Peak Trans

LuckyLloyd

benjamin d wrote: »

Considering that, according to Wikipedia, estimates for the prevalence of transgender people ranges from a low of 0.17 in 100000 (that's 0.00017%) to a high of 1 in 4500 (0.02%), transgender issues occupy an enormously inflated proportion of media attention. Ludicrously so, in fact.

That's wild - hard to believe the politically inclined youth of today are so concerned with this stuff when it is of such tiny import on society.

Sal Butamol

We really are importing the most toxic aspects of American identity politics.

professore

ItAintMeBabe wrote: »

Why?

For the same reason I would hate people saying "white swan". The vast majority of swans are white - it's stupid to keep adding "white" in front of it.

markodaly

It is interesting that things we would normally balk at, like FGM or chemical castration are both illegal and frowned upon, yet the new age moral guardians of our world want to make it acceptable if a 2-year-old 'identifies' as the other sex.

Why are these idiots listened to? Does that make me a Transphobe? It is also odd that this ideology gets a license to spout this stuff here.

ceadaoin.

markodaly wrote: »

It is interesting that things we would normally balk at, like FGM or chemical castration are both illegal and frowned upon, yet the new age moral guardians of our world want to make it acceptable if a 2-year-old 'identifies' as the other sex.

Why are these idiots listened to? Does that make me a Transphobe? It is also odd that this ideology gets a license to spout this stuff here.

In the UK , a woman was interviewed by police under caution for saying on Twitter that an underage male child who was sent by his mother to have to have gender reassignment surgery in Thailand had been "castrated". This is hate speech now apparently. This type of surgery is not allowed in the UK on children. Any parent who sends their female children abroad for female genital mutilation so that they can circumvent UK law is subject to criminal action, and rightly so. Why the double standard? It's bizarre.

DEFTLEFTHAND

ceadaoin. wrote: »

In the UK , a woman was interviewed by police under caution for saying on Twitter that an underage male child who was sent by his mother to have to have gender reassignment surgery in Thailand had been "castrated". This is hate speech now apparently. This type of surgery is not allowed in the UK on children. Any parent who sends their female children abroad for female genital mutilation so that they can circumvent UK law is subject to criminal action, and rightly so. Why the double standard? It's bizarre.

This is seriously disturbing and creepy.

Somebody needs to shout halt on this whole thing.

We're going to look back one day with utter shame and regret.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote:

We're going to look back one day with utter shame and regret.

If anyone thinks that this is acceptable or appropriate, they should be ashamed of themselves

ceadaoin.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

This is seriously disturbing and creepy.

Somebody needs to shout halt on this whole thing.

We're going to look back one day with utter shame and regret.

Mermaids is the organisation that the mother who allowed her son to be operated on works for. Mermaids are campaigning for children to be allowed gender reassignment surgery on the NHS, and also provide training to the police and schools on trans issues relating to children. How people like this have gained such positions of influence and so fast is beyond me.

ceadaoin.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Mermaids is the organisation that the mother who allowed her son to be operated on works for. Mermaids are campaigning for children to be allowed gender reassignment surgery on the NHS, and also provide training to the police and schools on trans issues relating to children. How people like this have gained such positions of influence and so fast is beyond me.

I'm not surprised. Feminism opened the gates to all offices with the focus on "equality" and the focus groups for minorities widened the doors even further. This movement to make everything acceptable allows pretty much everything to be tolerated, and any objections to it, are passed off as discrimination. It started in the universities as much as three decades ago, which means that the graduates of womens studies, or other pop-psychology courses have had the time to get into positions of power/influence.

It's more of the short-term focus of politics and social change. In their rush to change everything, they've encouraged all the limitations to be removed.

And it will get worse, because there is no real way to oppose it. Oh, sure, some traditionally disliked minority groups or behavior will continue to be shut out, but we're going to see a lot more minority beliefs about sexuality, gender, etc to gain influence.

Malayalam

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not surprised. Feminism opened the gates to all offices with the focus on "equality" and the focus groups for minorities widened the doors even further. This movement to make everything acceptable allows pretty much everything to be tolerated, and any objections to it, are passed off as discrimination. It started in the universities as much as three decades ago, which means that the graduates of womens studies, or other pop-psychology courses have had the time to get into positions of power/influence.

