# Oklahoma Republican proposes that any provider who provides gender affirming care to 26 year olds or younger is a felony



## Nothereed (Tuesday at 5:46 PM)

https://abcnews.go.com/US/new-bill-ban-gender-confirming-care-26-oklahoma/story?id=96261603

I just can't anymore. What a way to start the new year.


----------



## AncientBoi (Tuesday at 6:01 PM)

[sends that six-year-old to Oklahoma]


----------



## pustal (Tuesday at 6:04 PM)

It not even longer that excuse to "protect the children from themselves, it's just a phase", what's the excuse for adults now aside religious fanaticism?


----------



## FAST6191 (Wednesday at 2:56 AM)

pustal said:


> It not even longer that excuse to "protect the children from themselves, it's just a phase", what's the excuse for adults now aside religious fanaticism?


I know it is another Nothereed troll post but 25 is about the time a lot of formation of various things in developmental psychology (there is a reason special forces won't recruit you before then, driving fatalities drop like a stone and all manner of other marks of maturity that correspond to perks in society or at least massive reductions in insurance).
How it plays in matters of transgenderism I am not sure, or indeed if it has even been studied that much (the stuff for kids is up in the air and this is way out into the unknown in either direction, though rates for 25+ are probably on the low end).
There is probably also the element of insurance at play if 25 is the cut off for kids to be on the insurance of their parents.


----------



## FurryGreenLobster (Wednesday at 3:44 AM)

They just don't want them getting gender affirming care under their parents insurance, 26 is also the cuttof for that.


----------



## Nothereed (Wednesday at 6:37 PM)

FAST6191 said:


> know it is another Nothereed troll post* but 25 is about the time*


Going to cut you off. All up to that point they have a substantially higher chance of suicide, which said gender affirming care, substantially brings down the odds. This is specifically targeting them, this is hate.
You wouldn't delay depression medication who is suffering suicidal ideation would you?


FAST6191 said:


> How it plays in matters of transgenderism I am not sure, or indeed if it has even been studied that much


https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/gender-affirming-care-saves-lives

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789423


> In this prospective cohort of 104 TNB youths aged 13 to 20 years, receipt of gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones, was associated with 60% lower odds of moderate or severe depression and 73% lower odds of suicidality over a 12-month follow-up.



https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/ what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people /



> Transgender individuals, particularly those who cannot access treatment for gender dysphoria or who encounter unsupportive social environments, are more likely than the general population to experience health challenges such as depression, anxiety, suicidality and minority stress. While gender transition can mitigate these challenges, the health and well-being of transgender people can be harmed by stigmatizing and discriminatory treatment.


We have studies on this and consensus on it, go act ingorant on the subject elsewhere.


----------



## The Catboy (Wednesday at 6:47 PM)

This isn’t about children, it’s just a hatred of trans people and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that fact. Conservatives are just hateful people who hate when other people have freedom, that’s how it has always been.


----------



## SG854 (Wednesday at 6:48 PM)

Do not hate Trans. Love one another. Please.


----------



## chrisrlink (Wednesday at 7:34 PM)

if OK AL TX and SC want to suceed from our union let them most hateful states in the nation go, good riddence,also a vast majority of conservitives polled disagree with the people in charge R v W some a pro trans it is only the people in power and those religious wackjobs that hate LGBTQ (don't quote me on that though i read somewhere a vast majority of republicans (middle class) disagree on those issues that the higher ups hate


----------



## lolcatzuru (Wednesday at 7:42 PM)

Nothereed said:


> https://abcnews.go.com/US/new-bill-ban-gender-confirming-care-26-oklahoma/story?id=96261603
> 
> I just can't anymore. What a way to start the new year.



i know! what an amazing gift! 23 off to a great start


----------



## Taikutsumaranai (Wednesday at 7:45 PM)

Ehehehe, somewhat reminds me of an RPG game I used to play and I couldn't use a class change scroll until I've reached a certain level XD


----------



## stanna (Wednesday at 7:57 PM)

Your even a man or a woman period, you can identify as a hedgehog if you want but your still a man or woman end off.


