Trans women are not women (Part 8)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emily's Cat said:
What would be even stranger would be assuming that the people have the wrong motives because they're on a different political team, and then assuming that because their motives must (via assumption) be bad, the policy must also be a bad policy... and never actually bothering to consider the policy itself at all.
Click to expand...
It's lucky that hardly ever happens.
 
Myriad said:
Good to know that the courts are willing to intervene to protect those people from unproven potential harm.

Too bad no one is being that proactive in protecting female prisoners from potential rape until sufficient proof of actual harm accumulates (if even then).
Click to expand...
I think the strategy is to teach rapists not to rape.
 
Hercules56 said:
I dont think we should teach our kids that they can simply change their gender, choose a different gender, like they choose which baseball team to support.
Click to expand...

What other mental health conditions are on your short list of thing to teach prepubescent children? Should we teach them that Body Identity Integrity Disorder exists, or can we hold off on that until they get to med school? Or at least high school?

What about Bipolar Disorder? Or Borderline Personality Disorder? Or Munchausen's? Or Munchausen's by Proxy?

I don't think I've ever been taught about those, and I'm a grown-ass adult. What is it about gender dysphoria that prompts you to single it out for special instruction to small children?
 
shuttlt said:
What I meant was you have the simplified version for 5 year olds of mummies and daddies. Sure, there are polyamorous furries, gender queer power bottoms, and bread and butter "Johnny has two dads". Just because all those things exist, doesn't mean kids need to be told about it and encouraged to consider where they might fit in to all of that. We routinely present kids with age appropriate simplified falsehoods.

It just seemed to me that some of the arguments in favour of teaching kids all this gender stuff is that it's true. Even if it is true, which I think is disputed, that isn't an argument for teaching it.
Click to expand...

I rather think the argument for teaching it to children is the tried-and-true method of religious indoctrination.
 
Hercules56 said:
I believe we should teach our kids that gender dysphoria exists, its a real phenomenon, but its not like a choice that people can simply flip a switch to turn on or off
Click to expand...

I think the existence of gender dysphoria and trans people fits well into the curriculum of a high school health class as I recall it from when I was in hic=gh school in the early 80s.

As I recall, we talked about a lot of things including mental health conditions in addition to physical health, sexual health and STDs. I can't remember if that class was where I learned about what we now refer to as "intersex" conditions like Kleinfelter syndrome and the like. Could also have been freshman biology class or Jr. high health class. (Which also got into mental health, but not as deeply.)

For younger children (K-5), we didn't really have a health class that I recall. So I don't see a burning need to put it into the curriculum. But I also don't see a need to avoid the topic if it comes up. If it comes up for some reason, talk about it.
 
TomB said:
For younger children (K-5), we didn't really have a health class that I recall. So I don't see a burning need to put it into the curriculum. But I also don't see a need to avoid the topic if it comes up. If it comes up for some reason, talk about it.
Click to expand...

The problem with this approach is that there are teachers out there who will abuse such leeway, because there are teachers who say that they already abuse it. By that, I mean that they will make sure the topic "comes up", and then use that as an excuse to talk about it even though it's nominally not part of the curriculum. So in practice it becomes a part of the curriculum.
 
shuttlt said:
We will see. Maybe this is a good test? My money is on the whole driving offence thing disappearing because of this.
Click to expand...

You lose!

"Conservative MP Jamie Wallis has been charged with failing to stop after a car crash last November.

South Wales Police said Mr Wallis, 37, from Cowbridge, Vale of Glamorgan, has also been charged with failing to report the crash, careless driving and leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61256972
 
Matthew Best said:
You lose!

"Conservative MP Jamie Wallis has been charged with failing to stop after a car crash last November.

South Wales Police said Mr Wallis, 37, from Cowbridge, Vale of Glamorgan, has also been charged with failing to report the crash, careless driving and leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61256972
Click to expand...
I meant as a news story, but you are right... that isn't what I said. I accept by admonishment.
 
Aber said:
Latest UK survey, from a New Statesman article

https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/...ers-think-most-white-people-have-racial-bias/

Should a transgender person be recognised by their self declared identity?

Splits roughly:
30% Don't know
25% Yes
20% Yes, only if they have had gender reassignment surgery
25% No
Click to expand...
These kinds of surveys are so nebulous. Does it mean they should be "recognised by their self declared identity" in general social settings? Does it mean trans-women should go to women's prisons? Most of the issues in that link, the different political tribes interpret the words differently. Believing in social justice could mean anything from helping the needy to implementing Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism.
 
