Question about the homophobia thread

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

And what feelings exactly do trans women have that make them women? I get that this is an incendiary question but isn’t it a logical one?

Do you ask all women that question?

There are no universal “feelings” for being a woman.

That’s because being a woman is defined by chromosomes and biology- not “feelings.”

You’re referring to sex.

Here you go:

No sweetheart I’m not. Sex, chromosomes and biology define a woman, which is simply an adult human female. There is no such thing as gender, except in the realm of languages

Are all of the bigots this ignorant?

https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1
“Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.”

So my sincere question is - if gender is defined by norms, behaviors and roles, why does a transgender male need to have his breasts removed? They are merely a biological part of their anatomy. It seems like that makes a person transsex- they want the biological anatomy of the sex they identify with.

Anyone?

Most transgender males do not need to have their breasts removed. Most transitions are purely social. How people transition (most transitions are not medical) and their reasons for doing so are personal and each individual has their own reasons for doing so. None of us can answer as to "why" on their behalf.

Thank you for you answer Jeff. I get that it is an individual decision for everyone. I guess I am stuck on the people who have gender affirming surgery. Because it’s not really gender affirming, is is biological sex affirming. If people want to say that sex and gender are two different things, this muddies the water for me. I just don’t get it.

Why do you need to get it? Why can’t you let people figure it out themselves. Why do you feel the need to be the arbiter of other people’s lives.

It’s ok if you don’t get it.

Because I am a scientist - a doctor actually. And unless you can explain it
to me in a way that makes sense, I will never agree that trans women are women.
I will not blindly accept some ideology that is not rooted in science.

No one needs you to accept it. The world will go on without you.

“Ideology”? Your language is revealing.

“Trans women are women” is absolutely an ideology. There is no question about this.

Much of the population doesn’t accept it. That should tell you something.

That being said, I fully accept the existence of trans people and their basic rights in society (I am the psych hospital PP). I have many trans patients. They are treated with respect and compassion 100%. So please don’t tell me I’m a transphobe. I am not. But I will not fall in lockstep with the whole “trans women are women” mantra. They are transwomen. That’s why they have a separate identifier. They are males (with the appropriate chromosomes and genitalia) who identify as women.

Because you’re too rigid to be inclusive?

To be inclusive in the category of women? Yes, I am.

Not everyone gets to be included in everything because they want to be. I can be compassionate, kind and respectful (I am to my trans patients every day) - I don’t need to believe that transwomen are women in order to do that.

What do you mean by "believe that transwomen are women"?

Was this you?
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/1038810.page#22053266

That post is from over a year ago. Is this Jeff posting an anonymously? Otherwise how on earth did you find that?

And since that post is so old I have absolutely no idea if that was me. But that does sound like something I would say.

And I’m not sure what question you are asking. I think “I don’t believe transwomen are women” is a pretty obvious statement.

That was not me and I was also surprised that someone was able to find that old post. I was just happy to see that I was saying the same things a year ago that I am saying today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasingly, Europeans question doing the surgery to *children*.

Western European countries have recently led the way in scaling back and eliminating gender medicine treatments, not just surgeries, for minors. Sweden ended the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for anyone under 18 (outside of clinical trials and those who had already started treatments). Tavistock in Britain closed after the famous trial, and age limits have been raised for medical gender treatments there. There's not enough data to conclude that the long term health risks are worth any potential therapeutic benefits.

Norway and Finland have also recently restricted gender affirming care for minors. It's interesting to see this being rolled back in Scandinavia and the UK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason that detransitioners are embraced solely by awful republicans with ulterior motives is because everyone else tries to silence them.

What other groups support them? Who else is allowing them share their stories? You see it here in this thread that parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors are called liars. They’re shunned.

This is why I say trans activists should embrace them. If your goal is to ensure proper trans care, those detransitioners who are treated poorly by unethical doctors or whomever have an important voice, too.

Yes, I spend time in r/detrans. I tell you that only to indicate that these people are real with real stories and real pain and real voices.

