# Dispute over (now) 8-year-old son's transition to a girl



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Aug 29, 2020)

This case has been public for a few years now. The latest court decision overrides the previous one and it seems the mother will be able to go ahead with the transition of her son. Apparently the father has to pay 5000$ a month.
There is dispute whether the son actually wants to become a girl.

What is new to me is that the mother is not even the biological mother. She received the twin boys via egg donation.
What is your opinion on this case?

https://nypost.com/2019/10/23/texas...ng-to-stop-7-year-old-sons-gender-transition/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/c...ansition-for-8-yr-old-regains-decision-rights

My theories are:
a) After the break-up the mother become jealous of the reproductive success of her former husband. The transition is a way to axe some of the descendants of his. Children at that age are extremely malleable. You can turn them into or convince them of anything. They also don´t have a concept of sex yet. My parents also let me wear a dress once. Children want to please the desire of the parents, which would also explain why - if both parents tell the truth - the son acts differently around each parent.
b) The mother wants to have an even sex ratio. I have no data on this, but from my experience fathers usually wish for a son or have no preference. Mothers often want to give birth to both genders. My mother always told me how she wanted me to be a girl for said reason (hence the dress thing; luckily there were no surgeries back then). I have heard other women express similar desires. Even here in China, many women still usually want a son [traditionally the better provider at old age] but the second one "can" be a daughter. [this topic is common in China now that a second child is possible for two parents who don´t have siblings]
c) The mother wants to signal virtue. It is like celebraties adopting children from a different race. 
d) The mother genuinly believes her son´s "soul" is in the wrong body.


----------



## notimp (Aug 29, 2020)

Clusterf-

You can look on youtube for conversations between Joe Rogan and Debra Soh.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=joe+rogan+debra+soh

Scientific default position on this should be that you should at least wait until after puberty and probably until that person has reached the age of consent. But it is challenged by a general notion of 'non discrimination' probably - misapplied.

In those Interviews you get snippets like, if a person in a young peoples circle of friends identifies as the opposite gender, statistically in that friend circle you have a 4000% higher chance of another person identifying as the opposite gender as well compared to the statistical average.


----------



## swabbo (Aug 29, 2020)

Fucking humans smh


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 29, 2020)

Parents living through their children seems to be even more so these days than ever in the past. I see in some cases kids for some parents being like bumper stickers, instead of letting them be individuals.   

I also think it is BS whenever a father gets shafted like this.  And he has to pay for it on top. 

I had no idea that they allowed medical procedures with children for sex reassignment . That's sad.  There are so many things in life that legally require a certain age before being able to do.  Surprised they have not made a similar requirement with something like chemical or physical changes to a kids body to mock a different gender.

Was this woman even supposed to have children naturally? Or did science make that happen? If so maybe this is a side affect of going above nature.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Aug 29, 2020)

crimpshrine said:


> Was this woman even supposed to have children naturally? Or did science make that happen? If so maybe this is a side affect of going above nature.


As I stated above, she gave birth to them but she is not the biological mother. However, I suppose giving birth does effect the child in some ways (hormones, nutrients etc).


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 29, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> As I stated above, she gave birth to them but she is not the biological mother. However, I suppose giving birth does effect the child in some ways (hormones, nutrients etc).



So I guess it is safe to assume without those eggs she would not have been able to make children.  Maybe that is another red flag?  Like if nature never intended on allowing her to have children.

I read some more on that child.  It is really a sad story.   I am surprised that father has not done something outside of court if what is being said is true.  That the Boy has stated numerous times he wants to stay a boy.


----------



## notimp (Aug 29, 2020)

crimpshrine said:


> Was this woman even supposed to have children naturally? Or did science make that happen? If so maybe this is a side affect of going above nature.


Nature doesnt care if you or an entire species dies out tomorrow. Looking for a higher meaning in supposed 'actions of nature towards an individual' is... problematic.

If you are looking out for messages from higher beings in your life, thats... problematic. (Or exactly what your religion prescribed, but in what popular religion do you equate god to nature?)

Why is it problematic?

Because of what you are doing already. "What god meant to say, ..." "What nature meant to do here, ..." You are presenting yourselves as interpreting channels of infallible higher beings... 

Talking about trying hard to win an argument..


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 29, 2020)

notimp said:


> Nature doesnt care if you or an entire species dies out tomorrow. Looking for a higher meaning in supposed 'actions of nature towards an individual' is... problematic.
> 
> If you are looking out for messages from higher beings in your life, thats... problematic. (Or exactly what your religion prescribed, but in what popular religion do you equate god to nature?)
> 
> ...



It is you that is choosing to view nature as religious in nature or a higher power like god.  Not me.  

Maybe all I meant by "nature" is the basic definition of it.

Nature, in the broadest sense, is the natural, physical, or material world or universe. "Nature" can refer to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to *life in general*.

You are pretty touchy, LOL.

I take it you have some emotional damage from the church from someone?


----------



## notimp (Aug 29, 2020)

According to you nature had a plan. That was moral. That had purpose. That also included little Susi that couldnt get children on her own. 

That line of thinking is how humans made up the concept of gods.  And the first deities indeed were derived from concepts in nature. (The river god, the thunder god, the fertility goddess, .. )


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 29, 2020)

notimp said:


> According to you nature had a plan. That was moral. That had purpose. That also included little Susi that couldnt get children on her own.
> 
> That line of thinking is how humans made up the concept of gods.



Maybe you should have asked instead of assuming what I meant?  I did not say anything about god, I did not say I am religious and think that god has some plan for us and sure as heck did not intend for her to have kids.

I honestly did not at the time have a precise thing that I thought contributed to this even being a problem to begin with.  I was just using the word nature, generally.   I don't think this woman should be raising kids. Luck would have it that she would not be able to have kids to do what she is doing now, but science helped get around that.

I suppose she could have still did the same to adopted kids, but at least you would hope she would have to pass some type of test to confirm she is mentally fit to raise a kid or kids she wants to adopt.

Anyhow, my real point to this all is something is not right with that woman.  And I feel bad for the father, and the kid involved and I believe it is a travesty that they would allow anyone to take actions with a kid who is not fully developed yet that are so extreme.  That at this point has been backed by 1 judge in the legal system.

My main point is not what brought things to the point that this was allowed to even occur in.

Now that I think about it, you come into a thread about some kid who likely does NOT want to be made to simulate females.  And you are attempting to debate me about god, when I never mentioned god.

Odd.. so you going to comment on the meat of the post or not?


----------



## Darth Meteos (Aug 29, 2020)

i want to preface what i say with this: i am very left-wing
i am in favor of socialist policies and generally take a libertarian position on social issues
personal liberty is very important to me and a core part of my ideology

i must say, though, permanent body modifications shouldn't be allowed before the age of adulthood
hormone treatments are included in that, as they fuck with the natural biological processes that occur during the growing phase
this should be stopped


----------



## MohammedQ8 (Aug 29, 2020)

well skyrim players can modify characters so why not her hehe

I wonder where they get small penises and vaginas hehe


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Aug 29, 2020)

The thing with sex change is that from what I've seen you have to do it before puberty for it to be convincing. Since you can't reverse puberty. I think it's probably pretty clear at an early age if your kid is not acting like their birth gender but then again, 8 years might be a bit too young to know for sure, since young kids can be unpredictable.


----------



## notimp (Aug 29, 2020)

Convincing?

So you are saying halt the hormonal development of said body before puberty, reverse it medically, then surgically alter primary sexual organs with a risk of loosing sensation, or death, based on the outcome being more convincing?

Which would lead to what? More happy days in the rest of that persons life? As compaired to what, doing the same but with a less convincing outcome?

You are doing those surgeries not because of 'lifestyle choices', but because of severe psychological distress. The difference between 'might be more convincing (as done before puberty set in)' or not wouldnt qualify as severe psychological stress, even if you think it does, people usually should be quite able to cope with that. "But I want to be more beautiful." is a hard argument to drive in this context.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Aug 30, 2020)

Beware, notimp is soon going to argue that nature does not exist.
Just kidding, I understood what crimpshrine was saying. However, it is also true that religions are born by people ascribing meaning to everything (if you are the type of person who hears a strange sound and thinks it is a tiger, you are more likely to pass on your genes).

There is some correlation between physical and mental health, but we do not know whether the mother had any problems. She could be just a career woman who waited too long to have biological children of her own. This could be called the trends of our time (just like virtue signaling). And women are especially keen on following social trends.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 30, 2020)

The "mother" - who isn't even biologically related to either kid, they were created with donor eggs via artificial insemination - is clearly doing this to torment the father. She'll probably win and start the kid on puberty blockers in the next few years.

As tragic as this is, it's probably necessary that people - especially innocent people - suffer from the consequences of left-wing beliefs for them to understand that tolerance of those who want to destroy you is suicide. "I just want to grill," isn't an argument, it's a sign of weakness; and predators such as the "mother" in this case see weakness as reason enough to feed on other people's misery.


----------



## Darth Meteos (Aug 30, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> We should stop promoting mental illnesses.


even in the worst understanding of gender dysphoria, why wouldn't we make their lives better by simply giving them what will make them happy
this isn't promotion, it's chronic illness management


----------



## eyeliner (Aug 30, 2020)

Murder that despicable human that some adjectivate as "mother".
Murder the judge that even considers the possibility of letting some other that the owner of his body to have full control of it.

Let the child be. He will know what gender he wants to be in due time.


----------



## ImLEBrAn (Aug 30, 2020)

Darth Meteos said:


> even in the worst understanding of gender dysphoria, why wouldn't we make their lives better by simply giving them what will make them happy
> this isn't promotion, it's chronic illness management



Give them what? SRS? Then 10 years later they end up killing themselves? Sounds like a great plan...


----------



## MMX (Aug 30, 2020)

The Real Jdbye said:


> The thing with sex change is that from what I've seen you have to do it before puberty for it to be convincing. Since you can't reverse puberty. I think it's probably pretty clear at an early age if your kid is not acting like their birth gender but then again, 8 years might be a bit too young to know for sure, since young kids can be unpredictable.



"not acting their birth gender" what does that even mean?. Facebook lists 58 gender options. How would you know?

edit: what's the matter  Burorī, why edit your post?


----------



## Burorī (Aug 30, 2020)

that kid definitely won't get bullied at school...


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 30, 2020)

from what i gather it's more not the boy's choice but the mother's i would sympathize if it was the boy's choice on his own with support by the parents compairing apples to oranges here but it sorrta reminds me of my ex "forcing me" to convert to islam for the sake of marriage (which never happened thank god) you shouldn't force anyone to do anything IF they don't want to


----------



## PrincessLillie (Aug 30, 2020)

I sense a small amount of transphobia and misinformation emanating from this thread (unless I'm misinterpreting some of the other replies). Then again, I'm not sure what else I expected from the world news & politics section. I suppose I'll just drop my opinions and dip.
If the child is, indeed, transgender, I see no reason why the mother shouldn't proceed. Hormone blockers are perfectly harmless and can be reversed by simply stopping the usage of them (all they really do is "pause" puberty). Estrogen typically isn't administered until a little bit later in life, and surgeries usually aren't done until adulthood. Though, the evidence shown on both sides is pretty contradictory to each other and it's not exactly easy on my part to tell who's lying for their own benefit and who isn't, especially given these are only articles from news outlets and I have no further insight into the situation. In the end, the only way to truly tell which way is best for the child is if the child themself is given a voice in the situation. Even 8-year-olds are intelligent enough to understand when something is wrong with their gender identity and/or gender expression, and it's important that they're given the chance to voice such frustrations. Given the circumstances though, I have good reason to doubt they will be given a voice.
*TL;DR*: Only the child can know for sure if they're trans, even at 8 years old.

Slightly off-topic, but the rest of the content on LifeSite (second link in the OP) genuinely hurts to read. Definitely would not trust them.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Aug 30, 2020)

MMX said:


> "not acting their birth gender" what does that even mean?. Facebook lists 58 gender options. How would you know?
> 
> edit: what's the matter  Burorī, why edit your post?


I dunno, I'm not good at explaining this stuff.


----------



## Soulsilve2010 (Aug 30, 2020)

I'm all for letting people be who they feel they are, the only exception is really young children like this.They shouldn't be able to even start transitioning until they are at least 18.A LOT can change after puberty mentally.There's plenty of ways to live how you want without changing your body so transitioning doesn't need to take precedence to making sure someone is absolutely sure before taking the irreversible plunge.Some things can be reversed but the biggest one(the surgery) is for life.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 30, 2020)

Here's my two cents.

If it was the boy's decision, that's a very dangerous decision and he's lying to himself but it was his choice and he's not hurting anyone else.
If it was the mother's decision, that's despicable.


----------



## Asia81 (Aug 30, 2020)

fuck this shit
thanos please kill us


----------



## notimp (Aug 30, 2020)

sks316 said:


> If the child is, indeed, transgender, I see no reason why the mother shouldn't proceed. Hormone blockers are perfectly harmless and can be reversed by simply stopping the usage of them (all they really do is "pause" puberty). Estrogen typically isn't administered until a little bit later in life, and surgeries usually aren't done until adulthood


Hormone blockers are perfectly harmless. Well, yes, the kid might not have a growth spurt, no change of voice, recessed genetal development, and increased rates of suicidal thought and self harm, but apart from that nothing serious, really....

Stop the disinformation!

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-50046579

Again what is the proposed benefit of halting child development, over letting it develop and then decide later in life?

Its mostly cosmetic right? And why you should administer hormone blockers for ultimately a cosmetic benefit is beyond me. Yes having become a more beautiful (societies standards) transgener might be something that person would want later in life, but not having that shouldnt inflict high psychological distress.

So what are you taking the risk of a suppressed development (oh no - its just paused, seems unlikely in several aspects, if you have studies, please post and I'll read them) and higher risk of suicidal thoughts for?


edit: Ok proposed benefits are not 'breathing space' but maybe not having to undergo surgery later on in life:


> The HRA said clinicians and researchers should "avoid referring to puberty suppressing as providing a 'breathing space' to avoid risk of misunderstanding".
> 
> Rather, the purpose of the treatment should be described as being offered to children demonstrating strong and persistent gender identity dysphoria "such that the suppression of puberty would allow subsequent cross-sex hormone treatment without the need to surgically reverse or otherwise mask the unwanted physical effects of puberty in the birth gender".


This refers to secondary sexual characteristics in women? Is there an equivalent operation that would not be needed for born males?


> In clinical practice, several former Gids clinicians question whether people can accurately predict this pathway.
> 
> "That would mean Gids has accurate procedures that can differentiate between those whose gender dysphoria in childhood will desist and those for whom it will persist," one ex-Gids clinician, who wished to remain anonymous, told Newsnight.
> 
> "The service is not able to do this for a number of reasons, including the nature of the assessment process, research in this field is still lacking, and that the patient cohort has changed significantly in the last few years."





> Evidence is also emerging that provides insights into whether puberty blockers are a treatment to help alleviate gender dysphoria, or if they're fundamentally part of the pathway to full medical or surgical transitioning.
> 
> "We were constantly told, and told to tell patients that the blockers provided a pause. There was no doubt that that is what we were saying," the former Gids clinician said.
> 
> ...


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 30, 2020)

I assume it's about this story below.



That mother is a psycho. She has no idea what she's done to her son.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Aug 31, 2020)

sks316 said:


> Even 8-year-olds are intelligent enough to understand when something is wrong with their gender identity and/or gender expression, and it's important that they're given the chance to voice such frustrations.


8-year-olds are people pleasers and immitators of their parents. That would explain his conflicting behavior around the father vs the around the mother. You can even turn 8-year-olds into Jihadis, for example. I had no idea about sex when I was 8. I wasn´t even sure about genitals, nor did I care. Even bringing up this question induces a lot of stress in the child and should be considered child abuse. Children cannot be left children anymore.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 31, 2020)

Burorī said:


> that kid definitely won't get bullied at school...


That's a problem, an even bigger one is when he grows up and realizes what his mother did to him.


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 31, 2020)

Even if it was fully the child's idea or she completely means well, going to have to say no to this one. If gender or even outright sex was easily reversible, that would be a different story. At least then, the person would have a choice later on.


----------



## omgcat (Aug 31, 2020)

KingVamp said:


> Even if it was fully the child's idea or she completely means well, going to have to say no to this one. If gender or even outright sex was easily reversible, that would be a different story. At least then, the person would have a choice later on.



puberty blockers are well received by most people unless they have an allergy. you can put a pause on puberty and worry about which hormones the child will receive when they get to the proper age. this allows them time to talk with therapists and psychologists about options, feelings, gender dysphoria, body dysphoria, etc. if the child decides to not transition, it's no harm no foul, and they stop the puberty blockers. to even get the medications needed for any of this to occur, they need to be screened by licensed psychologists and therapists.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 31, 2020)

omgcat said:


> puberty blockers are well received by most people unless they have an allergy. you can put a pause on puberty and worry about which hormones the child will receive when they get to the proper age. this allows them time to talk with therapists and psychologists about options, feelings, gender dysphoria, body dysphoria, etc. if the child decides to not transition, it's no harm no foul, and they stop the puberty blockers. to even get the medications needed for any of this to occur, they need to be screened by licensed psychologists and therapists.


Your body is a temple.


----------



## omgcat (Aug 31, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Your body is a temple.



yes it is, and people can change it how they want. maybe a few new rooms, new coat of paint, maybe a new interior. It is THEIR body and they can make changes to it as they, and their team of trained medical professionals, see fit. religion has no place in this conversation, this is in science's domain.


----------



## linuxares (Aug 31, 2020)

When I were 8, I were playing in the sandbox, with pinecones and my friends. I didn't care about my dingdong more than to pee.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 31, 2020)

omgcat said:


> yes it is, and people can change it how they want. maybe a few new rooms, new coat of paint, maybe a new interior. It is THEIR body and they can make changes to it as they, and their team of trained medical professionals, see fit. religion has no place in this conversation, this is in science's domain.


Religion has a place in every conversation.

Even if it didn't, it doesn't change the fact that 41% of all t******** commit suicide.
EDIT: It really censored that.


----------



## Darth Meteos (Aug 31, 2020)

ImLEBrAn said:


> Give them what? SRS? Then 10 years later they end up killing themselves? Sounds like a great plan...


Because, of course, they aren't suicidal because they're ostracized for their choice, but simply _because of _the choice. Makes sense! Genius!



UltraSUPRA said:


> Religion has a place in every conversation.


Yeah, the bin.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 31, 2020)

Given that:
1. Most transgender kids are the children of leftists.
2. Political beliefs are partially heritable.
3. Transgender people are far less likely to successfully reproduce.

Should we encourage leftists to trans their children?


----------



## mightymuffy (Aug 31, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> Apparently the father has to pay 5000$ a month.


Fuckin' hell, I'd have a sex change myself for that kind of money...

Aaanyway...


			
				UltraDolphinRevolution said:
			
		

> There is dispute whether the son actually wants to become a girl.