Here's an article quoting Rachel Levine on the recent changes in Florida restricting "gender affirming care".


https://komonews.com/news/nation-wo...praises-gender-affirming-care-for-adolescents


She supports such care and says "there is no argument" about it among professionals treating transgender youth.


That's the kind of thing that drives me a bit crazy. I'm not an expert. I don't know if they are good or bad. However, I don't need to know that, or be able to make a decision, in order to know that there is, in fact, an argument. That much I can say with absolute certainty.

I see it all the time here. Here at ISF, I know that "there is no evidence" means some variation of, "I don't care about the evidence."

I haven't spent time poring over articles to try and sort out the state of the art, but it sure seems to me, based on what I've read, that puberty blockers are bad news and should not be used in the vast majority of cases, if ever, and that hormone treatment has irreversible effects and should be treated with extreme caution. I'm certain, at the very least, that there's an argument. I'm not sure where Ms. Levine is getting her information.
 
Meadmaker said:
I'm not sure where Ms. Levine is getting her information.
Click to expand...

It almost doesn't matter, because the field is corrupted.

Remember that article SuburbanTurkey posted which, among other things, claimed that puberty blockers were reversible? And then when I dug into it, the links it claimed supported that either didn't, or actually contradicted it? This wasn't a one-off. It's sadly the norm now. If they will lie about the consequences of drugs on children, why wouldn't they lie about the existence of a consensus?
 
Ziggurat said:
It almost doesn't matter, because the field is corrupted.

Remember that article SuburbanTurkey posted which, among other things, claimed that puberty blockers were reversible? And then when I dug into it, the links it claimed supported that either didn't, or actually contradicted it? This wasn't a one-off. It's sadly the norm now. If they will lie about the consequences of drugs on children, why wouldn't they lie about the existence of a consensus?
Click to expand...

When all is said and done, it's just a complete denial of reality. The evidence is clear, so the only way to reconcile it with preconceived notions is to deny that the evidence exists.
 
Ziggurat said:
It almost doesn't matter, because the field is corrupted.

Remember that article SuburbanTurkey posted which, among other things, claimed that puberty blockers were reversible? And then when I dug into it, the links it claimed supported that either didn't, or actually contradicted it? This wasn't a one-off. It's sadly the norm now. If they will lie about the consequences of drugs on children, why wouldn't they lie about the existence of a consensus?
Click to expand...
This is true of so many issues. So few people actually check.
 
Meadmaker said:
Here's an article quoting Rachel Levine on the recent changes in Florida restricting "gender affirming care".


https://komonews.com/news/nation-wo...praises-gender-affirming-care-for-adolescents


She supports such care and says "there is no argument" about it among professionals treating transgender youth.


That's the kind of thing that drives me a bit crazy. I'm not an expert. I don't know if they are good or bad. However, I don't need to know that, or be able to make a decision, in order to know that there is, in fact, an argument. That much I can say with absolute certainty.

I see it all the time here. Here at ISF, I know that "there is no evidence" means some variation of, "I don't care about the evidence."

I haven't spent time poring over articles to try and sort out the state of the art, but it sure seems to me, based on what I've read, that puberty blockers are bad news and should not be used in the vast majority of cases, if ever, and that hormone treatment has irreversible effects and should be treated with extreme caution. I'm certain, at the very least, that there's an argument. I'm not sure where Ms. Levine is getting her information.
Click to expand...

When someone in charge of the department of health and human services insists "there is no argument" when referring to medical procedures for which there is a LOT of argument... I get pretty iffy about them being in charge of health care in the US in the first place.
 
This is a categorization problem. "Evidence" doesn't work because the definition will just shift.

You can't show me "evidence" that you have 4 fingers and a thumb or that you have 5 fingers.

Nobody from any viewpoint in this discussion can just define themselves into being correct, but that's also sorta of all we have to go on because that's the only thing in question... definitions.
 
Meadmaker said:
When all is said and done, it's just a complete denial of reality. The evidence is clear, so the only way to reconcile it with preconceived notions is to deny that the evidence exists.
Click to expand...

I'd hardly say a single opposing academic article is "clear" evidence.

I have to admit that doing deep dives into medical academic journals is not my specialty. I would assume there would have been some response to that paper seeing as it seems to have had very little impact in the way these many organizations are recommending care for trans adolescents, but I don't really have the inclination or experience to go through a tedious dive of the literature.

I suppose you could assume the lack of changing practice is the result of "corruption", but that's quite the leap of faith when more ordinary reasons seem more likely.

ETA: It seems Dr. Cantor's "Sexology Today" is little more than a personal blog, which might explain why his essay did not get much academic traction.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom