if I want to talk to CA people I can just do that in Austin. Denver and Miami We see those plates , they haven’t changed them yet @ROXRAN Miami is better than LA Collins Blvd is the new Melrose breh rappers don’t get murdered in Miami like they do in LA @pgabriel
The tweets they may see aren't this -you have to literally do a search and if kids are searching this then they obviously have concerns You make it sound as if a kid will open up twitter and it instantly pops up- this makes no sense - no typical kid is searching this information so yes I would rather have blurred out evidence to those of us that would rather realize what is actually happening /quote] yes, more kids are playing Xbox enjoying summer vacation then searching what is inclusive in "PRIDE" events on twitter I am sure of that - lol I'm willing to bet kids that see tweets in general do not specifically search for what is inclusive of actually attending these events in turn which would be required to come across such tweets for many of us. We realize that, but we want to know what is inclusive of PRIDE events and I think this information is helpful to adults that actually you know search this on twitter You obviously don't have any kids lol
@FranchiseBlade - if exposing yourself to children is NOT so bad - please go ahead and do so out in public and see what happens to you maybe some random suburban in Houston
Well, I am glad that Western and Northern Europe have been sensible and took at step back when it comes to surgical procedures and puberty blockers for children. There isn't even close to sufficient data on long term happiness, gender dysphoria, transition etc. to know what the consequences of giving children puberty blockers and surgical intervention. Wisely, the medical community in Europe has changed their procedures until more information is known. It will not happen in the USA, because medicine is largely financially driven in the USA. Children are being put on puberty blockers after a single doctor visit in many cases and it is a very profitable endeavor. I really hope that a lot of people do not get hurt long term. Having said that - children should be free to dress how they want and how they like. Children should be able to express themselves as individuals. There is nothing wrong with marginalized groups, and that includes those that have gender dysphoria and non-binary people and the trans community promoting pride and inclusion - because they have been marginalized in society. In short - trans people and other marginalized group should be treated like HUMANS - and that is why a lot of those that are on the far right, that are pushing so hard against the LGBTQ+ community are ultimately going to fail. There is a difference between genuine concern and hatred - and some of the loudest voices against the LGBTQ+ community are pushing actual hatred. Those on the far left will ultimately fail as well and they will not be taken seriously - common sense ultimately wins out - but I don't think the long term consequences for them will be as severe as those that push raw hatred.
Yes. Puberty blockers are used for precocious puberty sufferers, which is about 1:10,000 children. They use puberty blockers because they know that it causes a lot of maturity and mental development issues if a child has precocious puberty. The other uses of puberty blockers are for cancer (primarily prostate and breast cancer). The FDA has never even approved the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria - it's an off-label usage. That doesn't mean that it is dangerous, as we have off label use for a number of things like weight loss medications and some anxiety medications. However, there are some severe common side effects like lack of genital development in those born with a penis, poor bone density and late on set of growth plates. The question is what is the long-term consequences and are they worth the risk. We know from a number of studies that about 75-90% of children in the USA that have some degree of gender dysphoria BEFORE puberty don't have it after puberty starts. The problem is that puberty for females start between 8-10 years old. However, we also know from the limited studies we have that those that have gender dysphoria AFTER puberty begin, report that they are more happy with puberty suppressors than those that were not offered such treatments. Now we don't know what the long term satisfaction will be at this time because we lack the data. The puberty blockers will not make someone look more like the other gender long term - that is a myth. What it DOES do is that it lets children delay having the changes in puberty that can be difficult emotionally. For example a female that identifies as a boy will not have to deal with her body developing breasts at 12-13 years old. The whole situation is a lot different than it is being portrayed in the USA and really shouldn't be the political football that it is.
All you are doing is fueling the hates. Do you think your "sincere concern" is helping anything besides people who hate LGBTQ people pointing at you? You don't have to type here to show concern. All it does is give those who hate LGBTQ people some ammo.
There is ZERO evidence or fact based studies to support the proposition that trans people have ANY higher rates of pedophilia. There is absolutely nothing at all - it is the same argument that was used against homosexuals - it was wrong when it was a popular trope decades ago and it is wrong now. Not only is it not scientifically accurate, it does a disservice because it leads to misconceptions that only make it easier for pedophiles to rape and molest children.
I will repeat again if we're talking about common sense then yes we should have regulations, medical ethics regarding hormone treatment and surgery but not blanket bans that don't consider things like precocious puberty. This thread is a perfect illlustration of alarmism and why common sense is hard to find when most of the "debate" is driven by doom scrolling and retweeting Twitter.
Huh? No, they potentially suffer long term health effects based on decisions made when they were a child and unable to consent?
I actually agree that many on the LGBTQ side go too far and personally I think public nudity in these parades shold be prohibited, but the examples cited here from just last weekends PRIDE parades aren't even Trans people. This is where the topic is completely conflated and shows that this is going after more than just the transgendered but at LGBT in general.
Agreed - I thought I pointed that out effectively, but I may have failed at it. The difference in how this issue is being handled in the USA and how it is being largely handled in Western and Northern Europe is immense. We are seeing the intersection of money in medicine and politics and it is very negative and unnecessarily divisive.