It's more of the short-term focus of politics and social change. In their rush to change everything, they've encouraged all the limitations to be removed.

And it will get worse, because there is no real way to oppose it. Oh, sure, some traditionally disliked minority groups or behavior will continue to be shut out, but we're going to see a lot more minority beliefs about sexuality, gender, etc to gain influence.

The roots of biology denialism are much more in transhumanism than in feminism.

Malayalam

Malayalam wrote:

The roots of biology denialism are much more in transhumanism than in feminism.

Undoubtedly, but the floodgates were opened when "third wave" feminism redefined "equality" and promoted a culture of victimhood

Malayalam

Malayalam wrote: »

The roots of biology denialism are much more in transhumanism than in feminism.

Sure, I can accept that. It doesn't refute what I posted though.

Annasopra

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Mermaids is the organisation that the mother who allowed her son to be operated on works for. Mermaids are campaigning for children to be allowed gender reassignment surgery on the NHS, and also provide training to the police and schools on trans issues relating to children. How people like this have gained such positions of influence and so fast is beyond me.

Have you any links to your claims that Mermaids are campaigning for this surgery?

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Have you any links to your claims that Mermaids are campaigning for this surgery?

Well this is what the CEO has to say about prescribing cross sex hormones to children

"“Basing it on an age is completely inappropriate,” said Susie Green, head of Mermaids, a charity that works with trans children and their families. “We believe it should be in line with the young person’s maturity and their ability to understand what’s involved and the implications of what treating and not treating are.”

this is the same person who sent her son to Thailand at 16 for surgery, something which is now illegal there also. It's pretty obvious what her, and by extension the organisation she represents, stance is regarding surgery for people under 18 given that they are so eager to have kids started on blockers and hormones.

Still waiting for those links showing "TERFS" making actual rape and death threats against trans gender people or trying to disrupt their meetings with violence.

Annasopra

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Well this is what the CEO has to say about prescribing cross sex hormones to children

"“Basing it on an age is completely inappropriate,” said Susie Green, head of Mermaids, a charity that works with trans children and their families. “We believe it should be in line with the young person’s maturity and their ability to understand what’s involved and the implications of what treating and not treating are.”

this is the same person who sent her son to Thailand at 16 for surgery, something which is now illegal there also. It's pretty obvious what her, and by extension the organisation she represents, stance is regarding surgery for people under 18 given that they are so eager to have kids started on blockers and hormones.

Still waiting for those links showing "TERFS" making actual rape and death threats against trans gender people or trying to disrupt their meetings with violence.

So basically you made that up about them campaigning for surgery then. Its actual nonsense really. Nobody is campaigning for surgery on children.

Cupatae

How do these threads just drift off into nonsense nearly completely irrelevant to the original topic.. lol

Malayalam

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

So basically you made that up about them campaigning for surgery then. Its actual nonsense really. Nobody is campaigning for surgery on children.

If the CEO of one of the UK's biggest charities advocating for transkids brought her child to Thailand for a full sex change operation at 16 - the youngest ever Briton to have such surgery - it at least indicates a strong mindset.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3973036/Jackie-Green-heart-controversy-children-young-nine-given-drugs-change-sex.html

As to the idea that nobody is campaigning for surgery on children, I find this is incorrect -

In the US Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, Assistant Professor at the Children's Hospital in Los Angeles, and prominent gender physician for children, has been actively campaigning for lowering the age of genital surgeries for young people. This is a doctor who has admitted to skipping the pubertal blockers and putting children as young as 12 directly onto cross sex hormones.

https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/skipping-the-puberty-blockers-american-transgender-children-doctors-are-going-rogue/



A voice warning the be cautious of the more permissive approach being advocated-

Dr Kenneth Zucker, a gender identity specialist at Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, (says) "There is debate on how low one should go in starting hormonal treatment to suppress puberty. I think where it's going to get interesting in this field in the next 10 years is that, at least in some quarters, there's now a much more permissive approach toward supporting cross-sex hormone therapy and even surgery and the question is going to be, 'is the more permissive approach going to correlate with more regrets or more dissatisfaction?'"