They have nowhere to go. They were once trans. They matter, too.

How about those who detransition, but then regret it and re-transition? Do they have stories to tell and do you think their voices are important for the debate? Do you think they should be promoted similarly?

YES, of course they have voices, too. Of course!

I think everyone involved should have their voices heard. It’s odd that you would think I’d want to silence any voices. I never indicated that I support silencing contrary opinions….like many activists do.

When you take up all of the oxygen about detransitioners then you are effectively silencing the vast majority of transgender people.

Interesting. Do you also see how trans women take up all the oxygen with respect to women’s rights?

No. I see RWNJs using transgenderism as a decoy to take away women’s rights. Women should all be working together to lift ALL of us up, not tearing each other down.

DP. I haven't heard anything about this. Can you give an example?

[Anonymous]

If you want to read an excellent but very old book that is eerily predictive, read Great and Desperate Cures: The Rise and Decline of Psychosurgery and Other Radical Treatments for Mental Illness by Elliot S. Valenstein (well-respected neuroscientist who just passed away this year). Originally published in 1986, it goes through how the lobotomy came to be seen as a lauded treatment, including the rigid orthodoxy of thought that developed to defend it. The book is medically dense and meticulously researched, definitely not an easy read. But it is eye-opening in the parallels to today.

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-97483-000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

And what feelings exactly do trans women have that make them women? I get that this is an incendiary question but isn’t it a logical one?

Do you ask all women that question?

There are no universal “feelings” for being a woman.

That’s because being a woman is defined by chromosomes and biology- not “feelings.”

You’re referring to sex.

Here you go:

No sweetheart I’m not. Sex, chromosomes and biology define a woman, which is simply an adult human female. There is no such thing as gender, except in the realm of languages

Are all of the bigots this ignorant?

https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1
“Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.”

So my sincere question is - if gender is defined by norms, behaviors and roles, why does a transgender male need to have his breasts removed? They are merely a biological part of their anatomy. It seems like that makes a person transsex- they want the biological anatomy of the sex they identify with.

Anyone?

Most transgender males do not need to have their breasts removed. Most transitions are purely social. How people transition (most transitions are not medical) and their reasons for doing so are personal and each individual has their own reasons for doing so. None of us can answer as to "why" on their behalf.

Thank you for you answer Jeff. I get that it is an individual decision for everyone. I guess I am stuck on the people who have gender affirming surgery. Because it’s not really gender affirming, is is biological sex affirming. If people want to say that sex and gender are two different things, this muddies the water for me. I just don’t get it.

Why do you need to get it? Why can’t you let people figure it out themselves. Why do you feel the need to be the arbiter of other people’s lives.

It’s ok if you don’t get it.

Because I am a scientist - a doctor actually. And unless you can explain it
to me in a way that makes sense, I will never agree that trans women are women.
I will not blindly accept some ideology that is not rooted in science.

No one needs you to accept it. The world will go on without you.

“Ideology”? Your language is revealing.

“Trans women are women” is absolutely an ideology. There is no question about this.

Much of the population doesn’t accept it. That should tell you something.

That being said, I fully accept the existence of trans people and their basic rights in society (I am the psych hospital PP). I have many trans patients. They are treated with respect and compassion 100%. So please don’t tell me I’m a transphobe. I am not. But I will not fall in lockstep with the whole “trans women are women” mantra. They are transwomen. That’s why they have a separate identifier. They are males (with the appropriate chromosomes and genitalia) who identify as women.

Because you’re too rigid to be inclusive?

To be inclusive in the category of women? Yes, I am.

Not everyone gets to be included in everything because they want to be. I can be compassionate, kind and respectful (I am to my trans patients every day) - I don’t need to believe that transwomen are women in order to do that.

What do you mean by "believe that transwomen are women"?

Was this you?
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/1038810.page#22053266

That post is from over a year ago. Is this Jeff posting an anonymously? Otherwise how on earth did you find that?