....and that is literally where this particular story should end! I would usually lean towards the 'wait until after puberty' argument myself, but then again kids aren't stupid: my 2 year old nephew started to point my mobile phone at my face to unlock it, then when I took that feature off, he then grabs my finger in an attempt to use the fingerprint unlock! 2 years old! I was trying to push building blocks up the cats arse when I was 2! But anyway... - if the child is not 100% sure then the whole idea is nonsensical: somebody should give the mother a giant slap..


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 1, 2020)

omgcat said:


> yes it is, and people can change it how they want. maybe a few new rooms, new coat of paint, maybe a new interior. It is THEIR body and they can make changes to it as they, and their team of trained medical professionals, see fit. religion has no place in this conversation, this is in science's domain.


That's fine, as long as the individual is at least 18 years old, not 8 years old.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 1, 2020)

Darth Meteos said:


> Because, of course, they aren't suicidal because they're ostracized for their choice, but simply _because of _the choice. Makes sense! Genius!


It is a lot to ask of the world to conform to one´s own beliefs. The truth is, most people do not really think a person who has had a sex change operation has become a different person. They go along with it because they do not want to offend. This can be a noble motivation. However, it might be healthier for the people who want to do a sex change operation if society does not confront them, nor lie to them in order to not offend them. People can see through lies eventually.


----------



## notimp (Sep 1, 2020)

MysticLord said:


> Given that:
> 1. Most transgender kids are the children of leftists.
> 2. Political beliefs are partially heritable.
> 3. Transgender people are far less likely to successfully reproduce.
> ...


1. Whoever does that statistic is probably a fraud. (What scientist goes around in search for transgender people, to ask them their parents political orientation? And gets enough feedback to compile something thats accurate enough statistically? Seems made up.)

2. No? Most likely predictor is social class (income, where you are living), not what your parents voted... Correlation is not causation.

3. There are so few transgender people in the world, or even in 'a nation' that that doesnt matter. Thats the most infuriating part about ultraminority politics. They dont matter to society at large at all (as in nothing changes substantively) compared to how much they are played to conjure up fear, or dislike, or even compassion. Or a sense of progress. They do matter to transgender people (the minorities themselves).

Thats also why large corporations love black lives matter. Actual paygap between black and white people at the lower income level (below glass ceiling) is 14% (on average, not in the same job), if you go into race wars over that, which result in 'experts' educating your entire workforce, that they have to check 'white privilege every step of the way, company laughs all the way home.

And if you take qualification into account (so education) its far less:









https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandto...al-wage-gaps-persistence-poses-challenge.aspx

The bigger issue here is class based (much fewer black people in higher positions), and you wont fix the glass ceiling issue (professional networks) by letting your lower class employees take 'priviledge classes'. Its almost a distraction.

For transgender it is not, of course. Making it an issue of societal importance is the only way they can be integrated better. (Minority issue)

So in other words, you fight about transgender issues, if you think your society is perfectly fine, and you really, really have something to do about that group making up 0.6% of your population (first google result). Or because you got baited, so you dont look at other issues. (Or because you are part of that minority.)

You fight for 'black rights' in the workforce, by attending 'white privilege' trainings as a normal grunt in the workforce, if you think everything else is perfectly fine, you just have to do something about the fact that there are too few black millionaires (argumentative shortcut) arround statistically - or because you got baited.

I also dont see the 'education issue' for black folks being solved, by their white jobmates 'checking privilege'.

Its a trap.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 1, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Even if it didn't, it doesn't change the fact that 41% of all ******** commit suicide.
> EDIT: It really censored that.



If you are gonna use a figure then at least get your fucking figures right.

41% of trans people have not committed suicide. 

41% of trans have attempted suicide but only in AMERICA. It doesn't take a genius to work out why the figure is so high in a country that is one of the most transphobic in the world. 

World wide the attempted suicide rate in the trans community sits at only 3.5% which is only slightly higher than the worldwide figure for the CIS community.


----------



## Jokey_Carrot (Sep 1, 2020)

Bruh I didn't even understand what a fucking vagina was till I was 11.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 1, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> 41% of trans have attempted suicide but only in [...] one of the most transphobic [countries] in the world.


"Ignore my chromosomes or I'll commit suicide."


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 1, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> "Ignore my chromosomes or I'll commit suicide."


Thats a very flippant remark that covers up the fact of why the figure is actually so high in America.

For instance over 50% of trans women in America will be sexually assaulted at least once in their lives.

85% of American trans women will be physically assaulted at least once in their life.

But hey if you want to keep burying your head into why the suicide figures are so high in America then more fool you.


----------



## Viri (Sep 1, 2020)

I remember when I was 8~10, I wanted to be a girl, because I lived with 2 sisters, and wanted to be more like them. I told my mom, and she said you're a boy, live with it. Then at age 10 I got some friends, and grew out of it. I'm happy my mom told me to deal with it, and wasn't like this mom. I'm quite happy to be a guy.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 1, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> For instance over 50% of trans women in America will br sexually assaulted at least once in their lives.


I'm pretty sure that's _why_ people become part of the LGBTQTILHXJTSIHCKZJFZJXKHXGJSIFOHZYDZOHCOHVIYCY+ community.


AmandaRose said:


> 85% of America trans women will be physically assaulted at least once in their life.


By who? The doctors cutting off their body parts and administering hormones?


----------



## deficitdisorder (Sep 1, 2020)

8 seems crazy young to me. You can still obviously love and support the child for who they want to be. maybe put them on puberty blockers or something but to do full transition process at that age feels off to me. 




UltraSUPRA said:


> I'm pretty sure that's _why_ people become part of the LGBTQTILHXJTSIHCKZJFZJXKHXGJSIFOHZYDZOHCOHVIYCY+ community.



Maybe you should spend the majority of you life being publicly shamed and hated for just existing then maybe you could understand some of their issues.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 1, 2020)

deficitdisorder said:


> Maybe you should spend the majority of you life being publicly shamed and hated for just existing then maybe you could understand some of their issues.


So I can't have an opinion?


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 2, 2020)

deficitdisorder said:


> You can still obviously love and support the child for who they want to be.


You can, but you shouldn´t. Look at Viris example. Unconditional love does not mean supporting bad ideas.


----------



## deficitdisorder (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> You can, but you shouldn´t. Look at Viris example. Unconditional love does not mean supporting bad ideas.




Wow. In what fucking world would a child expressing themselves as more feminine or masculine a bad thing?


----------



## ShadowOne333 (Sep 2, 2020)

Hilarious how some are saying "puberty blockers" do no harm at all.
Like if time itself and body growth will be like:
"Oh you want me to stop? Sure, I'll hold off for when you consider me back to come back".

Seriously? Do you really believe "halting" puberty does no harm?
Do you really believe puberty is a thing you can control at will?
That you can resume it or stop it just whenever you want?

The fucking nerves lol


----------



## chrisrlink (Sep 2, 2020)

so the dad has to pay for it? theres the real answer she wants the money herself a new twist on child support


----------



## notimp (Sep 2, 2020)

ShadowOne333 said:


> Hilarious how some are saying "puberty blockers" do no harm at all.
> Like if time itself and body growth will be like:
> "Oh you want me to stop? Sure, I'll hold off for when you consider me back to come back".
> 
> ...


I actually would want to read studies. If all development just sets in later, when hormones arent blocked anymore. On a superfluous level it seems counter intuitive. But it still could be the case.

Also I was wrong on the growth spurt thing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty_blocker

Wiki talks about 'fully reversible' and positive effects on suicide prevention later on in life, but then lists a NGO brochure as source.

edit: Ah, so there are long term effects:


> That said, doctors recommend children take puberty blockers only for a period of four years, in order to avoid long-term side effects, like loss of bone density.


src: https://theswaddle.com/what-are-puberty-blockers/

Here is another long term effect:


> If children with male genitalia begin using GnRH analogues early in puberty, they might not develop enough penile and scrotal skin for certain gender confirmation genital surgical procedures, such as penile inversion vaginoplasty. Alternative techniques, however, are available.


https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...horia/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075

...

But essentially, the argument for taking them is:

- Lower suicide rates later in life (disputed, see BBC article)
- Reduces the need for later surgery (if the gender dysphoria stays longterm)

Potential issue: Studies are rather sparse.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 2, 2020)

deficitdisorder said:


> Wow. In what fucking world would a child expressing themselves as more feminine or masculine a bad thing?


That´s not what I said. If a child has the idea to change their sex, it is a bad idea. It doesn´t come naturally. Children shouldn´t be made to think about sex at that age. The mother claimed her son already wanted to be a girl at 6 years old. This shouldn´t be taken seriously. No need to oppose the child either.


----------



## Lucifer666 (Sep 2, 2020)

The Real Jdbye said:


> The thing with sex change is that from what I've seen you have to do it before puberty for it to be convincing. Since you can't reverse puberty. I think it's probably pretty clear at an early age if your kid is not acting like their birth gender but then again, 8 years might be a bit too young to know for sure, since young kids can be unpredictable.


solution: puberty blockers until adulthood

EDIT:

This whole thread is a fucking joke, and almost nobody knows what they're on about.

The kid is 8. EIGHT. IF this were the kid's choice and not the mum's, all anyone has to do is affirm their identity and allow them to express themselves however, with whatever clothes, toys, etc. they choose. If the gender variance is still present by pre-teens (fully acknowledging the possibility that it might not be), talk to some experts and consider puberty blockers, either before puberty, or once the kid's had the chance to briefly try their natural puberty, as per the kid's choice. At 16-18 depending on local laws they can then go on to HRT.

