They seem to have been overtaken by fundamentalists or something, because they've adopted the same policies that the Governor of Texas is advocating.
 
But, if you must focus on the politics, can you do some research into the government of Sweden? They seem to have been overtaken by fundamentalists or something, because they've adopted the same policies that the Governor of Texas is advocating.

Somehow I doubt they are "the same" policies.

Is Sweden seeking to lock up parents of trans children for seeking out medical care that was, until very recently, considered best practices and perfectly legal?

There's very clearly a post-hoc element of the radical reinterpretation of existing Texas law that cannot be explained in any other way than intentional capriciousness. It's willful obtuseness to pretend otherwise.

I could just as easily ask why you refuse to meaningfully engage with the obvious political and animus driven elements of the trans debate.
 
Last edited:
I could just as easily ask why you refuse to meaningfully engage with the obvious political and animus driven elements of the trans debate.

Probably because this isn't in the politics section of the forum. That is the appropriate place to have such a discussion, not here.

So back to the topic. Can you actually defend the merits of medical transition for prepubescent children? So far, you have not made any serious attempt to. You tried to make an argument from authority by using that AAP statement, but that collapsed like a house of cards under scrutiny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom