Another child sues for being sexually mutilated by the Left

[marvin martian]

Because immigrants and their children aren't typically down with bigoted white wing culture and politics.

Ah, the "white wing", a.k.a. people you voted for.

LOL

 

[Curried Goats]

One of those who understand science, yes.

Sure you do.....

 

[Curried Goats]

Ah, the "white wing", a.k.a. people you voted for.

LOL

View attachment 768207

I've never voted for that man. I live in South Florida you dipshit.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And people go without medical care in the US and die because they can't afford it. Canada's population is healthier than our own and they live longer. The results speak for themselves but you Snowflake Cosplayers rather retreat to your fantasy safe spaces when reality doesn't agree with you.

No one is denied treatment in the US my son has no job and no money and he sees a doctor and is treated all the time

 

[Curried Goats]

No one is denied treatment in the US my son has no job and no money and he sees a doctor and is treated all the time

Your personal ancedote isn't evidence of America's healthcare landscape.

 

[Hurricanelover]

You are a blithering idiot who has no idea what you’re talking about.

Exactly, these people don't know shit about the science and the suffering behind this and yet want to just ban it just because. This is the idiocy that makes up the right wing fundies in our society. They don't give a damn if these kids have to suffer as they simply don't care. They're of the same mindset as the taliban.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Sure you do.....

Your responses are getting Lamer and lamer. But in light of what I just mentioned, I suppose that is to be expected.

 

[Red Front]

Yep, it just feels like years.

Overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have increased since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 25.6 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—longer than the wait of 22.6 weeks reported in 2020. This year’s wait time is the longest wait time recorded in this survey’s history and is 175% longer than in 1993, when it was just 9.3 weeks.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/waiting-your-turn-2021.pdf

I've waited up to 9 weeks to see a specialist after being referred by my primary care physician, with my private insurance, to see a specialist. Right-wingers pretend every nation with socialized medicine or with a single-payer system isn't meeting people's medical needs and that's simply not true.

If anything a lot of the obstacles that socialized medicine has in the nations that have it is having to constantly fight against the right-wingers who are always trying to defund public medicine and turn it private. It's a constant struggle to adequately support and develop a public health system when a considerable number of government officials or members of parliament i.e. congress, are trying to obliterate it.

I believe in medical freedom. People should have the option, if they have the resources, to receive healthcare in a privately owned clinic or hospital, however, there should also be a public system (like the VA) or at least a single-payer government-run insurance plan for everyone, like Medicare or Medicaid.

We have plenty of technology today to take care of the logistics and delivery of care, so I don't buy the right-wing rhetoric that public health is by default ineffective. I lived in Costa Rica off and on, as an American ex-pat, for over fifteen years, between the age of 24 and 40 (I lived in a few other countries as well), and I received some very good healthcare under their government insurance. You right-wingers are telling me a third-world country like Costa Rica can provide adequate healthcare to its citizens, but the United States can't? Not buying it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Exactly, these people don't know shit about the science and the suffering behind this and yet want to just ban it just because. This is the idiocy that makes up the right wing fundies in our society. They don't give a damn if these kids have to suffer as they simply don't care. They're of the same mindset as the taliban.

The science is pretty simple. Children's brains are not nearly developed well enough to make life changing decision like having their genitals mutilated. Do you have any science that disputes at?

Due to current laws allowing such mutilation of young children who are not capable to consent, we will be seeing many more cases of detransitioning and the trauma that accompanies it.

But Democrats don't care, since they are counting on " minor attracted persons" as their next big voting block. Pedophiles used to come in all political stripes, Goldwater Republicans to Wilkie democrats. But now that the Democratic party has embraced them, they will flock to the party of perversion.

 

[Curried Goats]

Your responses are getting Lamer and lamer. But in light of what I just mentioned, I suppose that is to be expected.

 

[Curried Goats]

The science is pretty simple. Children's brains are not nearly developed well enough to make life changing decision like having their genitals mutilated. Do you have any science that disputes at?

Do you have any science that says adolescents and their parents are incapable of informed decisions, you intellectually vapid fuckwit?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Do you have any science that says adolescents and their parents are incapable of informed decisions,

Since I did not claim that adolescents and their parents are incapable of informed decisions, I have no need to.

I said:

The science is pretty simple. Children's brains are not nearly developed well enough to make life changing decision like having their genitals mutilated. Do you have any science that disputes at?

It was quoted by you in your post, so you could have just cut and pasted what I said and asked if I had any science to support it. Or can I give you credit for already knowing that there is plenty of science behind mhy claim?

you intellectually vapid fuckwit?

When an internet post makes you that angry, you should probably re-read it and take several deep breaths before you respond. Or maybe a couple of days off the board, as you did before.

If your claim is that a child is capable of making life changing decisions like having their genitals mutilated, so long as their parent is involved, you're going to look pretty silly. Asking a pre-puberty child: "do you consent to various procedures such as hormone therapy, genital reconstruction, breast reconstruction, facial plastic surgery, speech therapy, urologic and psychiatric services and primary care." and expecting an informed answer is ludicrous.

So, please . . . tell us that you think that such a child could give informed consent.

Should age of consent for sex laws, for gun purchases, for drivers licenses and purchase of liquor and cigarettes all have an exception if the parent signs off on those things for a child?

I guess the age of consent for sex is a bad example to use to convince Democrats. Many of the posters on here clearly have a strong interest in child transgenders based on images and video they post. I'm sure they'd love to convince some transgender stage mom - the woke version of a pagaent mom - that it would be a great experience for their 14 yo transgirl to experience sex with a man "as a woman."

What if a psychiatrist and a physician both signed forms stating that a twelve year old is physically and mentally capable of driving a car on public streets and owning and carrying a handgun and smoking cigarettes while she does, and then drinking responsibly after she parks her Dodge Charger. You're going to be fine with that?

Hey, I got a riddle for you CG:

What do standing in Jacksonville, Florida and Reading a list of nations by IQ have in common?


You have to go pretty far south to get to Jamaica, mahn!

 

[Curried Goats]

Since I did not claim that adolescents and their parents are incapable of informed decisions, I have no need to.

You mean you have no desire to be intellectually honest. I added the and their parents part because your premise is disingenuous. Children aren't making healthcare decisions on their own. They are making them with their parents and doctors.

It was quoted by you in your post, so you could have just cut and pasted what I said and asked if I had any science to support it. Or can I give you credit for already knowing that there is plenty of science behind mhy claim?

Your disingenous argument? I don't care about the science of children being capable of making life altering decisions on their own because no one but you is suggesting that they are or should be.

When an internet post makes you that angry, you should probably re-read it and take several deep breaths before you respond. Or maybe a couple of days off the board, as you did before.

I'm not at all angry that you're this much of a Dipshit.

If your claim is that a child is capable of making life changing decisions like having their genitals mutilated, so long as their parent is involved, you're going to look pretty silly.

Really? Children and their parents make decisions about life altering care all the time. Who else do you think should be making those decisions for them? When its cancer or other ailments like something that might necessitate the ampitation of a limb are you also advocating that this decision be taken from patients and their parents? Or just in this one instance?

Asking a pre-puberty child: "do you consent to various procedures such as hormone therapy, genital reconstruction, breast reconstruction, facial plastic surgery, speech therapy, urologic and psychiatric services and primary care." and expecting an informed answer is ludicrous.

Where are their parents in this process? Your continued attempts to dismiss them from the conversation are ludicrous.

So, please . . . tell us that you think that such a child could give informed consent.

I think patients and their parents can give that consent. See if you can address my argument rather than beating up these silly cosplay arguments.

Should age of consent for sex laws, for gun purchases, for drivers licenses and purchase of liquor and cigarettes all have an exception if the parent signs off on those things for a child?

None of those things are healthcare. So far you've tried to compare healthcare to tattoos, guns, drivers licenses, liquor, cigarettes and sex and while each of those are obviously ridiculous comparisons the discussion around them and what sort of parental involvement is acceptable is nuanced so let's get into it.

First let's tackle guns and drivers licenses. As I said before guns and drivers licenses are not equivalent to healthcare. For one your healthcare decisions don't have the ability to harm others as guns and cars do. For that reason the government and society has the duty of weighing an individuals desire to carry a gun or drive a car in public with the safety of the public at large. There's a side note here that I don't think anyone should be allowed to carry a gun in public but that's a different argument for a different time. In private however and in safe and supervised environments I don't have an issue with parents allowing their children to handle firearms or drive cars because in those instances the public isn't in any danger. I've taken my daughter and nephew and cousins to the gun range when they were teenagers (my nephew's still a teenager) and my brothers and I have taught our children and younger cousins how to drive manual cars when they were teenagers on our land. Are you arguing this should be prohibited?

Liquor and cigarettes are inherently harmful. Now you might argue so is some trans care and the big difference there is that care is prescribed by doctors for the purpose of treating more harmful maladies. That said if you give your teenager a beer or a cigarette they aren't going die, they'll probably be okay and no one from the government is going to come knocking your door down over it nor should they. If you're making cigarette and beer runs for your teenagers however I'd argue that reaches the level of child endangerment and I'd use professional medical opinions and research on the long term affects of alcohol and nicotine on developing brains and lungs to prove it. What would the counter argument be? There are no medical opinions stating alcohol and nicotine are good for children and teenagers. Which brings us back to the inherent harm in some forms of healthcare, including but not limited to trans care. Treating cancer in children is also in many ways inherently harmful but cancer is deadly so we allow patients and their parents, with the advice of their chosen healthcare providers, to dictate a path of treatment. Whether you like it or not puberty blockers, hormones, top surgergy, these are considered treatments by our major professional healthcare institutions. All of these ridiculous arguments about consent have nothing to actually do with consent. We all understand the brains of children and teenagers are still developing and so they require parental guidance, especially in important or potentially dangerous situations. For instance we allow some younger teenagers to drive on the road when a parent is seated next to them. Your problem is that you don't think these procedures should be considered treatment and you know what, that's fair. Argue that. These arguments about consent exist only so you can suggest teenagers and their parents are incapable of rational decision making in this one instance.

I guess the age of consent for sex is a bad example to use to convince Democrats. Many of the posters on here clearly have a strong interest in child transgenders based on images and video they post.

This is nothing more than a disgusting insinuation. I posted a young girl's heart felt testimony about her experiences with gender confusion, her encounters with bullies, her feelings of depression and the joy and relief she felt in living her gender identity in an accepting community. The stories and experiences of trans teenagers and children are important to the discussion and yet all you see is sex where none actually exists. What is wrong with you that that is where your mind goes?

I'm sure they'd love to convince some transgender stage mom - the woke version of a pagaent mom - that it would be a great experience for their 14 yo transgirl to experience sex with a man "as a woman."

If we're done with your cosplay arguments I'd like to point out factually that it was Republican representatives in West Virginia that blocked a bill banning child marriages.

What if a psychiatrist and a physician both signed forms stating that a twelve year old is physically and mentally capable of driving a car on public streets and owning and carrying a handgun and smoking cigarettes while she does, and then drinking responsibly after she parks her Dodge Charger. You're going to be fine with that?

Can you find such doctors? I'm fine with you trying and failing to.

Hey, I got a riddle for you CG:

What do standing in Jacksonville, Florida and Reading a list of nations by IQ have in common?


You have to go pretty far south to get to Jamaica, mahn!

Your arguments don't exactly raise the expectations of your IQ score.

 

[Seymour Flops]

You mean you have no desire to be intellectually honest. I added the and their parents part because your premise is disingenuous. Children aren't making healthcare decisions on their own. They are making them with their parents and doctors.

Your disingenous argument? I don't care about the science of children being capable of making life altering decisions on their own because no one but you is suggesting that they are or should be.

So if a parent and doctor agree that a boy needs hormones in order to avoid developing male secondary sex characteristics, the child has no input? Suppose he says, “but, I don’t want to be a girl!” If his counselors have referred him to a psychologist because he plays dolls with the girls, and the psychologist has concluded that he is transgender and in denial, and his pediatrician prescribes puberty blocking hormones, can the child veto all those adults?

Because if the child can say “yes” or “no” to transgender treatment, how are they not making the decision?

I'm not at all angry that you're this much of a Dipshit.

You seem by your posts to be very angry at life. That’s all I can tell you.

Really? Children and their parents make decisions about life altering care all the time. Who else do you think should be making those decisions for them? When its cancer or other ailments like something that might necessitate the ampitation of a limb are you also advocating that this decision be taken from patients and their parents? Or just in this one instance?

I advocate that laws be passed preventing adults from cutting off healthy parts of a healthy child’s body, and giving them hormones to interfere with the normal process of puberty, absent a legitimate health reason for doing so if ever there is one.

Your own great state of Florida has passed such laws, and I hope Texas will catch up soon. What are you doing about that? It will decrease the number of young boys taking female hormones near you. How concerned are you about that?

Where are their parents in this process? Your continued attempts to dismiss them from the conversation are ludicrous.

I think patients and their parents can give that consent. See if you can address my argument rather than beating up these silly cosplay arguments.

Obviously, parents should be the deciders for any health treatment. For purely cosmetic procedures like giving hormones and cutting off body parts in a vain attempt to make a child resemble the opposite sex, the state has a role in protecting children from parents crazy enough to want such a thing?

None of those things are healthcare. So far you've tried to compare healthcare to tattoos, guns, drivers licenses, liquor, cigarettes and sex and while each of those are obviously ridiculous comparisons the discussion around them and what sort of parental involvement is acceptable is nuanced so let's get into it.