If all of this is stemming from the mother and not the kid in any way, fuck that. TL;DR, get a neutral third party (neither mum nor dad), preferably a specialist, to talk to the kid and see what's going on.

I'm sick of all the misinformation about trans people and gender dysphoria. I'm sick of people tossing out false statistics about people like myself committing suicide "anyway." We are real people, not a hot topic for you to spout your brainless opinions about.

FWIW am trans, knew from when I was about 5, I started transitioning at 21 (couldn't start at 18 due to 3+ year waiting list, and when I was under 18 I was living in a severely transphobic country with severely transphobic parents.) Even as I am now, not 100% perfect, transitioning was absolutely, without a doubt, the right thing to do. I had never felt normal and mentally healthy like I do now, for the first 21 years of my life straight. It is still mind-boggling for me to realise that most people don't think about killing themselves multiple times a day, starting from childhood. I straight up unlocked an entire emotional spectrum I never knew I had.

My ONLY gripe regarding gender dysphoria nowadays is the fact that I had to go through the wrong puberty. It's fucked the shape and skeletal structure of my body _for life_ (and subsequently, my confidence and how I feel about myself.) People saying "it's just cosmetics"/"they can wait" are utterly clueless.

The trans kid debate gets me riled because I, like many others, am a victim of never having had the choice to do anything about it, even something as benign as blockers.


----------



## notimp (Sep 2, 2020)

Lucifer666 said:


> puberty blockers until adulthood


Not possible? You should take them for four years at most and puberty sets in a 11-12 years of age.



Lucifer666 said:


> f all of this is stemming from the mother and not the kid in any way, fuck that. TL;DR, get a neutral third party (neither mum nor dad), preferably a specialist, to talk to the kid and see what's going on.


Not likely possible. That deference of responsibility would be very hard to build an independent advisory body around. Basically, if at later stages 40% of the people your assessment was not correct on would attempt suicide, its hard to imagine many people wanting to put on that burden.

Also independent sense of self is an issue, see f.e.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216782/


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 2, 2020)

Here is a little something for all of you spouting nonsense about puberty blockers. 

https://www.gendergp.com/debunking-the-myths-surrounding-puberty-blockers-trans-kids/


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 2, 2020)

I have half followed this for a while now. Very dubious logic involved from where I sit from various angles.

I see ups (if it is the case then the end results end in better passing for the MTF path, though not insurmountable) and downs (if it is an incorrect diagnosis then that is some serious downsides) to doing things. Equally doing nothing does not mean you do not do the counselling/living as bit similar to say not getting a tattoo until you are 18 or something.

Not going through puberty at the same time as your cohorts is a tricky one and fairly well established in general discussion -- how many have heard the "I went away to college and it finally happened" type deals or simply 13 year olds that have squeaky voices or have not sprouted tits yet when various others in the same school year have*? Injury and in this case perhaps more relevant still being those biologically intersex individuals and things that go there (would also be another factor to evaluate in the specific case). Blocking muscle growth and associated concepts does also reduce options for various things in the sports world (as it stands simply being the older ones in your school year has a massive effect as you might effectively have a year's growth over the others (September was the age cut off when I were a lad, I understand some use calendar year now, either way 10 or so months of difference would be stunning to not happen in any given school year), imagine then being several years behind the curve - http://www.strongur.io/age-and-strength/ ).

*I have a slightly post world war 1 (it spends a lot of time dealing with what is today PTSD or combat stress reaction but it is still just the war rather than the first world war) psychiatry book that deals specifically at one point with young men not having a beard as luxuriant as their fellows.

"there are those that know from a young age"
There are also those that might misidentify themselves**. I don't know the numbers there but that would potentially be an active injury caused rather than slightly better outcome afforded/better outcomes more easily achieved which heavily skews in favour of not actively influencing things and instead sticking with talk/performative approaches -- there have been plenty of drugs yanked or dosages/preps/administration/contraindications seriously altered for 1 in 1000 serious negative outcomes (see diclofenac for but one example) so risk tolerance can be rather low. Do we have any info on what associated things might correlate with false positives here? Saw some stuff saying many might instead be autistic (the feeling of not being quite right in the world or your body tending to apply to both), and I imagine there are any number of hormonal imbalance type deals that can also cause fun here.
What sort of accuracy of testing is available here? Stats on point of contact to final transition, later life transitions for those that might not have it available, outcomes studies for those that did. Double blind-placebo controlled would be a fun one but ethics wise, and outcomes wise (signs of puberty are harder to ignore than not).

**there are four outcomes in any medical test. Positive positive (you really have aids), positive negative (you really don't have aids), negative negative (actually you do have aids but test says no) and negative positive (test says yes but reality says no).

As far as being stung for it to fund it. Would be another in the many dubious calls of family courts from where I sit. It is not necessarily an elective cosmetic type setup but does not sit right either.


----------



## notimp (Sep 2, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> Here is a little something for all of you spouting nonsense about puberty blockers.
> 
> https://www.gendergp.com/debunking-the-myths-surrounding-puberty-blockers-trans-kids/


Bring arguments:


> At the start of GnRHa treatment, all patients had normal bone mineral density, Delemarre-van de Waal reported. During GnRHa treatment, bone density gradually increased in the younger patients but slightly decreased in the older ones. However, after the teens received cross-sex hormones, bone density caught up, similar to the increase that occurs naturally in puberty, she said. All patients had normal or near-normal bone mass for their age after cross-sex hormone therapy.


What about the cases where no cross-sex hormone therapy follows? Also normal or near normal? What about cases where blockers were used for more than 4 years? (I cant answer those questions, based on the information available.)
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-06/tes-mii061513.php

Also this is based on a study (Netherlands) in the endocrine society journal. This is not the endocrine society "debunking the myth." as your link suggested.


Around weather using blockers can be considered "extended decision time" or already 'the beginning of a transition process' (in essence 'are some of its effects irreversible') there seems to be a dispute within the field.


----------



## omgcat (Sep 3, 2020)

notimp said:


> Bring arguments:
> 
> What about the cases where no cross-sex hormone therapy follows? Also normal or near normal? What about cases where blockers were used for more than 4 years? (I cant answer those questions, based on the information available.)
> https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-06/tes-mii061513.php
> ...



Once they start receiving either cross-sex or own-sex hormones from their own body after stopping the puberty blockers, the bone density catches back up. Puberty blockers are used for precocious puberty as well as just trans issues. they have been heavily studied for more than 40 years. people are acting like the parents are forcing this kid into this choice, that is not how any of this works. If any of the doctors or psychiatrists think something is not right or above board, they can refuse to prescribe the medications. The only issue here are people freaking out about society and gender because it hurts their feelings.


----------



## Goku1992A (Sep 3, 2020)

This is why I refuse to marry because of the laws here. Also I hate if I offend someone here because I am not against the LBGT community but if you are going to change your gender that should be an age requirement thing 8 years old is NOT an acceptable age to be doing those things. It seems to me the mother is influencing the son to want to be "Luna". Your mind changes so much in the coarse of time because when I was 18 I wanted tattoos but now since I'm 29 I'll never get them.
T


----------



## Darth Meteos (Sep 4, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> the post


This is a real load of garbage.


UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> It is a lot to ask of the world to conform to one´s own beliefs.


Bad start, it's not a belief, mate, they're asking you not to treat them like garbage. One of these ways is to accurately refer to their gender.


UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> The truth is, most people do not really think a person who has had a sex change operation has become a different person.


Neither does the person, whatta strawman. Personhood is not contained in the balls, bro, their gender changed, nothing else.


UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> They go along with it because they do not want to offend.


Finally, you're catching on. All you have to do is not be a jerk and everyone's happy!
whatdoyoumeanthepostisn'toveryet


UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> However, it might be healthier for the people who want to do a sex change operation if society does not confront them, nor lie to them in order to not offend them.


This is such a mask-off moment. The idea of refraining from misgendering is now an act requiring a lie. How hard is it to get on the page, buddy? Your hypothetical revolved around someone who had surgery to change their sex. That person is unquestionably a woman now. Down to the frickin' equipment, they are, in fact, a woman. Where is the lie?


UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> People can see through lies eventually.


Oh, well thank god you're here to settle everything. All these trans people were getting upset at all the people accurately identifying their gender. They were feeling so low inside after all these people did a normal, everyday thing, like using an accurate pronoun. Thank GOD you're here to save the day, bro! Faith in humanity restored!


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 4, 2020)

Darth Meteos said:


> This is such a mask-off moment.


I never wore a mask in regards to this question. Out of compassion or to avoid conflict I would not "misgender" somebody who has already had a sex change operation. I would advise against it however if a friend had these desires.



Darth Meteos said:


> That person is unquestionably a woman now. Down to the frickin' equipment, they are, in fact, a woman. Where is the lie?


The word "person" is actually related to the meaning of "mask" [ancient theater], so in a sense a "transitioned" person has taken on a new role. But just like tranvestites who dress like a women, I do not consider trans-women as actual women. You cannot force me to conform to anything other than reality.

With regards to postponing puberty (not addressed to you specfically): It is a difficult question whether messing with hormones is good idea. What if a boy wants to be super-muscular after watching action-heroes movies? Can we deny him steroids? What if he identifies as a super-strong person?


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 4, 2020)

Darth Meteos said:


> That person is unquestionably a woman now. Down to the frickin' equipment, they are, in fact, a woman.


Not as far as biology is concerned, it isn't.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 4, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Not as far as biology is concerned, it isn't.


And yet all the worlds leading biologists and academics disagree with your statement. Here for instance 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/health/transgender-trump-biology.amp.html

Or here is a school teacher describing in simple terms for all you idiotic Americans why your claim about biology is utter bullshit. Now don't get all confused with the basic science terms used in it.

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/teacher-destroys-transphobia-science.

Another thing It costs cisgendered people like yourself absolutely fucking nothing to acknowledge another person's gender identity. Literally nothing. It doesn’t lessen your rights in any way. It doesn’t hurt you. It doesn’t even lessen your own identity as male or female. It costs you zero fucking dollars to be nice. So why the fucking hatred?

And one last thing whether you like it or not


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 4, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> And yet all the worlds leading biologists and academics disagree with your statement.


Appeal to authority fellacy. And I doubt it is even true. I can name one leading biologist who disagrees, Richard Dawkins: _‘Is a trans woman a woman?  Purely semantic.  If you define by chromosomes, no.  If by self-identification, yes.  I call her ‘she’ out of courtesy.’_
https://planettransgender.com/richard-dawkins-insults-transgender-community/

I have read the article you provided.
First of all, referring to other species is irrelevant (which the author acknowleges). Second, when she speaks about humans she is referring to actual transsexuals. I am referring to transgender people, i.e. the idea that any man could become a woman or vice versa.

Will you call me Japanese because I like manga and identify as one? You could, but you would do it out of courtesy, just like Dawkins. You wouldn´t actually believe I was Japanese [btw I am also not Chinese].


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 4, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> Appeal to authority fellacy. And I doubt it is even true. I can name one leading biologist who disagrees, Richard Dawkins: _‘Is a trans woman a woman?  Purely semantic.  If you define by chromosomes, no.  If by self-identification, yes.  I call her ‘she’ out of courtesy.’_
> https://planettransgender.com/richard-dawkins-insults-transgender-community/
> 
> I have read the article you provided.
> ...


Nice to see you picked Richard Dawkins a scientist hated by pretty much every other scientist because of all his false claims and utter bullshit  Most scientists don't even class Dawkins as real scientist. 

This person for instance 

Harvard professor EO Wilson said that Dawkins wasn’t a scientist at all, instead calling him a “journalist” and implying that he didn’t do any work of his own.
. 
“There is no dispute between me and Richard Dawkins and there never has been, because he’s a journalist, and journalists are people that report what the scientists have found and the arguments I’ve had have actually been with scientists doing research,” said Wilson during an interview on Newsnight.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 4, 2020)

Once you and I leave this world we will not leave anything behind as important as his book "The selfish gene". That put aside, do you have anything to add in terms of arguments? You have resorted to name-calling (Americans), the appeal to authority fallacy and now an ad-hominem.

Can you actually talk about my critique of your argument, which you had only provided by posting a link?


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 4, 2020)

Why nobody has actually answered any of my other posts here with proper answers you know like why over 50% of trans women in America will be sexually abused at least once in there life or why the violence rate against trans women in America is so high or indead why America is one of the most transpobic countries in the world.

I genuinely want to know WHY Americans have such venom in them towards the trans community that pretty much every other country in the world doesn't have.

I get transphobic abuse on this site at least 3 times a week. I have been told to do the world a favour and go kill myself. I have been told that my family deserve to die in a house fire just for me being me. I have been told a lot worse than the above two and every single comment has been by an American. So I will ask again why is it that Americans think it's acceptable to be that horrible to someone who's existence has no effect on their life whatsoever?


----------



## IncredulousP (Sep 4, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> why is it that Americans think it's acceptable to be that horrible to someone who's existence has no effect on their life whatsoever?


Because half the country is mouth-breathing knuckle-draggers that think with their primal feelings


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 4, 2020)

Well, I am not disputing that America is more "transphobic" than many other countries. And I don´t know why that is. Therefore, I had nothing to reply to. If you want me to speculate, it could be the result of puritan influence. Perhaps the radical pursuit of exclusion on the other side could also be traced to tradition. People used to exclude and socially punish heretics for centuries. Today´s dogma is on the other foot though.
The "disbelievers" of old are the "-phobes" of today. I do not like this label as it inaccurate [perhaps with the exception of Islamophobia during a terror attack]. I could call you a truth-phobe or reality-phobe, but I am not going to play this game. Russians have already jumped on this band wagon. Sinophobia might be popularized next.


----------



## notimp (Sep 4, 2020)

Is it every time you cant have anything else stick in terms of messaging, that you conjure up a 0.6%(/1.000.000) issue that you can dominate by asserting emotions and finding out, that what you feel must be right? 

This thread is over. Was over, when the background here was analyzed. There is likely no new information to be found. So now we exchange feels on that issue for a few more days, and call other people and each other names? Or nearly do so?

None of this is of politicial or societal importance. In the scientific field, you have exactly what you couldnt imagine to be there - namely, a debate, and a recognition that gender dysphoria numbers in the west currently are high, not only because the taboo got removed, but also because its partly seen as a youth trend to promote and recognize diversity positively.

Adding outrage, doesnt help. No, we dont need to talk about the father. No, your education strategy isnt best,... (Not directed at you personally - I just go through the usual tropes, that pop up.  )


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 4, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> And yet all the worlds leading biologists and academics disagree with your statement.


So you're saying you have an XX chromosome.


AmandaRose said:


> Another thing It costs cisgendered people like yourself absolutely fucking nothing to acknowledge another person's gender identity. Literally nothing. It doesn’t lessen your rights in any way. It doesn’t hurt you. It doesn’t even lessen your own identity as male or female. It costs you zero fucking dollars to be nice. So why the fucking hatred?


It costs me my sanity and intelligence. It lessens my right to freedom of speech. A mental illness shouldn't be celebrated.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 4, 2020)

Fucking hell bring up GNC people and every bastard suddenly thinks they're a biologist. Disgusting. Transphobes don't actually give a shit about biology, they just hate trans people. So lame.


----------



## notimp (Sep 4, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> It costs me my sanity and intelligence. It lessens my right to freedom of speech. A mental illness shouldn't be celebrated.


Same issue as always in here. Minority groups scratching each others eyes out, once one of them got broader recognition. Or if you want to argue, a near majority group (you this time) wanting to scratch a minority groups eyes out.

You understand where that 'celebration' comes from? You removed the taboo, and every emotionally driven adult wants their 'you go girl, you show them' story or moment. Its positive encouragement (and if it should have landed with the mother, in this case, its a problem). Its currently hightened, because its the current minority group du jour, thats recognized. After you've seen it ten times, you arent full of adoration anymore, every time you see a same sex couple kiss.

The entire premise, that this 'celebration' causes you distress, at least at some level is hyperbole. You are not saving society from celebrating an illness becoming a norm, because it isnt. And in general, as societies we are still lightyears away from celebrating mental illnesses (well apart from the usual ones, ... narcissism, sociopathy in business, ..) in general.

This is literally about raising societal acceptance for one specific minority a little. And most of it is hyperbole, and regretfully still virtue signaling. You should be able to live through that.

edit: As for why are we raising societal acceptance of minority groups currently, a little, arriving at smaller and smaller minorities? Because more and more of life depends on digital identity in some form. On social media people can find their bubbles, but because of the nature of allowing for bubbles people will clash with other identity models. (Same issue as with news, no 'unifying' gatekeeper anymore.) Solution, make everything a little more accepted (even if for most people just on a superfluous level (at least at first)). And even advertisers like it. (Broader audiences.)


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Fucking hell bring up GNC people and every bastard suddenly thinks they're a biologist. Disgusting. Transphobes don't actually give a shit about biology, they just hate trans people. So lame.


That is something of a strawman from where I sit, nor does it really address the underlying question or indeed demonstrate why it might not be a useful one (to dismiss biology as a factor would presumably mean hormones are pointless, and that there should be no further research into surgical approaches beyond what trickles down in general -- get some better cell meshing stuff that does better for scars and keep that but no need to do anything else).
Chromosomes is a decent goal but I would say it is possible to go without it, though the things required for that would probably allow for chromosome/DNA alteration (my vision here would be organs either cybernetic or vat grown being wired in to create a functional equivalent).

There are many issues to thrash out, many of them quite contentious (the subject of this thread being but one of them*) and many within various movements normally seeking the advancement of such things (and others related to it) have some very odd ideas whenever I go looking.

*quickfire round is usually done at this point. Should preferred pronouns be legally mandated (doing so does rather raise questions in the free speech realm), is the same word describing transistors in my radio and ramps on my skateboard actually a hateful term or just in some places and times, how many genders are there (you say GNC, gender non conforming for those playing along at home, so presumably more than the basic two for you, said two from where I sit potentially able to describe all scenarios whilst including trans peeps) and how do I start to categorise such things, the sports question, someone makes a pill that makes you not care about any perceived mismatch between organs and head... what do (some tell me it is impossible which I reckon I can refute trivially, others consider it some kind of erasure and to be blocked with great zeal, others say if it works then nice to have the option, others would advocate for what might actually be erasure, others less far down the erasure path but still have the pill as a preference if interacting with a medic), the mental disorder question, do you regulate access to hormones (some seemed to advocate for simple over the counter as opposed to prescription which is insane given potent they are), what measure of such things should be provided by insurance (state funded or private), the age question we are doing here but there are others in similar realms (seeking better means of identification for one), what protocols should be observed vis a vis living as before transitioning, the issues of the TERFs, is choosing not to sleep with trans peeps some flavour of phobic and is it one that matters if so... this could go on for a while but I will leave it at that.