----------



## FAST6191 (Wednesday at 9:23 PM)

Nothereed said:


> Going to cut you off. All up to that point they have a substantially higher chance of suicide, which said gender affirming care, substantially brings down the odds. This is specifically targeting them, this is hate.
> You wouldn't delay depression medication who is suffering suicidal ideation would you?
> 
> https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/gender-affirming-care-saves-lives
> ...


Everything I saw was way less settled, and diagnosis rates also very questionable (rates that initially engage vs rates that ultimately do anything, and rates of detransitioning later if first do no harm is in play). For genuine cases I can well believe access to care being blocked by whatever would make things troubling, the question is usually on figuring out who needs it and who is something else as not all things are eminently reversible. You are also trying to twist my reasoning, though again you seem to have a nice agenda in all the posts around here (half the population is evil, world is terrifyingly awful despite all evidence to the contrary) and are possibly misreading me as well (I dare say we would align on many things but you seem to enjoy raging).


----------



## x65943 (Wednesday at 9:45 PM)

FAST6191 said:


> Everything I saw was way less settled, and diagnosis rates also very questionable (rates that initially engage vs rates that ultimately do anything, and rates of detransitioning later if first do no harm is in play). For genuine cases I can well believe access to care being blocked by whatever would make things troubling, the question is usually on figuring out who needs it and who is something else as not all things are eminently reversible. You are also trying to twist my reasoning, though again you seem to have a nice agenda in all the posts around here (half the population is evil, world is terrifyingly awful despite all evidence to the contrary) and are possibly misreading me as well (I dare say we would align on many things but you seem to enjoy raging).


People claim it's settled science but we are BY FAR in uncharted territory and we aren't practicing evidence based medicine when it comes to sexual transition / hormone therapy


----------



## sombrerosonic (Thursday at 7:51 PM)

stanna said:


> Your even a man or a woman period, you can identify as a hedgehog if you want but your still a man or woman end off.


Fuck i cant be Sonic now......

Thanks for ruining my dreams (Shitpost)


----------



## Wolfy (Thursday at 8:04 PM)

As much as I want to support people, it makes sense to not let those who are below a certain age do irreversible damage to their bodies. Everyone is entitled to their reasonings, but when its someone who may be going through a hard time and it seems like the only way, at least anyone up until 18 is usually confined to staying with their families, which can be very hard at times, but not the reason to alter your body in ways like transitioning. 26? Nah, you're probably mentally stable to make such a decision, but nothing before 18 I'd say.


----------



## Foxi4 (Friday at 8:05 AM)

pustal said:


> It not even longer that excuse to "protect the children from themselves, it's just a phase", what's the excuse for adults now aside religious fanaticism?


Based on the number chosen, and this is pure speculation on my part, I’d wager it has to do with brain development. The prefrontal cortex develops and matures until the age of 25, give or take. With that in mind, the logical conclusion is that at the age of 26 you’re dealing with someone who has a fully developed brain. Personally I think it’s a huge stretch, I’m against any age gate that goes beyond 18 - if someone’s old enough to go to war, they’re old enough to drink, smoke and make decisions regarding their own health. If we’re pushing things well beyond the age we consider as “adult”, the distinction between “adult” and “child” loses all meaning. Either someone’s an adult or they’re not. “Adult Lite” isn’t a thing.

Edit: First thing that popped up on Google tracks, so I’ll go with that - prefrontal cortex and limbic system.



> The *maturation of the adolescent brain* is also influenced by heredity, environment, and *sex hormones (estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone)*, which play a crucial role in myelination. Furthermore, glutamatergic neurotransmission predominates, whereas gamma-aminobutyric acid neurotransmission remains under construction, and this might be responsible for immature and impulsive behavior and neurobehavioral excitement during adolescent life. The *adolescent population is highly vulnerable* to driving under the influence of alcohol and social maladjustments due to an immature limbic system and prefrontal cortex. Synaptic plasticity and the release of neurotransmitters may also be influenced by environmental neurotoxins and drugs of abuse including cigarettes, caffeine, and alcohol during adolescence. Adolescents may become involved with offensive crimes, irresponsible behavior, unprotected sex, juvenile courts, or even prison.



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3621648/


----------



## DCarnage (Friday at 8:11 AM)

Years ago, I lived in California and tried to get snipped when I was 20 years old, I had two children but nooo, no doctor would snip me until I was 24. I tried again at 24 and nobody would snip me.. Had another child later on, wouldn't trade her for the world but.. wasn't supposed to have another one. Oh wait, are we talking about gender reassignment? Pfft, 18 plus, who gives af? It's their choice, let them live their lives.


----------



## RetroGen (Friday at 9:51 AM)

It's extremely doubtful that this anti-transgender bill is the result of anything scientific, such that any correlates in the literature are probably spurious cherry-picking at best.  Rather, it is punitive legislation which is more likely motivated by religious and political ideology and the denial of scientific facts, as most such views generally are.  

Something to bear in mind is that there is a limited time window for developing secondary sexual characteristics.  Barring transgender people from receiving gender affirming care until well into adulthood all but guarantees that their bodies will develop with the wrong secondary sexual characteristics, callously ensuring permanent gender dysphoria and all of the psychological issues that come with it.  Suffice to say, I accept the reality that transgender people exist and require timely, scientifically-informed, medical care.  Ideologically driven denial of this has no place in modern governance.


----------



## Foxi4 (Friday at 12:34 PM)

RetroGen said:


> It's extremely doubtful that this anti-transgender bill is the result of anything scientific, such that any correlates in the literature are probably spurious cherry-picking at best.  Rather, it is punitive legislation which is more likely motivated by religious and political ideology and the denial of scientific facts, as most such views generally are.
> 
> Something to bear in mind is that there is a limited time window for developing secondary sexual characteristics.  Barring transgender people from receiving gender affirming care until well into adulthood all but guarantees that their bodies will develop with the wrong secondary sexual characteristics, callously ensuring permanent gender dysphoria and all of the psychological issues that come with it.  Suffice to say, I accept the reality that transgender people exist and require timely, scientifically-informed, medical care.  Ideologically driven denial of this has no place in modern governance.


I don’t know if it’s black and white like that. Gender identity starts properly developing between the ages of 10 and 13, even children who perceive themselves as the opposite gender have a very high likelihood of desisting - in fact, the majority does end up being comfortable with their natal gender. It can only be considered permanent after puberty, and even that’s not a given. Brain development is strongly influenced by sex-specific hormones and interrupting that development leaves a lot of question marks, to say the least. That being said, once someone reaches adulthood, which in most countries is considered 18, I don’t see a reason why a patient couldn’t make an educated decision on the subject. As far as secondary sexual characteristics are concerned, they’re a purely cosmetic issue. I would err on the side of caution in this instance.


----------



## RetroGen (Friday at 3:44 PM)

Valwinz said:


> -snip-


This represents the sort of ignorant, denialistic, attitude that drives anti-transgender laws and policies.  It's no surprise that they tend to come from the political right, known for heightened disgust response (as seen above), and the denial of scientific facts.  It's bad faith to act as an apologist for such groups/individuals and portray their views as scientifically-guided.  It would be much more honest to simply admit that bigotry is the key motivator.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26481-left-or-right-wing-brains-disgust-response-tells-all/

	Post automatically merged: Friday at 3:53 PM

https://www.them.us/story/transition-regret-percentage-overblown-study

"A new review of medical data has found even more proof that transgender youth know who they are — and that fears over transition regret are dramatically overblown by anti-trans activists.