Transgender treatment isn’t healthcare either. It has great health risks as all injections and surgeries do, but none of the health benefits.

First let's tackle guns and drivers licenses. As I said before guns and drivers licenses are not equivalent to healthcare.

Neither is transgender treatment.

For one your healthcare decisions don't have the ability to harm others as guns and cars do. For that reason the government and society has the duty of weighing an individuals desire to carry a gun or drive a car in public with the safety of the public at large.

They can also regulate it purely for the safety of the individual.

There's a side note here that I don't think anyone should be allowed to carry a gun in public but that's a different argument for a different time. In private however and in safe and supervised environments I don't have an issue with parents allowing their children to handle firearms or drive cars because in those instances the public isn't in any danger. I've taken my daughter and nephew and cousins to the gun range when they were teenagers (my nephew's still a teenager) and my brothers and I have taught our children and younger cousins how to drive manual cars when they were teenagers on our land. Are you arguing this should be prohibited?

No, I’m not advocating that this be prohibited. I was trying to find out if your “kids can do it if their parents say so,” applies to everything, or just to your desired outcome of more boys taking female hormones.

Liquor and cigarettes are inherently harmful. Now you might argue so is some trans care

It would be an obvious argument.

and the big difference there is that care is prescribed by doctors for the purpose of treating more harmful maladies.

So, you admit that transgender specialists prescribe harmful treatment? That’s a bit of a breakthrough for you!

That there is a greater risk of not treating a transgender person than the many risks of hormone treatment and surgery is not backed up by any science. Therefore, any doctor deliberately prescribing harmful treatment with no scientific basis for them is by definition guilty of medical malpractice.

You seem to think that a medical degree confers some kind of magical power and take away all possibility of malfeasance. Your constant argument from authority makes me believe that either you do not understand why that is a fallacy or more likely that you do, but you just want to fill your posts with word salad.

That said if you give your teenager a beer or a cigarette they aren't going die, they'll probably be okay and no one from the government is going to come knocking your door down over it nor should they. If you're making cigarette and beer runs for your teenagers however I'd argue that reaches the level of child endangerment and I'd use professional medical opinions and research on the long term affects of alcohol and nicotine on developing brains and lungs to prove it. What would the counter argument be? There are no medical opinions stating alcohol and nicotine are good for children and teenagers.

A medical opinion stating that cutting the healthy breasts off of a healthy thirteen year old girl so she “looks more like” a boy is good for her is patently absurd, no matter how many letters the person expressing that opinion has after their name.

I said this in another post, and you should understand it. Democrats often sound a little off base. Or a lot. But when you go on and on about the benefits of making boy children look like girl children, and vice-versa, through dangerous surgeries that are often regretted, you sound bat. Shit. Crazy.

Which brings us back to the inherent harm in some forms of healthcare, including but not limited to trans care. Treating cancer in children is also in many ways inherently harmful but cancer is deadly so we allow patients and their parents, with the advice of their chosen healthcare providers, to dictate a path of treatment. Whether you like it or not puberty blockers, hormones, top surgergy, these are considered treatments by our major professional healthcare institutions. All of these ridiculous arguments about consent have nothing to actually do with consent. We all understand the brains of children and teenagers are still developing and so they require parental guidance, especially in important or potentially dangerous situations. For instance we allow some younger teenagers to drive on the road when a parent is seated next to them. Your problem is that you don't think these procedures should be considered treatment and you know what, that's fair. Argue that. These arguments about consent exist only so you can suggest teenagers and their parents are incapable of rational decision making in this one instance.

I know you don’t answer questions, but here is one: Since you are now equating cutting off healthy breasts for cosmetic reasons and cutting off cancer-ridden breasts to save a child’s life, does that mean that both could be done without the child’s consent?

Should doctors and parents tell their pre-teen that they have been diagnosed as transgender by a doctor for pete’s sake and they must have this “life-saving” surgery, whether they want it or not.

Another question, since you are so concerned that parents’ decisions be respected - ironic for a Democrat - if a child is diagnosed with cancer, and the parent decided that prayer is all that is needed, are you fine with that?

This is nothing more than a disgusting insinuation. I posted a young girl's heart felt testimony about her experiences with gender confusion, her encounters with bullies, her feelings of depression and the joy and relief she felt in living her gender identity in an accepting community. The stories and experiences of trans teenagers and children are important to the discussion and yet all you see is sex where none actually exists. What is wrong with you that that is where your mind goes?

You’ve said that many times. Have you convinced yourself yet?

If we're done with your cosplay arguments I'd like to point out factually that it was Republican representatives in West Virginia that blocked a bill banning child marriages.

Can you find such doctors? I'm fine with you trying and failing to.

It was a hypothetical. I know they confuse you. But, I’m sure there are doctors who would make that very recommendation if they were paid enough.

Your arguments don't exactly raise the expectations of your IQ score.

Serious question: are your American-born kids smarter than you? Science says that they most likely are, especially if their mother is American-born. That’s why you failed in your hope that I would be afraid of birthright citizenship. Legal immigrants and their first gen children are often the best Americans.

Even those from low-IQ countries are usually pretty hard-working and grateful for the chance to work hard. Of course, we have plenty of low-IQ natural born citizens, who choose not to work, so immigrants are needed for farm work, and other menial tasks. We also have multi-generational Americans who have the gift of our higher IQ’s but choose not to work, opting instead for welfare, including the welfare of student loan.

I call them “the economically valueless.” Right now, Americans and immigrants willing to work are able to produce enough to support such people who add nothing to the economy. At some point, though, we will tire of it and do something to either get them to work, or stop giving them the product of our labor, when they themselves contribute no such labor.

 

[Red Front]

Since I did not claim that adolescents and their parents are incapable of informed decisions, I have no need to.

I said:


It was quoted by you in your post, so you could have just cut and pasted what I said and asked if I had any science to support it. Or can I give you credit for already knowing that there is plenty of science behind mhy claim?



When an internet post makes you that angry, you should probably re-read it and take several deep breaths before you respond. Or maybe a couple of days off the board, as you did before.

If your claim is that a child is capable of making life changing decisions like having their genitals mutilated, so long as their parent is involved, you're going to look pretty silly. Asking a pre-puberty child: "do you consent to various procedures such as hormone therapy, genital reconstruction, breast reconstruction, facial plastic surgery, speech therapy, urologic and psychiatric services and primary care." and expecting an informed answer is ludicrous.

So, please . . . tell us that you think that such a child could give informed consent.

Should age of consent for sex laws, for gun purchases, for drivers licenses and purchase of liquor and cigarettes all have an exception if the parent signs off on those things for a child?