Re Richard Dawkins not being in good standing.
Outside of religious types when did that happen? He did loads of popular books, tweaked the noses of said religious types, was generally seen to do some decent research in general and in his study of the public perception of science.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)

FAST6191 said:


> is the same word describing transistors in my radio and ramps on my skateboard actually a hateful term or just in some places and times, .



You know fine well that word in the trans community is considered as bad as the N word. You also know fine well that that word is used by transphobic idiots to hurt trans people. You also know that that word is acceptable when describing transistors in a radio or the ramps of a skateboard or part of a car ect. 

So why would you even bring this up is beyond me other than to stir up more shit in this thread. Especially when it's a word that is banned from being used on the site


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> You know fine well that word in the trans community is considered as bad as the N word. You also know fine well that that word is used by transphobic idiots to hurt trans people. You also know that that word is acceptable when describing transistors in a radio or the ramps of a skateboard or part of a car ect.
> 
> So why would you even bring this up is beyond me other than to stir up more shit in this thread. Especially when it's a word that is banned from being used on the site



You tell me it is the case, and some seem to back it up for at least some. I go looking though at historical usages, the path to some deeming it a derogatory epithet, and some contemporary usages, and a different picture gets painted. There is also the option to "reclaim" the word if indeed it has fallen into disfavour so the future is open as well.

The site rules are immaterial in this particular aspect of discussion as well. Easy enough to play to them however if letter combinations might cause someone to pop an artery or something.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)




----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> You know fine well that word in the trans community is considered as bad as the N word.


If I said that the word 'cis' is a hateful word aimed at normal people, what would you do?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



AmandaRose said:


> View attachment 223763


The left can't meme.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If I said that the word 'cis' is a hateful word aimed at normal people, what would you do?



That argument is hilarious how many times has someone been called a ugly cis or told to go die you cis bastard ect ect. Never is the answer now replace cis with the T word and the trans community hears comments like the above all the time. 

Even yourself said in a post deleted in this very thread that we were all supposedly ugly you even used the t word  then replaced it with all *****


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> That argument is hilarious how many times has someone been called a ugly cis or told to go die you cis bastard ect ect. Never is the answer now replace cis with the T word and the trans community hears comments like the above all the time.
> 
> Even yourself said in a post deleted in this very thread that we were all supposedly ugly you even used the t word  then replaced it with all *****


I've never seen anyone online holding up a sign saying that they're outright afraid of you people.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I've never seen anyone online holding up a sign saying that they're outright afraid of you people.


Oh I wonder why we have such a fear of
cisgenders. This might clear it up for you

According to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey:

Nearly half (46%) of respondents were verbally harassed in the past year because of being transgender.
Nearly one in ten (9%) respondents were physically attacked in the past year because of being transgender.
Nearly half (47%) of respondents were sexually assaulted at some point in their lifetime and one in ten (10%) were sexually assaulted in the past year. In communities of color, these numbers are higher: 53% of Black respondents were sexually assaulted in their lifetime and 13% were sexually assaulted in the last year.
72% of respondents who have done sex work, 65% of respondents who have experienced homelessness, and 61% of respondents with disabilities reported being sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
More than half (54%) experienced some form of intimate partner violence, including acts involving coercive control and physical harm.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> That argument is hilarious how many times has someone been called a ugly cis or told to go die you cis bastard ect ect.



I would usually see it combined to become "cis het" and in that case could drum up a fair few occasions of people being excluded, or seeking they be excluded, on that basis. Usually by morons that don't know what it is to have a conversation*, write a book with fictional characters, act in a film/tv show/play. Some might say it in jest as well but some also seem to imagine there is no such thing as jest, or maybe at least there is but being as there is but a chance that someone hears it and comes over all unnecessary or something that even that should be verboten.

*we then immediately have to have a lines drawing discussion -- is trans trans or should FTM have no bearing on MTF discussions and vice versa. Very different experiences from what I can see. I would however say that is pointless and lived experience, whilst useful, matters little in the face of abstract logic and empathy.

Water off a duck's back as far as I am concerned, a policy I advocate everybody adopt vis a vis words, but that would be answer to that question.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)

FAST6191 said:


> Water off a duck's back as far as I am concerned, a policy I advocate everybody adopt vis a vis words, but that would be answer to that question.


 So do you say the same to Black people when the N word is used to racially abuse them?


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

That got us much further...  *sarc* 

edit Not directed at the last posting but everything prior to that.

Confronting the 'word debate': I think Amanda Rose has a point here. The word is connected with all kinds of concepts and images, most of them seeminly stemming from societal prejudices,  the Trans community wouldnt want to be associated with, if they had the choice. Trying to minimize its use seems fair.

'Taking it back' to reframe it also only works, if society at large stops using it with a different connotation.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> So do you say the same to Black people when the N word is used to racially abuse them?


Indeed I do.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> So do you say the same to Black people when the N word is used to racially abuse them?


So would you defend us white people if the word 'white' was used as a slur?


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 5, 2020)

FAST6191 said:


> Indeed I do.


Well I'm glad you are consistent or consistently wrong in doing so depending on one's point of view but that is an argument for another day.

But the very fact I have been told on this very site to go kill myself ect or the worst one as I meantioned previously was when someone said they hoped my family die a horrible death in a fire simply because I am trans then the whole water of a ducks back thing os some what hard to do especially when you know what is going on with my mum as we have discussed in my status previously.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



UltraSUPRA said:


> So would you defend us white people if the word 'white' was used as a slur?


Why wouldn't I when I am white myself.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> The left can't meme.


It's not a meme, dummy


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

AmandaRose said:


> Well I'm glad you are consistent or consistently wrong in doing so depending on one's point of view but that is an argument for another day.
> 
> But the very fact I have been told on this very site to go kill myself ect or the worst one as I meantioned previously was when someone said they hoped my family die a horrible death in a fire simply because I am trans then the whole water of a ducks back thing os some what hard to do especially when you know what is going on with my mum as we have discussed in my status previously.



This is the internet. If you are not being told to kill yourself then it might be said that you are not in fact doing the internet.
Likewise I have had similar sentiments expressed towards me and mine.

Little dogs bark, and it is generally meaningless. Why you would internalise anything I am at a loss for.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> It's not a meme, dummy


How fragile _are_ you people if you need to make a rulebook for things that we can't say to people like you?


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> So would you defend us white people if the word 'white' was used as a slur?


If this becomes an argument for 'white people being excluded', cry me a river..  This is a majority (or almost majority still), vs. an ultra minority argument.

Lets open up the analogy to radical feminism here. "But as a male I might be excluded from some of their meetings" might be correct, but you dont need a form of self pitty here - because, you - essentially - are barred access to a self help group and thats about it.

I've a - some would say derogative - image pretty vivid in my head currently (having 'visited' a liberal 'elites' online conference recently). And the image kind of looks like this: All the sessions that leaned heavily on feminism to make society more just - were lacking high level participants and people in there, usually werent amongst the brightest speakers. That I made that generalization, might be prejudice, but it was possible.

So in essence, leave them their self empowerment movements, even through you might be excluded, in the bigger context, none of that will ever be important. (People might make it to the higher national political level with that concept, but thats about it. In the space where ideas are king, no one is gonna deal with someone bringing a semantic crutch to an already liberal discussion.)


UltraSUPRA said:


> How fragile _are_ you people if you need to make a rulebook for things that we can't say to people like you?


Beside the point. The word in question was coined and filled with imagery at a time, when the acceptance movement hadnt hit, and when it would have been used mostly derogatively. They got a chance at a fresh start (societal acceptance wise), and bringing up the catalyst for old concepts hurts that. Using the word isnt as 'verboten' as the N word in the societal concept, but hey - be a man and cut them some slack.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> How fragile _are_ you people if you need to make a rulebook for things that we can't say to people like you?


There's no rulebook, it's just common sense to respect the existence of other people. The image was made for people who lack that understanding.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> There's no rulebook, it's just common sense to respect the existence of other people. The image was made for people who lack that understanding.


Sticks and stones.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Sticks and stones.


I guess I shouldn't expect much conscience from the guy who told me that they'd say the N-word if it wasn't banned on this forum lmao. Yeesh


----------



## RichardTheKing (Sep 5, 2020)

Wait until AFTER puberty (ideally wait until adulthood), the father shouldn't have to pay squat, and changing a son into a daughter is utterly disgusting.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

The son needs to be taken from his abusive mother, and given to his father. Then the mother can be sued for child abuse.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

RichardTheKing said:


> Wait until AFTER puberty (ideally wait until adulthood), the father shouldn't have to pay squat, and changing a son into a daughter is utterly disgusting.


Wait until after puberty for what? Thats a mistake I made. Transitioning (as in the operations) ALWAYS are performed after you hit adulthood. Waiting to take puberty blockers until adulthood kind of doesnt work.

hm...

"The father should...." Lets not mix this up with resentments in the divorced farthers community - this is a single case, highly emotionally, highly unusual. There is no concept of 'single case litigation' that would have any legal importance, coming out of it. This is literaly the worst case to generalize a point about something... else. And no - emotional argument is not enough to have the father not pay child support in this case.


RichardTheKing said:


> The son needs to be taken from his abusive mother, and given to his father. Then the mother can be sued for child abuse.


And then what if the child turns out to be gender dysphoric even after puberty (so long term) - you might have produced multiple traumas doing that. Child currently doesnt seem traumatized, at least. So while highly unusual, and while I personally also see tendencies in the mother to obsess about the concept, and exploit it for popularity gains - child doesnt seem to be neglected or hurt, and if all of that turns out to be a psychological minf*ck, can separate themselves from it later on in life, simply by growing up. If they get puberty blockers, or not, is an issue that has to be decided on a medical practitioners ethics level. (They have councils for that. They have psychological assesments for that.)