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30783983

The campaign for lowering the age of surgeries for children focuses in particular on mastectomies and hysterectomies as opposed to necessarily genital reconstructive surgery.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/mastectomies-endorsed-in-treatment-guidelines-for-trans-teens/news-story/2b396fc79f65cc89299a21593ed48366?nk=689a07e3115e7c329e2cd24f39080e05-1531375788

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/03/18/about-a-boy-2

Similarly in the UK there are doctors in private clinics who will administer cross sex hormones below the age of 16. As young as 11 or 12. For example Dr Helen Webberly.

https://www.thecut.com/2016/07/whats-missing-from-the-conversation-about-transgender-kids.html

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/11/transgender-nhs-doctor-prescribing-sex-hormones-children-uk

In Australia the campaign to make cross sex hormones available to younger children is also active.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31429-6/fulltext


Note - pubertal blockers followed by cross sex hormones almost invariably results in sterility. This is huge given that we are talking about what are effectively children who cannot legally drive, drink or vote.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/46da/ae7559f1b49d4516b0eee5266ab24a6e739a.pdf

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5642577/NHS-sex-change-drugs-putting-hundreds-children-risk-year.html




Children and teens are accessing cross sex hormones online.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-teenagers-in-online-drug-danger-qbqhxp8ps


Note - some researchers describe the huge increase in ROGD among children as a psychic epidemic or social contagion, reminiscent of the multiple personality disorder contagion of the 1990s.

http://quillette.com/2017/10/06/misunderstanding-new-kind-gender-dysphoria/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00332925.2017.1350804

Excellent post. Thanks for all the links.

Disturbing reading TBH.

Annasopra

Malayalam wrote: »

If the CEO of one of the UK's biggest charities advocating for transkids brought her child to Thailand for a full sex change operation at 16 - the youngest ever Briton to have such surgery - it at least indicates a strong mindset.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3973036/Jackie-Green-heart-controversy-children-young-nine-given-drugs-change-sex.html

As to the idea that nobody is campaigning for surgery on children, I find this is incorrect -

In the US Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, Assistant Professor at the Children's Hospital in Los Angeles, and prominent gender physician for children, has been actively campaigning for lowering the age of genital surgeries for young people. This is a doctor who has admitted to skipping the pubertal blockers and putting children as young as 12 directly onto cross sex hormones.

https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/skipping-the-puberty-blockers-american-transgender-children-doctors-are-going-rogue/



A voice warning the be cautious of the more permissive approach being advocated-

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30783983

The campaign for lowering the age of surgeries for children focuses in particular on mastectomies and hysterectomies as opposed to necessarily genital reconstructive surgery.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/mastectomies-endorsed-in-treatment-guidelines-for-trans-teens/news-story/2b396fc79f65cc89299a21593ed48366?nk=689a07e3115e7c329e2cd24f39080e05-1531375788

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/03/18/about-a-boy-2

Similarly in the UK there are doctors in private clinics who will administer cross sex hormones below the age of 16. As young as 11 or 12. For example Dr Helen Webberly.

https://www.thecut.com/2016/07/whats-missing-from-the-conversation-about-transgender-kids.html

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/11/transgender-nhs-doctor-prescribing-sex-hormones-children-uk

In Australia the campaign to make cross sex hormones available to younger children is also active.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31429-6/fulltext


Note - pubertal blockers followed by cross sex hormones almost invariably results in sterility. This is huge given that we are talking about what are effectively children who cannot legally drive, drink or vote.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/46da/ae7559f1b49d4516b0eee5266ab24a6e739a.pdf

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5642577/NHS-sex-change-drugs-putting-hundreds-children-risk-year.html




Children and teens are accessing cross sex hormones online.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-teenagers-in-online-drug-danger-qbqhxp8ps


Note - some researchers describe the huge increase in ROGD among children as a psychic epidemic or social contagion, reminiscent of the multiple personality disorder contagion of the 1990s.

http://quillette.com/2017/10/06/misunderstanding-new-kind-gender-dysphoria/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00332925.2017.1350804

Yeah no the poster claimed that Mermaids is campaigning for surgery for children. That is absolutely categorically wrong. They are not. The poster made it up. I dont know why you referenced hormones when I was talking about surgery. Of course there are some renegade medical practitioners advocating surgery as you reference but these are not widely carried out or agreed with or condoned. In relation to mastectomies yes they can be carried out at 16. The thing about it is though there has already been mastectomy surgery available for children for a long time for various other health conditions.