And since that post is so old I have absolutely no idea if that was me. But that does sound like something I would say.

And I’m not sure what question you are asking. I think “I don’t believe transwomen are women” is a pretty obvious statement.

In what context? Bathrooms? Sports? Everywhere?

And you believe transgender people are mentally ill?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasingly, Europeans question doing the surgery to *children*.

Western European countries have recently led the way in scaling back and eliminating gender medicine treatments, not just surgeries, for minors. Sweden ended the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for anyone under 18 (outside of clinical trials and those who had already started treatments). Tavistock in Britain closed after the famous trial, and age limits have been raised for medical gender treatments there. There's not enough data to conclude that the long term health risks are worth any potential therapeutic benefits.

This is correct. Last month the Norwegian Healthcare Investigation Board announced it would be revising its current guidelines for gender affirming care for minors because it no longer considers them to be evidence-based. The board also acknowledged that the growing number of teenage girls identifying as male post-puberty remains under-studied. Under the proposed updated guidelines, the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and transition-related surgery would be restricted to research contexts and no longer provided in clinical settings. Norway joins Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom in introducing greater safeguarding for children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasingly, Europeans question doing the surgery to *children*.

Western European countries have recently led the way in scaling back and eliminating gender medicine treatments, not just surgeries, for minors. Sweden ended the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for anyone under 18 (outside of clinical trials and those who had already started treatments). Tavistock in Britain closed after the famous trial, and age limits have been raised for medical gender treatments there. There's not enough data to conclude that the long term health risks are worth any potential therapeutic benefits.

This is correct. Last month the Norwegian Healthcare Investigation Board announced it would be revising its current guidelines for gender affirming care for minors because it no longer considers them to be evidence-based. The board also acknowledged that the growing number of teenage girls identifying as male post-puberty remains under-studied. Under the proposed updated guidelines, the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and transition-related surgery would be restricted to research contexts and no longer provided in clinical settings. Norway joins Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom in introducing greater safeguarding for children.

This tracks the eventual exposure of the lobotomy as a “treatment.” The places that rebelled first against lobotomies were those where costs were more of a consideration, and the treatment wasn’t as much of a profit center. In socialized medicine, while it may have lots of issues with access to care, one benefit is that there is less of a chance of profit driving medical decision-making.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

And what feelings exactly do trans women have that make them women? I get that this is an incendiary question but isn’t it a logical one?

Do you ask all women that question?

There are no universal “feelings” for being a woman.

That’s because being a woman is defined by chromosomes and biology- not “feelings.”

You’re referring to sex.

Here you go:

No sweetheart I’m not. Sex, chromosomes and biology define a woman, which is simply an adult human female. There is no such thing as gender, except in the realm of languages

Are all of the bigots this ignorant?

https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1
“Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.”

I know that’s what it says I’m your women’s gender studies book. But that is an incorrect, made up definition

That link is from the World Health Organization, I’d say that they have more credibility than an anonymous bigot.

Of course you would. It still means nothing.

The original poster of this thread asked why we can't have discussions on topics such as this. Posters like you are the reason why. There is nothing to discuss with you. There is no evidence that can change your mind. Therefore, I would kindly ask that you withdraw from this discussion so that those with less closed minds can continue.

Serious question: How can anyone feel that a world health organization has credibility if they put North Korea in a decision-making position, seeing how badly they treat their own people?

I have not said anything about the WHO, but practically every major medical association has the same policy. They don't all have North Korea involved. Moreover, the WHO position was well established prior to North Korea's involvement. You should evaluate the WHO position based on its medical merits rather than the latest right-wing outrage of the week.

Here is a list that you can evaluate for North Korean influence:

https://transhealthproject.org/resources/medical-organization-statements/

Did the WHO add North Korea to their board? Yes or no.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Saying that some doctors have unethically treated people who later detrans is *not* saying they are conspiring to trick people.

That’s a leap.

You talked about "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors". In other words, multiple unethical doctors are trying to convince parents to agree to unnecessary care (in your interpretation). What is the difference between that and "conspiring to trick people"?

DP. That’s a really disingenuous interpretation. Frankly I expect better from you than this.

Everyone reading can see both your words and my interpretation of them and come to their own conclusion. If you don't think that doctors are conspiring to trick parents, but you do believe that "unethical doctors" are doing something which "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against", please explain what you actually mean?

NP. There are doctors that have to make a choice between losing their license or providing health care of this kind demanded by the family. If put to a court of law, that would not meet the criteria of ‘conspiring to trick people’.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Saying that some doctors have unethically treated people who later detrans is *not* saying they are conspiring to trick people.

That’s a leap.

You talked about "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors". In other words, multiple unethical doctors are trying to convince parents to agree to unnecessary care (in your interpretation). What is the difference between that and "conspiring to trick people"?

DP. That’s a really disingenuous interpretation. Frankly I expect better from you than this.

Everyone reading can see both your words and my interpretation of them and come to their own conclusion. If you don't think that doctors are conspiring to trick parents, but you do believe that "unethical doctors" are doing something which "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against", please explain what you actually mean?

You of all people should know what “dp” means and that I’m not the person you were engaging with or who said that. But I agree with that person’s position.

There are medical professionals who will ignore a parent’s concern and hesitation about medical treatment for a child’s gender dysphoria. That may be motivated by genuine concern for the child, by feeling pressure from their administration or colleagues, or by the financial remuneration they will receive for continuing treatment.

To say they are trying to “trick” the parent implies they believe it is the wrong treatment and are prescribing it anyway. I don’t think that’s what pp is saying. The issue is that they willfully refuse to consider other causes for the gender dysphoria, ignore parental concerns, and proceed with medical treatment that may ultimately not be in the child’s best interest. Calling this a “trick” derails the conversation and ignores the larger issues at play.

There are apparently two posters accusing me of misinterpreting the statement about "unethical doctors" and now both of them are claiming they didn't post the message that said that. So, I went back to check and it is true that it wasn't you who wrote that. But, the other poster, who actually did write it, is also denying it for some reason. I apologize for confusing the two of you.

But, you ignored the primary point of the post that led to this diversion. If you believe that all voices should be heard, then you can set an example for all of us. When you post about those who detransition, be sure to mention how they are exploited by those who are anti-trans and that some of them reverse their decision again and retransition.

This is my reply to that.

Anonymous wrote:The reason that detransitioners are embraced solely by awful republicans with ulterior motives is because everyone else tries to silence them.

What other groups support them? Who else is allowing them share their stories? You see it here in this thread that parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors are called liars. They’re shunned.

This is why I say trans activists should embrace them. If your goal is to ensure proper trans care, those detransitioners who are treated poorly by unethical doctors or whomever have an important voice, too.

Yes, I spend time in r/detrans. I tell you that only to indicate that these people are real with real stories and real pain and real voices.

They have nowhere to go. They were once trans. They matter, too.

Yes, some people “retransition.” Is it because they are constantly threatened by activists? Is it because the only ones standing up for them are republicans?

I can’t help but wonder.

It is simply amazing how much power you attribute to a very marginalized population. In the face of an entire political party and several state governments attempting to restrict their rights, a group armed with little more than Twitter accounts is able to convince people to transition and then bully them into retransitioning when they stray. Yet, we should not let the word "conspiracy" escape our lips.

The power doesn’t just come from a very marginalized population. That population has the White House and major corporations behind them, as well as lots of legislators. At least be honest

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I got tired of removing posts that I considered hateful from that thread. Of course, the authors of those posts will deny that they are hateful because they obviously believe that calling trans women men and accusing them of having mental health issues are just differences of opinion. But, I don't find such posts acceptable.

Every trans-related thread here ultimately goes the same way. It's just too much effort to try to keep the threads civil.