I guess the age of consent for sex is a bad example to use to convince Democrats. Many of the posters on here clearly have a strong interest in child transgenders based on images and video they post. I'm sure they'd love to convince some transgender stage mom - the woke version of a pagaent mom - that it would be a great experience for their 14 yo transgirl to experience sex with a man "as a woman."

What if a psychiatrist and a physician both signed forms stating that a twelve year old is physically and mentally capable of driving a car on public streets and owning and carrying a handgun and smoking cigarettes while she does, and then drinking responsibly after she parks her Dodge Charger. You're going to be fine with that?

Hey, I got a riddle for you CG:

What do standing in Jacksonville, Florida and Reading a list of nations by IQ have in common?


You have to go pretty far south to get to Jamaica, mahn!

Why even bother going back and forth, ad infinitum with a brain-dead "woke" liberal on this puberty blocker issue? Waste of time. Such people are "gone". Out of their minds.

 

[Curried Goats]

So if a parent and doctor agree that a boy needs hormones in order to avoid developing male secondary sex characteristics, the child has no input? Suppose he says, “but, I don’t want to be a girl!” If his counselors have referred him to a psychologist because he plays dolls with the girls, and the psychologist has concluded that he is transgender and in denial, and his pediatrician prescribes puberty blocking hormones, can the child veto all those adults?

This is a false premise. There are no doctors forcing children into trans care. There may be and probably are cases of doctors who misled or misinformed their patients with poor diagnosis and committed malpractice by administering care based on those poor diagnoses but you can't and you won't find any reputable stories of a teenager being forced into gender affirming care against their will. The methodology of gender affirming care requires cooperative patients with a persistent desire to be their prefered gender. An unwilling transitioner doesn't fit that description. It's important here to note that transgenderism exist on a spectrum with patients opting for varying levels of transitioning. Some only ask to be called by their preferred pronouns, some choose only to change their outward appearence, some opt for puberty blockers and hormones and nothing more. The standard for gender affirming care is to support patients at whatever level of transitioning they are comfortable with.

Because if the child can say “yes” or “no” to transgender treatment, how are they not making the decision?

Minors always have the option of trying to opt out of care and depending on the context and severity of the ailment parents doctors or both might try to over rule their wishes and in the most extreme cases they end up in court.

To give more context if your child scrapes or sprains their ankle and you take them to the emergency room and they refuse care the doctors there probably won't care. If your child's ankle is sprained bad enough and you insist on care they might hold them down and wrap their ankle up depending on what kind of mood they're in. If your child has cancer and the treatment for it has a 90% success rate and you both refuse treatment for religious reasons or whatever the doctors might try to get the court to grant them temporary conservatorship over your child to force them into treatment. This has happened in different cases in different courts to varying success. A severe disease with an invasive treatment and long survival odds? They might not fight you on that one.

The point is children are minors and society has a duty to see to their best interests even occasionally against the best wishes of themselves and their parents but its a nuanced discussion that courts and society have to grapple with. It however is not the case with gender affirming care which no doctors have sought court orders to force on to their patients. In reality its usually applied in cases of religious parents and children denying science and life saving care out of ignorance.

I advocate that laws be passed preventing adults from cutting off healthy parts of a healthy child’s body, and giving them hormones to interfere with the normal process of puberty, absent a legitimate health reason for doing so if ever there is one.

Your own great state of Florida has passed such laws, and I hope Texas will catch up soon. What are you doing about that? It will decrease the number of young boys taking female hormones near you. How concerned are you about that?

I am concerned about the children and parents who will now have to travel out of state to seek care. But the only influence people like you have is through the political and legal means of local prohibition. You don't have the political numbers for a nationwide ban, you can't scare off doctors and medical facilities in welcoming states who have made it their mission to provide gender affirming care, and there is no professional institution who is going to parrot the bigotry you want them to. Not even Sweden and Finland. If the Swedish model were here and we were only treating the most severe cases of GD in children that has persisted from childhood through to puberty and the rest on a case by case basis, coupled with social support for patients and families, you'd still be carrying on like a bigot except now you'd also be crying about socialism.

Transgender treatment isn’t healthcare either. It has great health risks as all injections and surgeries do, but none of the health benefits.

Except it is, by nearly every major American medical governing body. You may not like that, but be an adult, put the cosplay aside and acknowledge facts.

So, you admit that transgender specialists prescribe harmful treatment? That’s a bit of a breakthrough for you!

Chemo and radiation are also harmful. As is cutting away gangrenous tissue or limbs and sometimes doctors find these precedures medically beneficial in other ways.

That there is a greater risk of not treating a transgender person than the many risks of hormone treatment and surgery is not backed up by any science. Therefore, any doctor deliberately prescribing harmful treatment with no scientific basis for them is by definition guilty of medical malpractice.

No science that you accept. That all of America's major medical boards find it appropriate care carries more weight than your opinion.

You seem to think that a medical degree confers some kind of magical power and take away all possibility of malfeasance. Your constant argument from authority makes me believe that either you do not understand why that is a fallacy or more likely that you do, but you just want to fill your posts with word salad.

It's only a fallacy to say because someone is a doctor their authority shouldn't be questioned. I have never said that. I have maintained that their opinions carry more weight with me than yours does but I have no problem with you questioning your doctors recommendations. Get a second opinion, get a third and then choose the best care that works for you. You're the one who's argument rests on fallacies. You imply nefarious financial goals but you provide no evidence. You begin and end your arguments on smears and character assaults.

A medical opinion stating that cutting the healthy breasts off of a healthy thirteen year old girl so she “looks more like” a boy is good for her is patently absurd, no matter how many letters the person expressing that opinion has after their name.

^ Case in point.

It was a hypothetical. I know they confuse you. But, I’m sure there are doctors who would make that very recommendation if they were paid enough.

^ And again.

Serious question: are your American-born kids smarter than you? Science says that they most likely are, especially if their mother is American-born. That’s why you failed in your hope that I would be afraid of birthright citizenship. Legal immigrants and their first gen children are often the best Americans.

You should check again.

Multiracial adolescents show no test score gap with whites

Also my daughter is definitely smarter than I am, her mother is a Jamaican of African descent.

 

[Seymour Flops]

This is a false premise. There are no doctors forcing children into trans care. There may be and probably are cases of doctors who misled or misinformed their patients with poor diagnosis and committed mal practice by administering care based on those poor diagnoses but you can't and you won't find any reputable stories of a teenager being forced into gender affirming care against their will. The methodology of gender affirming care requires cooperative patients with a persistent desire to be their prefered gender. An unwilling transitioner doesn't fit that description.

Yes, all that is true. I asked a hypothetical to try and get you to say whether you think children are decision makers in transgender treatment. I think that you are trying hard not to say either way.