The study, published October 20 in _The Lancet_, a prestigious and long-running medical journal, reviewed information from the Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria about trans patients who took puberty blockers before turning 18. Researchers examined the medical records of 720 patients at Amsterdam UMC’s Center for Expertise on Gender Dysphoria who had historically received at least three months of puberty blockers as minors, and attempted to determine how many of those patients had an active prescription for hormone replacement therapy on file as of December 31, 2018.

Of the entire cohort, 704 were found to have active HRT prescriptions at the end of the data collection period — a massive 98% of the patients analyzed.

As for the remaining 2%, researchers cautioned that the absence of data doesn’t mean they necessarily returned to identifying with their gender assigned at birth; most of those 16 had undergone some form of gonadectomy as part of their transition-related care, researchers noted, and may not realize they still need hormone treatment to avoid osteoporosis or other conditions. Others could be nonbinary and not desire further hormonal treatment, or may have been pressured into halting treatment by outside stressors, such as unaccepting family members.

The Amsterdam study’s findings affirm previous research into the persistence of gender identity among trans youth, and illustrate some of the challenges in identifying why a small number of people halt or reverse their medical transitions. Another study of over 300 young people from the Princeton Trans Youth Project published in May indicated that around 97.5% persisted in identifying as trans and/or nonbinary at the end of a five-year study period.

These studies increasingly demonstrate that the ongoing conservative freakout over gender identity and trans “desistance” is, at best, a massive overreaction. In an interview on liberal comedian Jon Stewart’s show _The Problem_ earlier this month, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge claimed that 98% of gender-dysphoric youth will eventually identify as cisgender — not only an “incredibly made-up” statistic, as Stewart noted, but per the Amsterdam and Princeton studies, precisely the inverse of what is true."

	Post automatically merged: Friday at 4:01 PM

https://journals.lww.com/prsgo/full...t_after_gender_affirmation_surgery__a.22.aspx

"*Results:*

A total of 27 studies, pooling 7928 transgender patients who underwent any type of GAS, were included. The pooled prevalence of regret after GAS was 1% (95% CI <1%–2%). Overall, 33% underwent transmasculine procedures and 67% transfemenine procedures. The prevalence of regret among patients undergoing transmasculine and transfemenine surgeries was <1% (IC <1%–<1%) and 1% (CI <1%–2%), respectively. A total of 77 patients regretted having had GAS. Twenty-eight had minor and 34 had major regret based on Pfäfflin’s regret classification. The majority had _clear regret_ based on Kuiper and Cohen-Kettenis classification.
Conclusions:​Based on this review, there is an extremely low prevalence of regret in transgender patients after GAS. We believe this study corroborates the improvements made in regard to selection criteria for GAS. However, there is high subjectivity in the assessment of regret and lack of standardized questionnaires, which highlight the importance of developing validated questionnaires in this population."


----------



## Doran754 (Friday at 6:40 PM)

I agree with the premise but not sure why It's set at 26 years. Should be 18, when you're an adult you should be able to do what you want (as long as it doesn't harm someone else).


----------



## sombrerosonic (Friday at 6:50 PM)

RetroGen said:


> This represents the sort of ignorant, denialistic, attitude that drives anti-transgender laws and policies. It's no surprise that they tend to come from the political right, known for heightened disgust response (as seen above), and the denial of scientific facts. It's bad faith to act as an apologist for such groups/individuals and portray their views as scientifically-guided. It would be much more honest to simply admit that bigotry is the key motivator.
> 
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26481-left-or-right-wing-brains-disgust-response-tells-all/


I think what he was saying was this man, maybe we should let the kids grow up BEFORE we give them hormone replacement therapy or have them transition. U know? let them grow up before they make life changing decisions?

