Yet again no parent is thinking that way aside from the degenerates. The general population of parents isn't researching ways to sexual abuse their kid thinking it's best for their kid.
Yes all that is possible and hormone treatments and surgery should be last resorts procedures thst definitely should not be entered lightly. That doesn’t mean there aren’t cases where someone is so disconnected from what they feel they should be that the alternative is suicide. To say then that this requires a blanket legal ban is politicians substituting their reasoning for indidviduals, medical professionals and parents.
Conservatives get triggered at mandate vaccination for their kids shouting and btchin about the my body my choice, ditto for masking up. Yet when it's something they agree with, they have no problem forcing their views restricting/banning abortion/transition surgery ignoring the my body my choice stance for those affected. Mental gymnastics as always.
This is a classic shifting argument to something that isn’t directly analogous. To take I head in though I will point out that some of the states that have bills against gender affirming care for minors also have bills that allow for marriage as young as 12. I think this was posted on here or another D&D thread of a MO state rep being confronted about on that issue. https://youtube.com/shorts/9H6UJ-uCrgc?feature=share
I think the optimal stance that folks should have on this topic should b similar to most health care professional strive for. Aiming to educate and inform parents the risk and benefits of the options withholding personal opinions and let the parents make a decision based on what they think is best for their kid. Quite idealistic. Folks sure like to fear mongering about little toddlers being subjected to gender transition surgery against their own will by their parents, an event that rarely if ever occur to impose a ban
That example is so dumb. To be a valid comparison, you have to believe that doctors are recommending sex with children as a treatment for some condition, and for that sex to be carried out by professional pedo. There are valid debate on child safety but when I hear this, I just see stupid.
I get what you’re saying in regards to doing what’s best for your kids. I’m a parent and I can tell you I’d be appalled if one of my children told me they wanted to be the opposite sex. It’s one thing to be sexually attracted to the same sex, you do you. A parent allowing a child to have their genitalia mutilated is so wrong it shouldn’t even be a topic of conversation. The real issue here is not the parents doing best for their kids. It’s the schools, teachers, corporations, some media and what have you, telling children it’s ok if you’re a boy and want to be a girl. Kids aren’t fully developed by any means and allowing a young, or even mid teen kid, to surgically change their sex is evil. I think that will create more mental illness for that person down the road than anything they are dealing with at that time. I’m sure when you were younger you did stuff and as an adult look back and say “damn that was ****ing stupid”! Everyone has. You don’t physically alter a young person cause “depressed”. They need mental help, not their body mutilated.
Are these all opinions from the gut or a intellectual curiosity to delve deeper into child psychology and data? One thing I see in your take is you have to assume an inherent evil entity rather than a group of people you disagree with for what is best for these kids. You have to prescribe that there is a neferious entity that has intent to harm children as their motivation as some sadistic evil plan. This is why I think right wing ideology is very child like. Most of my analysis of what is wrong with this world is simply greedy people having interests aligned. I don't believe there is some inherently evil thing. I think with the anti-trans movement, there are two levels, neither of which levels have inherent evil. The bottom level, which you are included in might have sincere desire to protect children while at the same time subconsciously dumping your frustrations of your day to day lives on a small group of powerless people as your scape goat for society around you decaying. The upper level consists of wealthy people who'd rather people like you be more angry about cultural issues rather than something like cartel price fixing scandals on essential human needs like rent. The motive is self serving but there is no inherent "evil for evil sake". For your world view to make sense, there would have the be a Hollywood horror type evil incarnate entity that does evil for evil sake which I find kinda childish. Is that being too harsh?
@Commodore @ROXRAN @Os Trigonum Elon is standing up for kids in middle school No boys in the girls locker room
No they aren’t the same but generally speaking “castration” hormones are essential hormones aka what you call puberty blockers (thinks we use in prostate and breast cancer). both are bad, you release these hormones during puberty for a reason , increased bone strength, altered anatomy (hips/breasts). So there are risks from that and risks from supplemental hormones which again is another risk (tons of literature on this just Google) yes that’s exactly what I mean in terms of risks benefits, and I agree if someone is going to kill themselves give them whatever. But you still didn’t answer the question and danced around it. Hopefully my above point clarifies it Btw what you are saying is too complicated is the cornerstone of the discussions these people need to have and goes on with respect to every other ailment every single day. If it’s too complex for you to answer and you can’t provide objective evidence (not saying you have to be right) then what business do you have strongly advocating for something you are unaware about the harms of?
I think my post below I quoted is relevant to this paragraph I've quoted from you. So read the quoted text below first to understand where I'm coming from. There is an army of medical professionals and researchers(not doctors on Twitter pretending to be researchers) who've weighted the effects of blockers and made informed decisions. The reason why the post I quoted of mine is relevant is because I see the same problem in you in that you believe in a sort of religious zealot framing of morality in that there is an inherent evil group. For your talking points on this subject to make sense you have to incorporate Hollywood horror concept type of pure evil to a group of medical professionals rather than the more likely reality: you simply disagree with their rewatch from a gutteral emotional perspective.
You’ve come out with premises that are factually and objectively incorrect. Naturally if your argument is predicated on things Google and online sleuthing was incorrect about then you’re going to be building your house incorrectly. i like you but I’m not going to engage with you, I think you may be the most rigid/echo chamber person on this board. I’ll address the other poster. if in the 1% chance you are sincere about expanding your knowledge base you have to understand that your “group of medical professionals and researchers” is absolute horseshit: your daily clinician and the governing bodies within their field come to consensus guidelines*** (yes guide) on how to base their decisions on this at the end of the day. There’s no black and white answer, which is why the risk/benefit question I posed the other poster is what the clinician applying it to has to evaluate. There isn’t someone with a PhD ina wet lab in the background. It’s not about some cancer signaling pathway, it’s really clinical practice. “A team of professionals” at vandy etc is not answer and you’d be hard pressed for them to go “yea tesosterone is great man!” ( knowing that It’s pretty bad for even bio men with “low T”) or “estrogen is great but it causes life threatening PEs”! Again, not in bad faith but I don’t find myself growing, gaining knowledge or even engaging in a healthy debate with you it’s usually some sort of loop depending on your mood or recent VICE media post, so I wont continue this. If you want to wave it as a W all yours
So you agree there isn't an inherent evil cabal but rather people who sincerely want to help children but you disagree with their logic and evidence on what they see as valid research. If we can agree on this baseline premise. Than yes, we can have a valid conversation that is not wrapped in the culture war nonsense.
Can you also explain how you came to the conclusion that there 99% chance that I'm speaking in bad faith?
This is a great point so let's address this. No I am not expert enough to make an evaluation myself. But let's be honest here, I don't think any of the people trying to block this stuff have near the expertise to advocate either. No one on the BBS likely does so we might as well not have any discussion over it right? Can you apply that standard to everyone here? And there is one more thing. The medical establishment - however flawed it maybe - has already made an evaluation and set a standard of care. No it's not perfect. No it's not without risks. But they have the best information possible and the most training to make this assessment of cost versus benefits - so it's completely fair for me to advocate a position based on that.