My kid has identified as trans. He most definitely has mental health issues, diagnosed well before. OCD and on the spectrum. What's cruel is the medical community and trans community preying on him, determined to separate him from a family who has always been his advocate.

Yes, you have been repeating this non-stop. It is very clear that you are not willing to accept your child's trans identity and prefer to view them as mentally ill and a victim of groomers. That is not a healthy attitude and, as you are seeing, the results are not good. I hope that your child will find love and support from those who truly are their advocate.

Can you please tell me how you can be so sure of my child's medical history?

I did not comment on your child's medical history. Your inability to accept them as trans is very clear and you repeatedly document the negative outcome of your lack of acceptance.

BTW, you refer to your child with male pronouns. Are those your kid's preferred pronouns?

You absolutely did. I bolded it. I asked you if you have access to my child's medical history, from childhood on. And if you have access to my child's interactions with his doctors and therapists. Because you are making a lot of accusations and assumptions without any data, if you don't.

I commented on your preference for viewing your child as mentally ill. Do you view your child's gender identity as a mental illness? Do you respect your child's gender identity in even the most basic way by using preferred pronouns? Everything you have written suggests that rather than providing your child support, you treat them as defective and mentally ill. Then, you blame others for your alienation.

NP. You’re not helping anyone’s case here. The PP clearly stated their child was diagnosed with mental health issues long before they identified as trans.

Right, but she has a reductive view of her child, only seeing her child as mentally ill and using that as an excuse to reject her child's trans identity. That has predictably resulted in alienation which she blames on everyone else. Moreover, she is extrapolating from that to justify calling all trans people mentally ill. That's why she got in this conversation which had nothing to do with her in the first place.

I have said NOTHING of the sort. I stated that my own child was diagnosed with OCD well prior to when this whole trans movement exploded. And has been diagnosed on the spectrum since early childhood. YOU seem to believe that this issue is black and white, that when a child states he/she is transgender, he/she definitely is. Some are, some aren't and there's a lot to unwrap with this issue, especially when there are previous mental health diagnosis. Since you do not have the full picture into MY child's particular situation, making your own 'diagnosis' is its own form of delusion. It shows the danger of activism in full view and demonstrates EXACTLY how some children are preyed upon. YOU, in your infinite leftist wisdom, has decided that MY child is transgender and that ME, as that child's PARENT, is clearly unfit to raise him. And you call conservatives tyrants? Wow.

"Well-intentioned" and "loving" parents used to send their kids to "pray the gay away camps" too. Just saying. Just because you gave birth to your child and love him/her on some level, doesn't mean you are doing right by them.

More assumptions. This is all you have - attacks and assumptions. If your child told you he had testicular cancer, would you seek a doctor's opinion and medical testing, or just lop them off because your child said he had cancer?

Well-intentioned and loving parents both listen to their children and seek out proper care. And that proper care is different for each child because each child has individual needs and issues. Groupthink and Groupspeak only serve to meet an agenda, not the individual child.

You can just love your child, you know. Use their preferred pronouns. Accept that they know who they are. Love them if that identity changes again. Or doesn't. You can treat his/her OCD while accepting them for who they are. I am on team Jeff on this.

I do love my kid. It’s hard now to find a psychiatrist who will treat OCD as OCD once the Trans word is used.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Isn’t the debate over how young is it appropriate to engage in this risky, major surgery?

Adults can obviously do whatever they want.

Some of the posters here assert that gender identity is solely a manifestation of mental illness. So, presumably they are also opposed to medical transitions by adults.

It definitely can be a manifestation of mental illness. It’s taboo now to even consider that.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Saying that some doctors have unethically treated people who later detrans is *not* saying they are conspiring to trick people.

That’s a leap.

You talked about "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors". In other words, multiple unethical doctors are trying to convince parents to agree to unnecessary care (in your interpretation). What is the difference between that and "conspiring to trick people"?

DP. That’s a really disingenuous interpretation. Frankly I expect better from you than this.