It should really be 18 and not 26


----------



## The Catboy (Friday at 6:56 PM)

RetroGen said:


> It's extremely doubtful that this anti-transgender bill is the result of anything scientific, such that any correlates in the literature are probably spurious cherry-picking at best.  Rather, it is punitive legislation which is more likely motivated by religious and political ideology and the denial of scientific facts, as most such views generally are.
> 
> Something to bear in mind is that there is a limited time window for developing secondary sexual characteristics.  Barring transgender people from receiving gender affirming care until well into adulthood all but guarantees that their bodies will develop with the wrong secondary sexual characteristics, callously ensuring permanent gender dysphoria and all of the psychological issues that come with it.  Suffice to say, I accept the reality that transgender people exist and require timely, scientifically-informed, medical care.  Ideologically driven denial of this has no place in modern governance.


They are never based on anything scientific or even based on reality—a great example is the laws of the anti-trans sport that have been passed in recent years. Their claims have always been about "protecting women's sports" but always arise in states with little to no trans athletes and literally no trans people that are majorly successful in those sports. Equally, these results are across the board as trans athletes are not dominating in any sports. 
And the most current laws are not following any of the science known about treating trans people. Far more studies have shown the harm of delaying HRT or gender-affirming care in any form. This includes the harm done by delaying or ignoring social trans care, the often influence cited statics of "42%" come from studies that show these numbers come from trans people facing adversity and transphobia. The entire "debate" on when trans people should start care has always been junk science at best and danger transphobia at worse. The majority of research on the topic has shown just this and thus these laws aren't based on any of that research. And the mental gymnastics to justify these laws is purely a hatred of trans people pretending to be a concern for them. Simply put, it's transphobic laws created by assholes who want trans people to either leave their states or die off from lack of care.


----------



## Doran754 (Friday at 6:58 PM)

RetroGen said:


> This represents the sort of ignorant, denialistic, attitude that drives anti-transgender laws and policies.  It's no surprise that they tend to come from the political right, known for heightened disgust response (as seen above), and the denial of scientific facts.



Calling people with a different viewpoint ignorant and anti transgender sure will make them come round to your viewpoint quicker! Goodjob. There's really no issue with waiting for children to grow up, If they're trans at 10  they'll still be trans at 18, then they can make an educated decision based on their own consent. It's no surprise that groomers tend to come from the political left. See how this works? Maybe don't automatically label a bunch of people.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Friday at 7:13 PM)

The Catboy said:


> This isn’t about children, it’s just a hatred of trans people and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that fact. Conservatives are just hateful people who hate when other people have freedom, that’s how it has always been.


The irony that you used the term "mental gymnastics" on this thread is not lost on me.

	Post automatically merged: Friday at 7:19 PM



RetroGen said:


> It's extremely doubtful that this anti-transgender bill is the result of anything scientific, such that any correlates in the literature are probably spurious cherry-picking at best.  Rather, it is punitive legislation which is more likely motivated by religious and political ideology and the denial of scientific facts, as most such views generally are.


You know what's not scientific? Telling people and kids that chopping off their breasts or penises and spending the rest of their lives taking hormone medications will make them feel better about themselves.

One does not treat mental illness physically. It's silly to think bringing the body in line with the mind is better than bringing the mind in line with physical reality. It requires a lot less cutting, recovery and hospital bills.


----------



## tabzer (Yesterday at 1:03 AM)

RetroDegen promoting the taking of kids to the chop shop, otherwise "bigotry".   

These are "trans people" trying to validate themselves by sacrificing children.  In that light, what is there not to hate?  Honestly, I don't think they are trans.  They are just perverts and most people are capable of recognizing them--which is why they prey on children.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Yesterday at 1:38 AM)

tabzer said:


> RetroDegen promoting the taking of kids to the chop shop, otherwise "bigotry".
> 
> These are "trans people" trying to validate themselves by sacrificing children.  In that light, what is there not to hate?  Honestly, I don't think they are trans.  They are just perverts and most people are capable of recognizing them--which is why they prey on children.