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> I guess I shouldn't expect much conscience from the guy who told me that they'd say the N-word if it wasn't banned on this forum lmao. Yeesh


oh gawd he said he don't care 'bout wut he says mods plz kill 'im t' deaf


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> oh gawd he said he don't care 'bout wut he says mods plz kill 'im t' deaf


You're proving my point bud


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> You're proving my point bud


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> View attachment 223764


That image means literally nothing


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

Ultra supra - could you not be such a d*ck an react to arguments against your position instead of spreading personal attacks for the last ten posts?

Talk on the argumentative level or sh*t up. No one needs your pre prepared 'white people victims memes'. Take that folder on your desktop - and stuff it.

This entire thread was conceptualized as outrage bait. And now you are prolonging it by going against people individually and bringing insane prepared memes, while ignoring the arguments brought against your position,.


edit: Here is my white person meme:

White person: Virtue signaling on facebook for the feels. If that gets boring. Going out in life and being able to do anything they want to without being judged especially harshly. (If they arent into blowing up self help groups for minorities for no reason).


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

I also don´t know what it is doing in this thread, but it is funny and true.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

Truth and humor are both subjective concepts. (Queue the no, there is only one truth, and it is mine responses..  )

Although I have to admit, this thread - very engaging..


----------



## KingVamp (Sep 5, 2020)

Not sure how you can be so mean-spirited and then try to play victim.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

KingVamp said:


> Not sure how you can be so mean-spirited and then try to play victim.


It's the oldest trick in the book for bigots


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Truth and humor are both subjective concepts. (Queue the no, there is only one truth, and it is mine responses..  )
> 
> Although I have to admit, this thread - very engaging..


If truth is subjective, what is the purpose of schools?


Seliph said:


> It's the oldest trick in the book for bigots


You haven't exactly proven me wrong on transgenderism being a mental illness.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> You haven't exactly proven me wrong on transgenderism being a mental illness.


It was never my job to prove you wrong, I think to most everyone else it's quite apparent that you're wrong. There's no use arguing with someone who doesn't understand what they're talking about.

If you REALLY want evidence, here's a nice little video you can watch.

But I don't think you will.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> It was never my job to prove you wrong, I think to most everyone else it's quite apparent that you're wrong. There's no use arguing with someone who doesn't understand what they're talking about.
> 
> If you REALLY want evidence, here's a nice little video you can watch.
> 
> But I don't think you will.



I'm not watching leftist propoganda. Put it into words or I'll spam Stonetoss up your anus.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I'm not watching leftist propoganda. Put it into words or I'll spam Stonetoss up your anus.


https://medium.com/@xtravisage/beyond-the-genderbread-person-1bee360d8377
Here's it in words. If you'd like to read through and cross-reference the article, be my guest.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> https://medium.com/@xtravisage/beyond-the-genderbread-person-1bee360d8377
> Here's it in words. If you'd like to read through and cross-reference the article, be my guest.


Oh...it's one of _those _articles that try to say that sex and gender aren't the same. How about you find a biology textbook from the 20th century and show me the page on sex/gender?


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Oh...it's one of _those _articles that try to say that sex and gender aren't the same. How about you find a biology textbook from the 20th century and show me the page on sex/gender?


My guy, just look up the dictionary definitions of sex and gender. They are clearly different. It is not hard to do this research.

Here are several studies on gender identity and gender expression from Yale
https://yale.summon.serialssolutions.com/#!/search?ho=f&fvf=IsScholarly,true,f&l=en&q="gender expression"

And here's the oxford definition of gender as a grammatical construct from Oxfordre.com
https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/vi...99384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-43

The science is not on your side, and it hasn't been for several years.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> My guy, just look up the dictionary definitions of sex and gender. They are clearly different. It is not hard to do this research.
> 
> Here are several studies on gender identity and gender expression from Yale
> https://yale.summon.serialssolutions.com/#!/search?ho=f&fvf=IsScholarly,true,f&l=en&q="gender expression"
> ...


Have you ever heard of indoctrination?


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Have you ever heard of indoctrination?


Have *you* ever heard of sugma?


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> This case has been public for a few years now. The latest court decision overrides the previous one and it seems the mother will be able to go ahead with the transition of her son. Apparently the father has to pay 5000$ a month.
> There is dispute whether the son actually wants to become a girl.
> 
> What is new to me is that the mother is not even the biological mother. She received the twin boys via egg donation.
> ...


Gender change is wrong and unnatural. Nobody should do it. No to mention, this surgery doesn't actually even change your gender. Your DNA still identifies you as your real gender and you are permanently infertile if you "change" your gender.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Gender change is wrong and unnatural.


Even people only reading clickbait ads know better:

6 surprising animals that can change sex
https://animalogic.ca/wild/6-surprising-animals-that-can-change-sex

If your truth is based on feels exclusively, and you find the need to still convince people using them, may I suggest you try religion.

Also, we all know, that this is how many people feel. Thats kind of the point for the campaigning.


dwain12435 said:


> Your DNA still identifies you as your real gender and you are permanently infertile if you "change" your gender.


I sense a little detective who wants a mobile DNA testing kit for christmas.

Almost all the points campaigned for are about societal perception, and not about what would result from your DNA, society in daily interaction doesnt test DNA. (And before you get into the 'hoodwinked' mindset, there are about 1000 types of interactions, where not knowing the other persons DNA would not cause distress or harm.)


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Gender change is wrong and unnatural.


Gender change is awesome dude you should try it sometime.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Even people only reading clickbait ads know better:
> 
> 6 surprising animals that can change sex
> https://animalogic.ca/wild/6-surprising-animals-that-can-change-sex
> ...


That is COMPLETELY irrelevant, as these animals change their sex naturally, whereas people just chop off their penises and do other things to simulate the other gender. Besides, maybe this kid might have wanted children? With a "gender change", this poor child will never be able to have any children of his own.


----------



## KingVamp (Sep 5, 2020)

I wonder how many people would change their sex, if it was easily changeable.


Also "unnatural". You mean like the internet you are using?


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> That is COMPLETELY irrelevant, as these animals change their sex naturally, whereas people just chop off their penises and do other things to simulate the other gender.


Let me get this straight, gender change is natural, when it happens naturally, but unnatural, if it does not happen naturally.

The same way as removing a rotten tooth you'd die from is natural, when it happens naturally, but unnatural, if it does not happen naturally?

Also. driving in a train is unnatural and would harm peoples minds, because humans werent meant to perceive that kind of speed, also was a popular argument in the day.

Heck, even the altar bread you'd consume at a mess is produced unnaturally these days.

If the argument is not about 'natures ethics' but about anything not natural being wrong because it wasnt meant to be, you couldnt live in a house, you couldnt press the lightswitch. And could I attend one of your ceremonies against breast implants please? Although, I couldnt fly over to where you are living to see it because it is unnatural. Nevermind streaming it. Work of the devil, I tell you.


edit: Also, on the semantics level: Something isnt ok, because it doesnt happen. So you shouldnt make it happen. Then put a word next to it that has the effect of making people feel wholesome and predetermined. With no extra logical argument attached to it. Its literally, it doesnt happen, so you shouldnt make it happen, because - word that makes you feel its predetermined.

You got to love religious arguing.


----------



## omgcat (Sep 5, 2020)

I just see a bunch of people in here arguing about shit they have no academic knowledge of. Like a bunch of people here probably don't even have a BS let alone the MS you need to be a therapist or the PhD you need to be a prescribing psychiatrist. let other people worry about their personal medical choices, and leave the conversation to people who are actually educated on the topics and fields of study involved.

also maybe don't have a fit about calling someone by their preferred pronouns. It's not hard, and it does not detract from your freedom of speech.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Let me get this straight, gender change is natural, when it happens naturally, but unnatural, if it does not happen naturally.
> 
> The same way as removing a rotten tooth you'd die from is naturally, when it happens naturally, but unnatural, if it does not happen naturally?
> 
> ...


Yes, but my point was that they shouldn't be doing this to this kid because he probably doesn't even know what any of this means. This process permanently prevents reproduction.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Yes, but my point was that they shouldn't be doing this to this kid because he probably doesn't even know what any of this means. This process permanently prevents reproduction.


Your point was what I described in the edit above:

edit: Also, on the semantics level: Something isnt ok, because it doesnt happen. So you shouldnt make it happen. Then put a word next to it that has the effect of making people feel wholesome and actions being predetermined. With no extra logical argument attached to it. Its literally, it doesnt happen, so you shouldnt make it happen, because - word that makes you feel its predetermined.

You've got to love religious arguing.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> This process permanently prevents reproduction.


It doesn't, actually. You don't have to have bottom surgery to be trans. The majority of trans-women actually keep their dicks. Anyways, bottom surgery can't be done on a person until they're an adult or have developed sufficiently enough. Like literally, you cannot do actual bottom surgery on an 8-year-old child. I don't really want to go into detail about this, but you straight up can't. It's not possible without botching the surgery.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

Michael Jackson, a African-American did surgeries (and perhaps other things) to look more like a European American. Has he become one?

He did not ask people refer to him as such, I am just asking this to get the point across. Out of curtesy we might stop calling him African-American, but we all know he did not change his ethnicity.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Your point was what I described in the edit above:
> 
> edit: Also, on the semantics level: Something isnt ok, because it doesnt happen. So you shouldnt make it happen. Then put a word next to it that has the effect of making people feel wholesome and actions being predetermined. With no extra logical argument attached to it. Its literally, it doesnt happen, so you shouldnt make it happen, because - word that makes you feel its predetermined.
> 
> You've got to love religious arguing.