Everyone reading can see both your words and my interpretation of them and come to their own conclusion. If you don't think that doctors are conspiring to trick parents, but you do believe that "unethical doctors" are doing something which "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against", please explain what you actually mean?

You of all people should know what “dp” means and that I’m not the person you were engaging with or who said that. But I agree with that person’s position.

There are medical professionals who will ignore a parent’s concern and hesitation about medical treatment for a child’s gender dysphoria. That may be motivated by genuine concern for the child, by feeling pressure from their administration or colleagues, or by the financial remuneration they will receive for continuing treatment.

To say they are trying to “trick” the parent implies they believe it is the wrong treatment and are prescribing it anyway. I don’t think that’s what pp is saying. The issue is that they willfully refuse to consider other causes for the gender dysphoria, ignore parental concerns, and proceed with medical treatment that may ultimately not be in the child’s best interest. Calling this a “trick” derails the conversation and ignores the larger issues at play.

There are apparently two posters accusing me of misinterpreting the statement about "unethical doctors" and now both of them are claiming they didn't post the message that said that. So, I went back to check and it is true that it wasn't you who wrote that. But, the other poster, who actually did write it, is also denying it for some reason. I apologize for confusing the two of you.

But, you ignored the primary point of the post that led to this diversion. If you believe that all voices should be heard, then you can set an example for all of us. When you post about those who detransition, be sure to mention how they are exploited by those who are anti-trans and that some of them reverse their decision again and retransition.

This is my reply to that.

Anonymous wrote:The reason that detransitioners are embraced solely by awful republicans with ulterior motives is because everyone else tries to silence them.

What other groups support them? Who else is allowing them share their stories? You see it here in this thread that parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors are called liars. They’re shunned.

This is why I say trans activists should embrace them. If your goal is to ensure proper trans care, those detransitioners who are treated poorly by unethical doctors or whomever have an important voice, too.

Yes, I spend time in r/detrans. I tell you that only to indicate that these people are real with real stories and real pain and real voices.

They have nowhere to go. They were once trans. They matter, too.

Yes, some people “retransition.” Is it because they are constantly threatened by activists? Is it because the only ones standing up for them are republicans?

I can’t help but wonder.

It is simply amazing how much power you attribute to a very marginalized population. In the face of an entire political party and several state governments attempting to restrict their rights, a group armed with little more than Twitter accounts is able to convince people to transition and then bully them into retransitioning when they stray. Yet, we should not let the word "conspiracy" escape our lips.

The power doesn’t just come from a very marginalized population. That population has the White House and major corporations behind them, as well as lots of legislators. At least be honest

Yes, let's be honest. Neither the White House nor a single corporation has bullied any anti-trans person or caused someone who has detransitioned to retransition.

Meanwhile, Florida has just prohibited gender affirming care for minors and made it extremely difficult for even adults to get such care. Just ignore that and be in awe of a Pride display at Target. That's where the real power is, right?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Saying that some doctors have unethically treated people who later detrans is *not* saying they are conspiring to trick people.

That’s a leap.

You talked about "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors". In other words, multiple unethical doctors are trying to convince parents to agree to unnecessary care (in your interpretation). What is the difference between that and "conspiring to trick people"?

DP. That’s a really disingenuous interpretation. Frankly I expect better from you than this.

Everyone reading can see both your words and my interpretation of them and come to their own conclusion. If you don't think that doctors are conspiring to trick parents, but you do believe that "unethical doctors" are doing something which "parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against", please explain what you actually mean?

You of all people should know what “dp” means and that I’m not the person you were engaging with or who said that. But I agree with that person’s position.

There are medical professionals who will ignore a parent’s concern and hesitation about medical treatment for a child’s gender dysphoria. That may be motivated by genuine concern for the child, by feeling pressure from their administration or colleagues, or by the financial remuneration they will receive for continuing treatment.