Don't you dare say that groomers are going after children. It's not like they are teaching college courses... oh wait.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...offers-course-healthcare-LGBTQIA-infants.html


----------



## Wolfy (Yesterday at 3:32 AM)

The Catboy said:


> They are never based on anything scientific or even based on reality—a great example is the laws of the anti-trans sport that have been passed in recent years. Their claims have always been about "protecting women's sports" but always arise in states with little to no trans athletes and literally no trans people that are majorly successful in those sports. Equally, these results are across the board as trans athletes are not dominating in any sports.
> And the most current laws are not following any of the science known about treating trans people. Far more studies have shown the harm of delaying HRT or gender-affirming care in any form. This includes the harm done by delaying or ignoring social trans care, the often influence cited statics of "42%" come from studies that show these numbers come from trans people facing adversity and transphobia. The entire "debate" on when trans people should start care has always been junk science at best and danger transphobia at worse. The majority of research on the topic has shown just this and thus these laws aren't based on any of that research. And the mental gymnastics to justify these laws is purely a hatred of trans people pretending to be a concern for them. Simply put, it's transphobic laws created by assholes who want trans people to either leave their states or die off from lack of care.



I think most would agree though that trans athletes would have either a advantage or disadvantage in sports if they participated in a different gender's respective sport right? It's not about them being successful or not, its about maintaining fairness not unlike with doping and other drugs I would think. Injuries based on more strength/aggressiveness, or due to the opposite could be a possibility so why chance it at all? How to treat one another has always been about understanding, but how many people in the world don't agree with one another? Not just for transgenderism, but for every topic, controversial or not, just letting your thoughts or factions be known always will trigger someone. It's why the majority of the world just fits into their respective groups or blend in while around others, because trying to find people who agree with you can be rough especially depending on where you are in the world. Families have their right to protect each other from any idea they find harmful for their kids, only until their old enough(18 years of age for the US). After that they should be free to make their decisions.


----------



## RetroGen (Yesterday at 12:38 PM)

The link below offers a meta-analysis of several scientific studies looking at the effectiveness of conversion therapy (e.g. attempting to "fix" the mind, instead of the body, of people with gender dysphoria, or attempt to change their sexual orientation).  While that approach sounds like an excellent plan in abstraction, in practice the evidence shows that such therapy is not only ineffective, but harmful to patients, often worsening their condition.   In medical circles, conversion therapy is viewed as pseudoscience and has been banned in 25 states and many countries, including Brazil, Germany, Spain, Australia, Canada, Chile, New Zealand, France, India, and several more.  Also note that there is some crossover between conversion therapy targeting sexual orientation and gender dysphoria, though both appear to be driven by similar antiquated beliefs, biases, and ideologies.  

TL;DR: science shows that treating gender dysphoria as some sort of perverted mental illness (as commonly portrayed in right-wing circles) doesn't work, but hormone treatment and gender reassignment are highly effective (evidence provided in my previous posts).

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-an-evidence-assessment-and-qualitative-study

"3. What are the outcomes of conversion therapy?

There is no robust evidence to support claims that conversion therapy is effective at changing sexual orientation or gender identity.

Some of the largest studies report little to no reported change in sexual orientation, and reports of success are unpersuasive due to serious methodological limitations and sometimes major flaws in study designs.

No studies which examined the effectiveness of conversion therapy aimed at changing gender identity were identified during the search period (2000 to 2020).

Evidence of harm associated with conversion therapy outweighs reports of some benefits, such as social support and a sense of belonging. In addition, the reported benefits are common to most forms of talking therapy or support groups and could be provided by other, more affirmative, approaches that mitigate risks of harm.

There is an increasing amount of quantitative evidence that exposure to conversion therapy is statistically associated with poor mental health outcomes including suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts. This body of evidence is larger for sexual orientation change efforts. However, one recent study has also found that gender identity change efforts are associated with similar negative health outcomes.