WTF does that even mean? Why is there a political forum on a gamer's website anyway? I was hoping to get away from all this political shit.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Seliph said:


> It doesn't, actually. You don't have to have bottom surgery to be trans. The majority of trans-women actually keep their dicks. Anyways, bottom surgery can't be done on a person until they're an adult or have developed sufficiently enough. Like literally, you cannot do actual bottom surgery on an 8-year-old child. I don't really want to go into detail about this, but you straight up can't. It's not possible without botching the surgery.


Well, then, that just proves my point. If you have a penis and can sexually reproduce with women, then you are male. That's all there is to it.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Well, then, that just proves my point. If you have a penis and can sexually reproduce with women, then you are male. That's all there is to it.


Lol I guess you've never heard of intersex people.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Lol I guess you've never heard of intersex people.


That is a different topic. The boy is male and - according to her mother - wants to become female.
Transgender is not transsexual/intersex. The former is the idea that you can change who you are based on feelings. The latter is an actual medical condition.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> That is a different topic. The boy is male and - according to her mother - wants to become female.
> Transgender is not transsexual.


Of course it's relevant. I'm just giving @dwain12435 an example of people who aren't men who also have penises and are able to sexually reproduce with women. I'm refuting their point.


----------



## lone_wolf323 (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> WTF does that even mean? Why is there a political forum on a gamer's website anyway? I was hoping to get away from all this political shit.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


I dont understand why you are even in these forums here. You say you despise these but you continue to post in here. Its kinda.puzzling to what you have said.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> That is a different topic. The boy is male and - according to her mother - wants to become female.
> Transgender is not transsexual/intersex. The former is the idea that you can change who you are based on feelings. The latter is an actual medical condition.


The idea that you can change who you are based on feelings is stupid! I feel like Lebron James! Does that mean I am Lebron James? No! This is stupid!


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> The idea that you can change who you are based on feelings is stupid!


Why not? For example, if you felt like a clown (which I'm sure you do often), wouldn't it make sense to become a clown based on those feelings if you so chose? Wouldn't that affirm your identity as a clown?

Just like clowns, gender is nothing but a transient social construct.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

If





Seliph said:


> gender is nothing but a transient social construct.


, then why are people born as male and female instead of being born with a heap of moldable clay in place of their sex organs so that you can make their gender be whatever you want?


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> If, then why are people born as male and female instead of being born with a heap of moldable clay in place of their sex organs so that you can make their gender be whatever you want?


1. There are a lot more things that factor into a person's sex than sex organs alone.
2. Again you clearly don't know what intersex people are.
3. Sex organs are basically "moldable clay", that's why some people get bottom surgeries to change their sex organs. Most of the human body can be reshaped like "moldable clay" anyways, it's not a concept exclusive to genitalia.
4. Gender is not the same thing as sex.
5. You ignored my sick burn, and I'm gonna be honest, that kind of hurt.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> Michael Jackson, a African-American did surgeries (and perhaps other things) to look more like a European American. Has he become one?


For most of his album buyers actually, probably yes. He would have had much less cultural appeal at the time, if he hadn't. Which actually was probably what his label told his parents at one point.

Being loved by the public then became an obsession with the results we are familiar with.

Also we dont just have to limit that to changing physical properties.

Cosby show was famous for what you'd call cultural appropriation nowadays. And very successful.

The entire advertising industry, and much of capitalism is based on a principle, that image is reality.

Ever heard of facebook? You are happy, if people around you like you, right?


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

Just because you modify something to resemble something else, doesn't mean it has become something else. It merely resembles it.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Just because you modify something to resemble something else, doesn't mean it has become something else. It merely resembles it.


Correct. At least on the DNA level. But its the resemblance people are after. Self image. 'Feeling of what you are.'

You dont greenlight the operation for a  'want' you greenlight it for severe psychological strain of feeling that you are in the wrong body. (After trying all other forms of alleviating the psychological strain.) And even if people dont go for the operation, but just for cosmetic changes, they are faced with "whats that - we dont like it", in social interaction.

The idea is to alleviate that.

Not to change 'reality' as a whole. Just perception.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Just because you modify something to resemble something else, doesn't mean it has become something else. It merely resembles it.


Really? Is that really true? If I mold clay into a pot, does that make a pot or does it only make the semblance of a pot? If I put a red ball on your nose, would that make you a clown or does that only make you resemble a clown? Are organs created from stem cells organs or do they simply create the semblance of organs? If I forge metal into a sharp stabby stick with a grip and pommel on it, does that make a sword or does it simply make the semblance of a sword?

If you took a penis and molded into the exact shape of a vagina, does that make a vagina or does it only make the semblance of a vagina? If you can agree that molded clay makes a pot, I think you can agree that a molded penis can create a vagina.

Do you see where your line of logic takes you? You should really read more about post-modernism. And also intersex people, because if you read about them you'd realize the entire foundation of your argument fundamentally makes no sense.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Correct. At least on the DNA level. But its the resemblance people are after. Self image. 'Feeling of what you are.'
> 
> You dont greenlight the operation for a  'want' you greenlight it for severe psychological strain of feeling that you are in the wrong body. (After trying all other forms of alleviating the psychological strain.) And even if people dont go for the operation, but just for cosmetic changes, they are faced with "whats that - we dont like it", in social interaction.
> 
> ...


My argument is that people shouldn't say that they are a different gender when all they actually are are their original gender with a modification so that they resemble their target gender.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Seliph said:


> Really? Is that really true? If I mold clay into a pot, does that make a pot or does it only make the semblance of a pot? If I put a red ball on your nose, would that make you a clown or does that only make you resemble a clown? Are organs created from stem cells organs or do they simply create the semblance of organs? If I forge metal into a sharp stabby stick with a grip and pommel on it, does that make a sword or does it simply make the semblance of a sword?
> 
> If you took a penis and molded into the exact shape of a vagina, does that make a vagina or does it only make the semblance of a vagina? If you can agree that molded clay makes a pot, I think you can agree that a molded penis can create a vagina.
> 
> Do you see where your line of logic takes you? You should really read more about post-modernism. And also intersex people, because if you read about them you'd realize the entire foundation of your argument fundamentally makes no sense.


This would make sense (somewhat) if transgender surgery actually changed your gender. But it doesn't. After a transgender surgery, your DNA stays the same gender, many parts of your brain and other body parts remain linked to the original gender, and your fake sex organs are really low quality. (A transgender woman's new "penis" is made of intestinal flesh.)


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> Just because you modify something to resemble something else, doesn't mean it has become something else. It merely resembles it.


Yes, and resemblance is enough. It literally all we can do. We can't do more than resemblance. (On different levels.)

But thats enough to remove psychological strain (How much? It differs.)

But if those people then are confronted with 'we dont like it' all the time, it kills them (figuratively - just not to be too dark here) regardless.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

Yes, so transgender surgery doesn't actually change your gender, because 





notimp said:


> We can't do more than resemblance.


----------



## notimp (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> My argument is that people shouldn't say that they are a different gender when all they actually are are their original gender with a modification so that they resemble their target gender.


That defeats the purpose.

Let me open up here, and tell you a personal story. Sincerely hoping that you arent just trolling because damn it, I dont like to.. 

I had a very similar experience in life. I had two vitrectomies, for mouches volantes. I now have IOLs in both of my eyes (because expectedly cataracts in both eyes followed a few years after) - everything went well. Which isnt always the case. My vision is not as it was before, but it is good - for having IOLs.

The operation also isn't done for a physiological need, but because of psychological strain. It is only done if nothing else helps.

And it helped enormously. Its an extremely difficult thing to promote, because if complications arise...

But at least I didn't have to deal with people telling me all day 'what have you done', after I've done it.



dwain12435 said:


> Yes, so transgender surgery doesn't actually change your gender, because


Gender socially is identified based on resemblance. But genetically, medically. No, we cant change you entirely. You wont be able to have children. Your genetical makeup doesnt change. But in most daily interactions, that doesnt matter.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> This would make sense (somewhat) if transgender surgery actually changed your gender. But it doesn't. After a transgender surgery, your DNA stays the same gender, many parts of your brain and other body parts remain linked to the original gender, and your fake sex organs are really low quality. (A transgender woman's new "penis" is made of intestinal flesh.)


DNA has nothing to do with gender, you're thinking about sex. And regardless of the quality of a trans-man's penis (I've seen some quality ones btw), they still have a penis lol, erection and all. Think about it, would you call a man with a micropenis female just because he has a "low quality" penis? No, you wouldn't.

Also with hormone replacement therapy, several aspects of your body and brain are changed to help you resemble the desired sex. You can look this up.


----------



## omgcat (Sep 5, 2020)

dwain12435 said:


> My argument is that people shouldn't say that they are a different gender when all they actually are are their original gender with a modification so that they resemble their target gender.



gender != biological sex. gender is in the mind, sex is the body part.

even sex is not binary, you can have varying degrees of issues such as SRY gene deletion which means someone with an XY develops through the XX pathway. one can even have X0 which results in a female body and striated gonads. one can even have SRY gene translation (movement) that results in a male body with XX sex chromosomes. also the crazy variations such as XXY, XXYY, XYY, ect. trans issues are part of the natural variation of the human species having to do with the mental part of sex. while it is small, when you get numbers of people in the scales of billions, these variations can be more common. Intersex and non-standard genital formation is as common as red hair (1-2%).


----------

