progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 64,552
- 39,388
- 2,615
a 17 yr old is not a child,,Topic is sexual mutilation of children.
And you love the idea.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
a 17 yr old is not a child,,Topic is sexual mutilation of children.
And you love the idea.
The line has to be drawn somewhere.what if its 30 days before they turn 18??
that close to 18 is a waste of time to deal with,, and considering a 17 yr old can emancipate from their parents all we can do is write this one off as a loss,,The line has to be drawn somewhere.
And if we say “17 is close enough”, then 16 year olds will say “what about me”. And so on.that close to 18 is a waste of time to deal with,, and considering a 17 yr old can emancipate from their parents all we can do is write this one off as a loss,,
sure would be nice if it was that easy,,And if we say “17 is close enough”, then 16 year olds will say “what about me”. And so on.
That’s why the line has to to be firmly drawn at a specific age.
That's an interesting statistic.I didn't know any of this until I began researching it, this morning!!!
Data from the Times article estimates there were 203 gender-affirming surgeries performed on minors in the year, at only eleven different clinics. In contrast, 3,200 girls ages 13 to 19 received cosmetic breast implants in 2020. Another 4,700 had breast reductions.
More Teens Get Breast Implants Than Trans Top Surgery
Despite a lack of data, anti-trans proponents often center narratives of regret to dissuade gender-affirming health care.www.advocate.com
Yes it has to, and of necessity, that line will be somewhat arbitrary, and not a good fit for many individuals. The lines of 18, and 21, were not set by members of the religious right who hate transkids. They were drawn long ago in English Common Law, and European civil codes.And if we say “17 is close enough”, then 16 year olds will say “what about me”. And so on.
That’s why the line has to to be firmly drawn at a specific age.
I agree that 18 and 19 year olds are in that number and it does not show how many are theirs, and not those younger.... But it was the closest I could find covering the ages we were discussing....That's an interesting statistic.
Is your point is that those opposed to having boys get breast implants to make them look like girls, have not objected to teenage girls getting breast implants? They haven't, but so what? That means they are inconsisten for opposing "gender affirming" boob jobs for males?
Apples and oranges for several reasons:
1) Age 13 to 19 includes two years of legal adult years, 18 - 19. So how many of those 3,200 "girls" are legal women who made the decision as legal adults? 3,000? 3,195? As a matter of fact, 3,200 of them were 18 or 19. From your linked statistics report:
View attachment 864376
2) If there were underage girls getting breast enhancements for purely cosmetic reason, and not following a medically necesarry mastdectomy, or some traumantic injury to their breasts, I would say that is not very wise. But none of those, as far as I know, were court ordered over ojection of the parents. If it were, I would be as opposed to it as I am to nonconsensual breast enhancements on male children.
3) None of them (if they happened) are attempts to surgically alter a child's body to alleviate a psychological disorder.
4) I do object to underage girls having boob jobs to fit the media's impossible standars of female beauty. So, no inconsistency. I haven't been vocal about it, because it has not been in the news. Maybe because it doesn't happen according to the report you cited.