It's important here to note that transgenderism exist on a spectrum with patients opting for varying levels of transitioning. Some only ask to be called by their preferred pronouns, some choose only to change their outward appearence, some opt for puberty blockers and hormones and nothing more. The standard for gender affirming care is to support patients at whatever level of transitioning they are comfortable with.

Does that require a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria, or just an estimate of the patient’s comfort level?

Minors always have the option of trying to opt out of care and depending on the context and severity of the ailment parents doctors or both might try to over rule their wishes and in the most extreme cases they end up in court.

Right, to be judged by a judge, not a doctor. Your idea that doctors are allowed to do as they please because they are doctors is a fallacy. The state has always regulated medical treatment, since the creation of the state.

To give more context if your child scrapes or sprains their ankle and you take them to the emergency room and they refuse care the doctors there probably won't care. If your child's ankle is sprained bad enough and you insist on care they might hold them down and wrap their ankle up depending on what kind of mood they're in.

Yes, and I see no reason that this could not happen to a purportedly transgender child, if a doctor were in the mood for it. Those transgender specialists have to be very adept at handling transkids’ stage parents. They and the mental health providers a who feed them kids are the salesmen of the industry.

If your child has cancer and the treatment for it has a 90% success rate and you both refuse treatment for religious reasons or whatever the doctors might try to get the court to grant them temporary conservatorship over your child to force them into treatment. This has happened in different cases in different courts to varying success. A severe disease with an invasive treatment and long survival odds? They might not fight you on that one.

Yes, I know that happens. The question was whether you are happy that it does. I’ll take it for a yes. Another example that parents, children, and doctors do not have the final say on every medical decision. Even in cases in which the state never gets involved, they don’t get involved because they see no issue in the overwhelming majority of health decisions.

The point is children are minors and society has a duty to see to their best interests even occasionally against the best wishes of themselves and their parents but its a nuanced discussion that courts and society have to grapple with. It however is not the case with gender affirming care which no doctors have sought court orders to force on to their patients. In reality its usually applied in cases of religious parents and children denying science and life saving care out of ignorance.

Now in Florida, the state has decided that children will not be subjected to this kind of medicalization, even if they “choose” it.

I am concerned about the children and parents who will now have to travel out of state to seek care.

No, they won’t “have to.” They are free to realize that if the state bans a purported health treatment, there is a reason for it, and reconsider.

But the only influence people like you have is through the political and legal means of local prohibition.

Yes, what else?

You don't have the political numbers for a nationwide ban, you can't scare off doctors and medical facilities in welcoming states who have made it their mission to provide gender affirming care,

Of course, with so much money at state, they won’t quit.

and there is no professional institution who is going to parrot the bigotry you want them to. Not even Sweden and Finland. If the Swedish model were here and we were only treating the most severe cases of GD in children that has persisted from childhood through to puberty and the rest on a case by case basis, coupled with social support for patients and families, you'd still be carrying on like a bigot except now you'd also be crying about socialism.

I’d be very happy if our government restricted transgender care for children to only those with severe Gender Dyphoria instead of our current free-for-all.

Except it is, by nearly every major American medical governing body. You may not like that, but be an adult, put the cosplay aside and acknowledge facts.

The Florida Board of Medicine has twelve doctors, all of whom know far more than you about the harm and benefits of transgenderization of minors.

Chemo and radiation are also harmful. As is cutting away gangrenous tissue or limbs and sometimes doctors find these precedures medically beneficial in other ways.

Healthy breasts on a thirteen year old girl with gender confusion are in no way comparable to gangrenous limbs.

No science that you accept. That all of America's major medical boards find it appropriate care carries more weight than your opinion.

Not Florida’s.

It's only a fallacy to say because someone is doctor their authority shouldn't be questioned. I have never said that. I have maintained that their opinions carry more weight with me than yours does but I hove no problem with you questioning your doctors recommendations. Get a second opinion, get a third and then choose the best care that works for you. You're the one who's argument rests on fallacies. You imply nefarious financial goals but you provide no evidence.

You need evidence that money sometimes motivates people to act in ways that are unethical?

You begin and end your arguments on smears and character assaults.

Statistics about IQ is not a smear or character “assault.” I’m much more amused by the thinness of your skin than its color.

Multiracial adolescents show no test score gap with whites

I’ll read that later, to see if it’s any more scientific than most of what you post. But I don’t disagree with that sentence, because the skin color-IQ correlation is just that a correlation, not a causation.

 

[Curried Goats]

Yes, all that is true. I asked a hypothetical to try and get you to say whether you think children are decision makers in transgender treatment. I think that you are trying hard not to say either way.

Your hypothetical made no sense. Forcing gender affirming care on someone opposed to it is counter to the goal of affirmation. Its right there in the name. Do less cosplay and do more to address real world problems and you'll look less ridiculous.

Does that require a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria, or just an estimate of the patient’s comfort level?

Let's take a moment to clear up terms and descriptions because even I've probably been fairly loose with my terminology.

People who feel an incongruence between their assigned sex at birth and their gender identity are transgendered. They exist on a spectrum from people who adopt different pronouns, dress in a masculine, feminine or androgynous manner in opposition to their assigned sex at birth, and those who opt for varying degrees of medical transitioning.

Not all trans people suffer from gender dysphoria. GD refers to the anxiety and mental suffering that can occur due to this incongruity however not all trans people suffer from GD. For some trans this incongruity is just an issue they have to manage and deal with but it does not cause them any distress. (Desire to change one's physical appearence is not an inherent sign of distress)

Right, to be judged by a judge, not a doctor. Your idea that doctors are allowed to do as they please because they are doctors is a fallacy. The state has always regulated medical treatment, since the creation of the state.

Your argument that I think doctors should do as the please is the fallacy but you also misunderstand the role of the court in these cases. Doctors prescribe treatment plans. If the patient refuses and the malady is severe enough and the treatment highly successful they might sue to be granted temporary conservatorship over the patient to force them to undergo that treatment. What the court is deciding on is who has the authority to decide on treatment options for that person, their doctor or themselves. If you look at it from another standpoint these judges also decide the level of a patients autonomy.

Yes, and I see no reason that this could not happen to a purportedly transgender child, if a doctor were in the mood for it. Those transgender specialists have to be very adept at handling transkids’ stage parents. They and the mental health providers a who feed them kids are the salesmen of the industry.

They're not stage parents, this isn't theater, they're just parents.

Yes, I know that happens. The question was whether you are happy that it does. I’ll take it for a yes.

Happy isn't the word I'd use. It's unfortunate when children are groomed into cosplay beliefs that encourage them to neglect their biological self in order preserve the tenants of an imaginary being. It's unforunate that the people who groom them into these beliefs are often their own parents, its unfortunate their parents are often victims of this same grooming and it's unfortunate when the State has to step in and look out for the health of these children and protect them from their groomer communities.

Now in Florida, the state has decided that children will not be subjected to this kind of medicalization, even if they “choose” it.