Although we need to take care when making causal inferences, qualitative studies have found that people who have undergone conversion therapy attribute such feelings to the conversion therapy. The majority of people we interviewed in this study described experiencing conversion therapy as harmful, and reported self-harm and suicidal thoughts.

Plausible explanations for such harms include that conversion therapy makes internal conflicts worse rather than resolving them. It also reinforces the stigma associated with minority sexual orientations or gender identities."


----------



## Foxi4 (Yesterday at 1:08 PM)

Wolfy said:


> I think most would agree though that trans athletes would have either a advantage or disadvantage in sports if they participated in a different gender's respective sport right? It's not about them being successful or not, its about maintaining fairness not unlike with doping and other drugs I would think. Injuries based on more strength/aggressiveness, or due to the opposite could be a possibility so why chance it at all? How to treat one another has always been about understanding, but how many people in the world don't agree with one another? Not just for transgenderism, but for every topic, controversial or not, just letting your thoughts or factions be known always will trigger someone. It's why the majority of the world just fits into their respective groups or blend in while around others, because trying to find people who agree with you can be rough especially depending on where you are in the world. Families have their right to protect each other from any idea they find harmful for their kids, only until their old enough(18 years of age for the US). After that they should be free to make their decisions.


Establishing a separate league would solve all of these problems. Women don’t participate in men’s sports and vice versa specifically because they have different body types with different capabilities. Stands to reason that in-betweeners deserve, and should be granted, their own sports arena to compete in.


----------



## Wolfy (Yesterday at 4:09 PM)

Foxi4 said:


> Establishing a separate league would solve all of these problems. Women don’t participate in men’s sports and vice versa specifically because they have different body types with different capabilities. Stands to reason that in-betweeners deserve, and should be granted, their own sports arena to compete in.



I do agree, but like with many things its not a thing because companies don't think it'd be profitable enough. If it was a simple local sport or even coalition that set up tournaments for transpersons to compete then it'd be simple, but to have big cash prizes would need a large following, something to rival the NFL and it's mountain of fans which: watch the games which show ads, buy merchandise, buy tickets to games. And that's the problem, the world is built to create profit, and if it isn't then there isn't a reason for corporations to put any effort behind them.


----------



## N7Kopper (Yesterday at 4:39 PM)

RetroGen said:


> This represents the sort of ignorant, denialistic, attitude that drives anti-transgender laws and policies.  It's no surprise that they tend to come from the political right, known for heightened disgust response (as seen above), and the denial of scientific facts.  It's bad faith to act as an apologist for such groups/individuals and portray their views as scientifically-guided.  It would be much more honest to simply admit that bigotry is the key motivator.
> 
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26481-left-or-right-wing-brains-disgust-response-tells-all/
> 
> ...


Gish gallops like this are a common strategy. "Overwhelm common sense with countless peer-reviewed studies that have come to scientific consensus by stripping the titles from anyone who dared disagree." It works well on some people because to refute such lies, you would need hours - as James Lindsey demonstrates. The fact that it takes him so long shows the effectiveness of the strategy.

And then you pull the Orwell. Stoking feelings of discomfort with one's gender is "gender-affirmation" while providing a counternarrative is "conversion therapy". If transsexuality occurs naturally, there would be no need for "gender affirmation" to discover it. This can be observed easily by citing the massive spike in trans-identification while societal trans-acceptance drops like a stone thanks to all the queers (literal: Gail Rubin's Thinking Sex-style founding document queers) noncing kids.

I want to say right here: ONE detransitioner is TOO MANY. Nobody's running around getting shot up with insulin because he FELT diabetic. If things are being misdiagnosed, there is a PROBLEM. And if people are trying to call you a bigot for pointing that out, that PROVES the problem.


----------



## Foxi4 (Yesterday at 8:03 PM)

Wolfy said:


> I do agree, but like with many things its not a thing because companies don't think it'd be profitable enough.


The WNBA exists and, let’s be real here, nobody watches it.


----------