This reply encapsulates a lot of the unknowns in a polarizing debate over absolutes. Another usage of those chemicals had been chemical castration. Some might argue the administration and dosage is different, though I doubt doctors knew wtf they were doing with the chemical castration therapy back then either. It's also a weird dichotomy when I think about it more and more. Alan Turing drove himself to suicide when he was administered hormone therapy to quell his then-considered "deviant urges", but a reapplication of similar chemicals "with proper motivation" might lead to brighter outcomes? A lot of the psychological/behavioral research over the past 5 decades has been about our conscious will not being the prime driver of our motivations/actions but rather the "holistic" composition of our genetic, protein, hormonal, neurological and physiological interactions. You might not be a criminal out of agency or even environment (epigenetic?), but rather because you have a mental imbalance (lithium) or had a genetic deficiency that caused you become addicted to one thing more than others. So to rely on chemical therapy to stunt or "reverse" a process because the child asserts they identify a specific gender (whom supporters argue as consistent with the "holistic" blueprint model that removes choice) is a bit of an inward turn for me. One could argue that it's because society that's more unaccepting and rigid because we can't simply grasp a male looking 6'6 powerlifer identifying and wanting to be treated with a feminine identity. But if that's the core truth of it all, then how does hormones get that trans body builder further in touch with their identity? It seems more culturally reactionary than an independent affirmation of self. For once, I get to choose my identity and others have to affirm it! And now we push this fractured debate of unknowns upon children? A youth's mindset is mostly to fit into parental and peer aspirations. Cultural correctness then removes gender specific expectations though people like Dylan Mulroney want to fit masculine/feminine stereotypes like princesses or action heroes. That's fine in their Here and Now, but when they get an age where maybe they want to become full grown adults or even conceive children of their own, those options become yet again limited because of their situation. When they were children they got what they wanted (in theory), so maybe if they remain infantile or "innocent", the same will happen? I mentioned this before, but if doctors had full control over human growth, there'd be organic Kardashians popping left and right all while reaffirming that superficial glamor identity. It's a twisted and insidious trap. One that mints bulimics and suicide attempts from cis-girls. So I'm not sure where this political rush will end. I mean there are textbook cases where GAC has been successful which is enough to fight against blanket state bans, though the increasing numbers of cases is a bit disturbing if only because the same scientists and researchers didn't expect or anticipate them. It's become another post-Trust issue. One where skepticism against doctors, researchers, and psychologists is rightfully justified in light of European rollbacks and our own media's hesitance to give equal weight to it while presenting this debate. It just means we really don't know for sure and they know that they don't either.
No, there are a lot of people in the middle - and I am concerned about what the facts are and not so much what extremists on either side of the argument believe or choose to use as ammo. Those on the far left of this issue have decided that science doesn't matter and anyone pointing out facts are monsters that hate the trans community. Those on the far right are so ignorant, that they cannot even differentiate between transexuals and homosexuals and pedophiles. They lack the basic information to even have a valid opinion. There is a LARGE group of people in the middle that don't agree with either extreme.
Yes, history is full of examples of medication and treatment being largely adopted without knowing the long term effects on people. We tend to look back on these examples and say we are too enlightened to do that now - but we keep making these same mistakes. Especially when it comes to off label use. Yes - look at assisted suicide, you give the same treatment to someone that doesn't want to die and it is murder. As with case of mental illness, extreme societal prejudice and other influences - it is never an easy black and white treatment or definitive cause like lets say you cut your hand, get an infection and die from gangrene. The intersection of hard and soft sciences - and we also tend to really ebb and flow. It used to be all physical or genetic (phrenology) and then we went to the opposite, that humans were responsible for every single behavior, as if we are blank-slates with complete amnesia, every decision is made in a vacuum. Now we are trying to BALANCE the too - but it seems that for most people, that balance only matters to the extent that it supports the biased conclusion that they want. People fish for evidence, throwing out the evidence they do not want and relying on the evidence they do like to justify their actions. Smart people - well sociopaths with certain wirings can use their selective evidence and wedge issues to do what they want at a larger scale - this is what scares me about DeSantis. Some of it is good intentions and some of it is not - but we see a desire for control across the board. Bingo! Yes and I will point out that when a culture is completely scrubbed and started anew - it doesn't usually end well. We saw it in Germany, the former Soviet Union, North Korea, the genocide of African culture in the USA and many many groups across the world. Also the intersection between what one BELIEVES a gender role is and what true gender roles are, often are not congruent. Which is why I would argue that someone like Dylan Mulroney is actually a misogynist. Exactly, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Yes, the US medical industry is very money driven. There is never a time when someone says just because we can do something doesn't mean we shouldn't. We are being twisted at the laces and nothing changes ----- blah blah Originalist bullshit. At this point it is just a political football - with seedy grifters trying to get their egos stroked or to profit off of it. There are also a lot of crusaders that like feeling self important claiming that they are fighting for "the children" We have those on the right like DeSantis that is using the trans debate to essentially destroy 100 years of progress under the guise he is doing for the children - and we have those on the far left that are perfectly fine with begin hormone blocking therapy on children without any concern for the long term medical consequences. The argument in the USA is incredibly selfish all the way around in the USA.
Difference between being nude and exposing oneself to a child. I don't support nudity at all ages pride parades. Just saying it won't scar most people if a kid sees nudity.
You do realize that pride parades where people are nude reaches literally tens of kids, right? So it's a very low bar to surpass.
CBC changes LGBTQIA2S+ acronym to 2STNBGC In a story on demands in British Columbia to provide “gender-affirming care” such as puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to transgender kids, CBC News opted for the acronym 2STNBGC instead of LGBTQIA2S+. The article titled “Representative for children and youth calls for expanded services, protections for gender-diverse kids” was published by the public broadcaster on June 22. Citing BC’s Representative for Children and Youth Jennifer Charlesworth, 2STNBGC stands for “two-spirit, transgender, non-binary and other gender-diverse children and youth.” https://tnc.news/2023/06/27/cbc-lgbtq-acronym-2stnbgc/