You mean even if they, their parents and their doctors choose it. Your need to constantly minimize the involvment of their parents and physicians seems almost pathological now.

No, they won’t “have to.” They are free to realize that if the state bans a purported health treatment, there is a reason for it, and reconsider.

I agree. Let's consider the reasons and processes they used to come to this decision.

Florida medical board votes to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors

The board held its first meeting on the issue in August, and on Friday it officially voted to draft a ban on certain gender-affirming therapies for minors. The meeting began with expert testimony in favor of and against such care.

Dr. Michael Laidlaw, an endocrinologist in Rockland, California, cited often-criticized research that found 50% to 90% of children whose gender identity isn’t consistent with their assigned sex at birth grow out of the condition by adulthood.

However, Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at Yale School of Medicine who treats transgender people between the ages of 10 and 25, told the board that the research Laidlaw cited and the June report issued by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration are methodologically flawed.

“Neither of the authors of the state’s review is a subject matter expert,” McNamara said. “One individual is a dentist. The other is a post-doctoral fellow in biostatistics. At a bare minimum, the systematic review should be conducted by those who are qualified to assess the literature. I wouldn’t trust a dermatologist review of the literature on a neurosurgical procedure, for instance.”

We'll talk a little more about that often cited figure of 80% of children growing out of GD in a moment because despite us talking about it previously in other threads even I wasn't fully aware of how much it has been misrepresented on the Right. But first a little more on how this decision went down.

The first nine attendees who spoke were in favor of restricting gender-affirming care for minors. Eight of them said they have detransitioned, or come to identify with their assigned sex at birth after having previously identified as trans. Only one of the eight had received gender-affirming medical care as a minor.

Jude Speegle, the only transgender person to testify at Friday’s meeting, read the names of 17 trans teens who died by suicide “over living in a world that refused to acknowledge or accept them.”

With about 45 minutes left in the public comment period, board member Dr. Zachariah P. Zachariah said only one more person would be allowed to testify. The crowd protested, and he offered to provide an email where they could share their testimonies.

At one point, an audience member yelled that trans youths would suffer if the board voted to bar care: “The blood is on your hands!” To which Zachariah responded, “That’s OK.”

Emile Fox, a trans nonbinary person from Orlando who uses “they” and “he” pronouns, said they signed up to testify and weren’t able to, which frustrated them after the first eight people who testified were all in favor of restricting care, but none of them were from Florida.

Seems like a rather political move by this politically appointed Board but I know you feel differently so lets discuss that study you all keep hyping on that shows 80% of children grow out of their gender dysphoria by adulthood.

Florida Leaders Misrepresented Research Before Ban on Gender-Affirming Care

“The 80% statistic, used by the Florida Department of Health and the state’s leadership, is categorically false,” Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the Yale School of Medicine, told PolitiFact. “After a close read of the scholarship cited by the state, the state’s conclusion simply cannot be drawn in good faith.”

The 80% figure in the review did not reference children’s gender identities; it centered on the persistence and desistence of gender dysphoria in adulthood. Steensma later wrote that “using the term desistence in this way does not imply anything about the identity of the desisters.”

This study has been touted as evidence that 80% of children grow out of being trans and that is not at all what the study actually says. 80% grow out of the distress they feel over their identities not their trans identities themselves.

Statistics about IQ is not a smear or character “assault.” I’m much more amused by the thinness of your skin than its color.

I was referring to your character attacks on healthcare providers not myself and I don't actually care if you do engage in them, I'm just pointing out that's all your arguments rest on.

I’ll read that later, to see if it’s any more scientific than most of what you post. But I don’t disagree with that sentence, because the skin color-IQ correlation is just that a correlation, not a causation.

Sure you will.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Let's take a moment to clear up terms and descriptions because even I've probably been fairly loose with my terminology.

Fair.

People who feel an incongruence between their assigned sex at birth and their gender identity are transgendered. They exist on a spectrum from people who adopt different pronouns, dress in a masculine, feminine or androgynous manner in opposition to their assigned sex at birth, and those who opt for varying degrees of medical transitioning.

I’m with you. No disagreement at all.

Not all trans people suffer from gender dysphoria. GD refers to the anxiety and mental suffering that can occur due to this incongruity however not all trans people suffer from GD. For some trans this incongruity is just an issue they have to manage and deal with but it does not cause them any distress. (Desire to change one's physical appearence is not an inherent sign of distress)

Correct. I had thought you did not get that.

Your argument that I think doctors should do as the please is the fallacy but you also misunderstand the role of the court in these cases. Doctors prescribe treatment plans. If the patient refuses and the malady is severe enough and the treatment highly successful they might sue to be granted temporary conservatorship over the patient to force them to undergo that treatment. What the court is deciding on is who has the authority to decide on treatment options for that person, their doctor or themselves. If you look at it from another standpoint these judges also decide the level of a patients autonomy.

Correct.

They're not stage parents, this isn't theater, they're just parents.

Some of them are publicity hounds. All of them are purposefully or inadvertently enabling their children’s attention-seeking behavior, which has been a personality trait of every single child with a mental disorder that I’ve ever worked with.

No parent who has normal intelligence thinks that their fourteen year old son can insist on using the girl’s bathroom, showering with girls, and playing on girls sports teams and no one will object. They know that this will bring attention and they choose to have their kid do it. Stage mom may not be a precise description, but I believe I said that they are the woke version of stage moms.

Happy isn't the word I'd use. It's unfortunate when children are groomed into cosplay beliefs that encourage them to neglect their biological self in order preserve the tenants of an imaginary being.

That’s where you go off track. What or who is the imaginary being you refer to? Telling a child that they are a boy and will grow up to be a man, in spite of the normal confusion they may feel before, during and after puberty is not grooming them. Not unless you believe that Mr. Rogers was a groomer.

Not mutilating and poisoning their healthy body is not neglecting their biological self. It is preserving it. A child can socially transition and wait on more permanent changes until they have the maturity to make the decision. That’s what I mean by your not knowing how crazy you sound. Just FYI, every time you write “cosplay” in this context, my estimate of your likely IQ goes down a point.

It's unforunate that the people who groom them into these beliefs are often their own parents, its unfortunate their parents are often victims of this same grooming and it's unfortunate when the State has to step in and look out for the health of these children and protect them from their groomer communities.

Examples of the state stepping in to over-ride parental decisions about transgender treatment that you support?

You mean even if they, their parents and their doctors choose it. Your need to constantly minimize the involvment of their parents and physicians seems almost pathological now.

Not every choice parents and medical providers make is by definition appropriate. Some parents would choose genital mutilation for their daughters. Some parents would give their daughters over in marriage to an older man who is a religious leader. The daughters might even agree, having been groomed to believe it is their duty. The state would rightly step in.

I agree. Let's consider the reasons and processes they used to come to this decision.