To say they are trying to “trick” the parent implies they believe it is the wrong treatment and are prescribing it anyway. I don’t think that’s what pp is saying. The issue is that they willfully refuse to consider other causes for the gender dysphoria, ignore parental concerns, and proceed with medical treatment that may ultimately not be in the child’s best interest. Calling this a “trick” derails the conversation and ignores the larger issues at play.

There are apparently two posters accusing me of misinterpreting the statement about "unethical doctors" and now both of them are claiming they didn't post the message that said that. So, I went back to check and it is true that it wasn't you who wrote that. But, the other poster, who actually did write it, is also denying it for some reason. I apologize for confusing the two of you.

But, you ignored the primary point of the post that led to this diversion. If you believe that all voices should be heard, then you can set an example for all of us. When you post about those who detransition, be sure to mention how they are exploited by those who are anti-trans and that some of them reverse their decision again and retransition.

This is my reply to that.

Anonymous wrote:The reason that detransitioners are embraced solely by awful republicans with ulterior motives is because everyone else tries to silence them.

What other groups support them? Who else is allowing them share their stories? You see it here in this thread that parents who are trying to stand up for themselves against unethical doctors are called liars. They’re shunned.

This is why I say trans activists should embrace them. If your goal is to ensure proper trans care, those detransitioners who are treated poorly by unethical doctors or whomever have an important voice, too.

Yes, I spend time in r/detrans. I tell you that only to indicate that these people are real with real stories and real pain and real voices.

They have nowhere to go. They were once trans. They matter, too.

Yes, some people “retransition.” Is it because they are constantly threatened by activists? Is it because the only ones standing up for them are republicans?

I can’t help but wonder.

It is simply amazing how much power you attribute to a very marginalized population. In the face of an entire political party and several state governments attempting to restrict their rights, a group armed with little more than Twitter accounts is able to convince people to transition and then bully them into retransitioning when they stray. Yet, we should not let the word "conspiracy" escape our lips.

The power doesn’t just come from a very marginalized population. That population has the White House and major corporations behind them, as well as lots of legislators. At least be honest

Yes, let's be honest. Neither the White House nor a single corporation has bullied any anti-trans person or caused someone who has detransitioned to retransition.

Meanwhile, Florida has just prohibited gender affirming care for minors and made it extremely difficult for even adults to get such care. Just ignore that and be in awe of a Pride display at Target. That's where the real power is, right?

And in some areas Target has stopped putting out pride merch because people complained. So yes, definitely the gay agenda is winning here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

And what feelings exactly do trans women have that make them women? I get that this is an incendiary question but isn’t it a logical one?

Do you ask all women that question?

There are no universal “feelings” for being a woman.

That’s because being a woman is defined by chromosomes and biology- not “feelings.”

You’re referring to sex.

Here you go:

No sweetheart I’m not. Sex, chromosomes and biology define a woman, which is simply an adult human female. There is no such thing as gender, except in the realm of languages

Are all of the bigots this ignorant?

https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1
“Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.”

So my sincere question is - if gender is defined by norms, behaviors and roles, why does a transgender male need to have his breasts removed? They are merely a biological part of their anatomy. It seems like that makes a person transsex- they want the biological anatomy of the sex they identify with.

Anyone?

Most transgender males do not need to have their breasts removed. Most transitions are purely social. How people transition (most transitions are not medical) and their reasons for doing so are personal and each individual has their own reasons for doing so. None of us can answer as to "why" on their behalf.

Thank you for you answer Jeff. I get that it is an individual decision for everyone. I guess I am stuck on the people who have gender affirming surgery. Because it’s not really gender affirming, is is biological sex affirming. If people want to say that sex and gender are two different things, this muddies the water for me. I just don’t get it.

Why do you need to get it? Why can’t you let people figure it out themselves. Why do you feel the need to be the arbiter of other people’s lives.

It’s ok if you don’t get it.

Because I am a scientist - a doctor actually. And unless you can explain it
to me in a way that makes sense, I will never agree that trans women are women.
I will not blindly accept some ideology that is not rooted in science.

NP. Thank you for the sanity check.