Florida medical board votes to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors

The board held its first meeting on the issue in August, and on Friday it officially voted to draft a ban on certain gender-affirming therapies for minors. The meeting began with expert testimony in favor of and against such care.

Dr. Michael Laidlaw, an endocrinologist in Rockland, California, cited often-criticized research that found 50% to 90% of children whose gender identity isn’t consistent with their assigned sex at birth grow out of the condition by adulthood.

Of course such a study would be “often-criticized.” Doesn’t mean it is true or false.

However, Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at Yale School of Medicine who treats transgender people between the ages of 10 and 25, told the board that the research Laidlaw cited and the June report issued by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration are methodologically flawed.

“Neither of the authors of the state’s review is a subject matter expert,” McNamara said. “One individual is a dentist. The other is a post-doctoral fellow in biostatistics. At a bare minimum, the systematic review should be conducted by those who are qualified to assess the literature. I wouldn’t trust a dermatologist review of the literature on a neurosurgical procedure, for instance.”

Do you understand that you are using the fallacy of argument from authority?

We'll talk a little more about that often cited figure of 80% of children growing out of GD in a moment because despite us talking about it previously in other threads even I wasn't fully aware of how much it has been misrepresented on the Right. But first a little more on how this decision went down.

The first nine attendees who spoke were in favor of restricting gender-affirming care for minors. Eight of them said they have detransitioned, or come to identify with their assigned sex at birth after having previously identified as trans. Only one of the eight had received gender-affirming medical care as a minor.

I’ve never cited that figure, as far as I know. It sounds very high to me. So that is a valid argument you have for whoever is citing it. I’ve seen anecdotal examples of regrets over having transgender treatment, but I don’t remember such statistics. If you have examples of me citing it, let me know and I’ll retract it.

Here’s the thing that I don’t think you get, and why we are talking past each other: Any research has to be analyzed. I have a masters in Ed Psych, so I have been trained in how to analyze research, not just read the abstract and assume it is the Gospel. I don’t think you even read the abstracts. You often link an article in the popular press (meaning non-academic) that has links to abstracts and you assume it must be true, or that the fact that it was written settles the science.

The research you’ve cited has been very problematic as far as methodology. You could even say that it is “often-criticized” since I do often criticize it. See how that works?

Some of them have reasonable methodology for a pilot study which would be a dry run for a larger and more rigorous study. But once the writers and editors of the popular press sees something that shows any support at all for the transgenderization of children, they run with it and the less informed swallow it whole.

Jude Speegle, the only transgender person to testify at Friday’s meeting, read the names of 17 trans teens who died by suicide “over living in a world that refused to acknowledge or accept them.”

Yes, suicide is very high among the transgender, with or without surgery and hormone treatments, with no studies showing that surgery and hormone treatment make any difference in suicide or suicide attempts. I’ve seen estimates as high as 32% to 59% of transgenders attempt suicide. Not “report suicidal ideation” but actually tried to kill themselves. That was in an article called “Suicide and Suicidal Behavior among Transgender Persons” by Virupaksha, Muralidhar and Ramakrishna, if you want to look it up. Sorry, cannot link right now.

That’s why gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder regardless of the APA’s politically driven parsing. Any mental condition that increases suicide so much compared to non sufferers indicates that people who have it are not mentally healthy.

I’m sure that the lack of acceptance of transgenders is a big part of the suicide. That’s what you should be working to change. What you’re doing now, by pushing permanent treatments on temporarily confused kids is pushing people away from acceptance of transgenders, not toward it.

If transgenders would accept themselves as they are, it would make it much easier for others to accept them as they are. Caitlin Jenner is a frequent guest on Foxnews, so more acceptance of Transgenderism is not impossible, if you don’t screw it up by going after the kids. When you do that, people will focus on that, and believe that the kids are the true goal.

With about 45 minutes left in the public comment period, board member Dr. Zachariah P. Zachariah said only one more person would be allowed to testify. The crowd protested, and he offered to provide an email where they could share their testimonies.

At one point, an audience member yelled that trans youths would suffer if the board voted to bar care: “The blood is on your hands!” To which Zachariah responded, “That’s OK.”

Sounds like Zachariah was tired of the pontificating. Hard to blame them. It was an absurd claim, with no science to back it up, yelled at a medical doctor, by some random wokester.

Emile Fox, a trans nonbinary person from Orlando who uses “they” and “he” pronouns, said they signed up to testify and weren’t able to, which frustrated them after the first eight people who testified were all in favor of restricting care, but none of them were from Florida.

Seems like a rather political move by this politically appointed Board but I know you feel differently

No, I dont’. Government boards often act politically. Do you know some that do not? I dont’ want government boards of any kind that feel they do not need to understand the desires of voters.

so lets discuss that study you all keep hyping on that shows 80% of children grow out of their gender dysphoria by adulthood.

Where do I “keep hyping” that study?

Florida Leaders Misrepresented Research Before Ban on Gender-Affirming Care

“The 80% statistic, used by the Florida Department of Health and the state’s leadership, is categorically false,” Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the Yale School of Medicine, told PolitiFact. “After a close read of the scholarship cited by the state, the state’s conclusion simply cannot be drawn in good faith.”

So, you do understand that just because there is a study that supposedly shows something, doesn’t mean we have to swallow it, without analysis? Glad to hear it after all of your “they’re smarter than you!” Nonsense.

The 80% figure in the review did not reference children’s gender identities; it centered on the persistence and desistence of gender dysphoria in adulthood. Steensma later wrote that “using the term desistence in this way does not imply anything about the identity of the desisters.”

This study has been touted as evidence that 80% of children grow out of being trans and that is not at all what the study actually says. 80% grow out of the distress they feel over their identities not their trans identities themselves.

That makes sense, and is another good argument for not doing the invasive surgeries and permanent hormone surgeries in order to relieve that distress, which is temporal in the overwhelming majority of cases.

The last thing a confused kid needs is adults trying to show other adults how woke they are by pushing them into treatment for that confusion. You may believe that every adult involved in education has pure motives and would never do such a thing, but I know for a fact it isn’t true.

Even the ones with good motives can be misguided. I know a counselor who believe she should be prompting troubled teens to talk about being transgender, even if they have never mentioned it and show no evidence of it. She bases that idea literally on an article she read in The Atlantic, not on a scholarly article.

I was referring to your character attacks on healthcare providers not myself and I don't actually care if you do engage in them, I'm just pointing out that's all your arguments rest on.

Funny, most people who support socialized medicine say that one reason is that the profit motive makes for poor medical outcomes. But in this one area of medicine only, profit motive is a good thing and it is a character attack to mention it.

Sure you will.

I read it. It was much better as far as documentation, methodology and statistical analysis than the transgender studies you’ve cited. It was not about IQ but about educational testing, though.

I know you take the whole demographics/IQ science very personally in a negative way. But the science is the science.

For what it’s worth, I believe that nutrition, moreso than genetics is the reason for the disparate IQ’s among races. Read GMR and Intelliegence Quotient (IQ) of the Rice Group on researchgate.com. It shows that frequent consumption of rice, grains, meat and eggs at breakfast especially, is associated with higher verbal, performance, and full scale IQ.

That’s why I support school breakfast programs at no cost to all children and am appalled at how unpallatable they under federal regulations.

 

[Red Front]

Fair.

I’m with you. No disagreement at all.

Correct. I had thought you did not get that.

Correct.

Some of them are publicity hounds. All of them are purposefully or inadvertently enabling their children’s attention-seeking behavior, which has been a personality trait of every single child with a mental disorder that I’ve ever worked with.

No parent who has normal intelligence thinks that their fourteen year old son can insist on using the girl’s bathroom, showering with girls, and playing on girls sports teams and no one will object. They know that this will bring attention and they choose to have their kid do it. Stage mom may not be a precise description, but I believe I said that they are the woke version of stage moms.

That’s where you go off track. What or who is the imaginary being you refer to? Telling a child that they are a boy and will grow up to be a man, in spite of the normal confusion they may feel before, during and after puberty is not grooming them. Not unless you believe that Mr. Rogers was a groomer.

Not mutilating and poisoning their healthy body is not neglecting their biological self. It is preserving it. A child can socially transition and wait on more permanent changes until they have the maturity to make the decision. That’s what I mean by your not knowing how crazy you sound. Just FYI, every time you write “cosplay” in this context, my estimate of your likely IQ goes down a point.

Examples of the state stepping in to over-ride parental decisions about transgender treatment that you support?

Not every choice parents and medical providers make is by definition appropriate. Some parents would choose genital mutilation for their daughters. Some parents would give their daughters over in marriage to an older man who is a religious leader. The daughters might even agree, having been groomed to believe it is their duty. The state would rightly step in.

Of course such a study would be “often-criticized.” Doesn’t mean it is true or false.

Do you understand that you are using the fallacy of argument from authority?

I’ve never cited that figure, as far as I know. It sounds very high to me. So that is a valid argument you have for whoever is citing it. I’ve seen anecdotal examples of regrets over having transgender treatment, but I don’t remember such statistics. If you have examples of me citing it, let me know and I’ll retract it.

Here’s the thing that I don’t think you get, and why we are talking past each other: Any research has to be analyzed. I have a masters in Ed Psych, so I have been trained in how to analyze research, not just read the abstract and assume it is the Gospel. I don’t think you even read the abstracts. You often link an article in the popular press (meaning non-academic) that has links to abstracts and you assume it must be true, or that the fact that it was written settles the science.

The research you’ve cited has been very problematic as far as methodology. You could even say that it is “often-criticized” since I do often criticize it. See how that works?

Some of them have reasonable methodology for a pilot study which would be a dry run for a larger and more rigorous study. But once the writers and editors of the popular press sees something that shows any support at all for the transgenderization of children, they run with it and the less informed swallow it whole.

Yes, suicide is very high among the transgender, with or without surgery and hormone treatments, with no studies showing that surgery and hormone treatment make any difference in suicide or suicide attempts. I’ve seen estimates as high as 32% to 59% of transgenders attempt suicide. Not “report suicidal ideation” but actually tried to kill themselves. That was in an article called “Suicide and Suicidal Behavior among Transgender Persons” by Virupaksha, Muralidhar and Ramakrishna, if you want to look it up. Sorry, cannot link right now.

That’s why gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder regardless of the APA’s politically driven parsing. Any mental condition that increases suicide so much compared to non sufferers indicates that people who have it are not mentally healthy.

I’m sure that the lack of acceptance of transgenders is a big part of the suicide. That’s what you should be working to change. What you’re doing now, by pushing permanent treatments on temporarily confused kids is pushing people away from acceptance of transgenders, not toward it.

If transgenders would accept themselves as they are, it would make it much easier for others to accept them as they are. Caitlin Jenner is a frequent guest on Foxnews, so more acceptance of Transgenderism is not impossible, if you don’t screw it up by going after the kids. When you do that, people will focus on that, and believe that the kids are the true goal.

Sounds like Zachariah was tired of the pontificating. Hard to blame them. It was an absurd claim, with no science to back it up, yelled at a medical doctor, by some random wokester.

No, I dont’. Government boards often act politically. Do you know some that do not? I dont’ want government boards of any kind that feel they do not need to understand the desires of voters.

Where do I “keep hyping” that study?

So, you do understand that just because there is a study that supposedly shows something, doesn’t mean we have to swallow it, without analysis? Glad to hear it after all of your “they’re smarter than you!” Nonsense.

That makes sense, and is another good argument for not doing the invasive surgeries and permanent hormone surgeries in order to relieve that distress, which is temporal in the overwhelming majority of cases.

The last thing a confused kid needs is adults trying to show other adults how woke they are by pushing them into treatment for that confusion. You may believe that every adult involved in education has pure motives and would never do such a thing, but I know for a fact it isn’t true.

Even the ones with good motives can be misguided. I know a counselor who believe she should be prompting troubled teens to talk about being transgender, even if they have never mentioned it and show no evidence of it. She bases that idea literally on an article she read in The Atlantic, not on a scholarly article.

Funny, most people who support socialized medicine say that one reason is that the profit motive makes for poor medical outcomes. But in this one area of medicine only, profit motive is a good thing and it is a character attack to mention it.

I read it. It was much better as far as documentation, methodology and statistical analysis than the transgender studies you’ve cited. It was not about IQ but about educational testing, though.

I know you take the whole demographics/IQ science very personally in a negative way. But the science is the science.

For what it’s worth, I believe that nutrition, moreso than genetics is the reason for the disparate IQ’s among races. Read GMR and Intelliegence Quotient (IQ) of the Rice Group on researchgate.com. It shows that frequent consumption of rice, grains, meat and eggs at breakfast especially, is associated with higher verbal, performance, and full scale IQ.

That’s why I support school breakfast programs at no cost to all children and am appalled at how unpallatable they under federal regulations.

They're creating more gender dysphoria. Kids now see it as a means to be more progressive and accepted by their peers. The ultimate statement of "wokeness" and being against those who are perceived as "regressive", "dinosaurs", "the traditionalists", intolerant, hateful, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, dogmatic, murderous ..etc. It's a sociopolitical statement, to be LGBTQ or transgender. There are now a bunch of children that don't have gender dysphoria who are becoming dysphoric, and gay, and lesbian, because "woke"/"progressive" adults and their peers are pushing them psychologically, emotionally, socially, politically in that direction. Going back and forth with Curried Goats is a waste of time, he/she is gone.