In regard to the issue of Susie Green/Mermaids there is a lot of mistruth and lies being spread around in this thread.

1 Susie Greens child was 16 at the time of the surgery in Thailand and in fact capable of making their own decisions.
2 She did not send her child anywhere to circumvent UK law. The law at the time was unclear. It has subsequently been clarified and would be illegal in the UK and Thailand at the time. What was done was at the time was lawful in the UK and Thailand
3 The person convicted of hate speech against Susie Green and her family was not convicted solely on the basis of 1 or 2 words as indicated abive. It was concerted harassment, publicly outing Susie Green and her child, inciting transphobic hatred against them on public platforms.

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

1 Susie Greens child was 16 at the time of the surgery in Thailand and in fact capable of making their own decisions.

Sixteen.

For long term, life changing, irreversible decisions. No, I do not agree.

Malayalam

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I dont know why you referenced hormones when I was talking about surgery. Of course there are some renegade medical practitioners advocating surgery as you reference but these are not widely carried out or agreed with or condoned.

Cross sex hormones after puberty blockers almost invariably render the user sterile. This is chemical sterilisation. One does not always have to go at a body with a scalpel to act irrevocably.

Johanna Olsen-Kennedy is not a renegade medical practitioner - she is one of the leading specialists in childhood gender issues in the US.

I was not specifically refering to Mermaids in my rebuttal - the poster is well able to defend herself - though I did reference mindset. I was arguing against the suggestion you made that NO ONE is advocating surgery for children. They are.

Even as an activist or advocate on behalf of trans kids if that is what you are, and you are very entitled to be such, surely you could admit that the principle of least done soonest mended, or the Hippocratic Oath of primum non nocere - first, do no harm - should be applied above all in these the most vulnerable and immature members of our society.
The prefrontal cortex does not even fully develop until well into the 20s (https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051) - to have children far younger than that enabled to make such radical life-changing decisions seems anti-humanist.

(Then again that's aptly enough Foucault, Heiddeger and their ilk's contribution to this post-modern, morally relative quagmire. All of which if you are interested to know can be traced back via Georges Bataille to influences like the Marquis de Sade...this has not come out of nowhere, this denial of the biology, etc etc etc)

EdgeCase

My view of it is that as a society we actually place way, way, way too much stress on gender differences and accentuate them enormously. It shouldn’t really make any difference, in practical and social terms whether you’re male or female, but it still does in many cases.

Hormones also do a lot more than just express your gender attributes. Biology is very efficient and uses systems to do multiple, unconnected things. So, certainly using the technology that is available today, you'll always have side effects and complications from anything that disrupts whatever hormones you have. They're doing a lot more than just causing secondary sexual features. The biggest issues I would be very concerned about would be growth and bone density. You're also potentially rendering someone unable to ever reproduce, if they don't go through puberty as they'll never develop the ability to do that.

I'm not going to attempt to analyse the psychology of being trans as I don't know enough about it or have any experience of it, but I do think that we should have a society that isn't so caught up on gender stereotyping.

We all start out the same and frankly, most of the time, if you strip away the differences in clothing, hair styles and so on, there's a hell of a lot less differences than we tend to think. Even watching some of my own relatives grow up, I'm very aware of the fact that some people still quite actively instil those stereotypes. I was really annoyed for example when someone called my toddler neice a "little tomboy" and told her father to stop her playing football. She loves football and it has nothing to do with her gender or future orientation either. Likewise, I see guys having every "female" attribute bullied out of them - they can't show a softer side, a caring side, be artsy, be flamboyant etc etc ... Many of those things aren't even featured that were always "feminine". Look back in history and you'll find male fashions where guys were the peacock and dressed and acted far more flamboyantly than the modern industrial, grey suited, worker bee fashion forced them into.

My view of it is that both men and women were forced into artificially accentuated roles that kept both in their place. Women were expected to be unambitious homemakers, soft and fluffy and men were expected to be either cannon fodder or industrial robots and have no emotions, as those were likely to reduce their industrial efficiency.

It's noteworthy that upper class men and women conformed to those stereotypes far less than working class and even middle classes. You'd see powerful women doing interesting things (eg many of the first aviation enthusiasts, car racing in the 1920s, huntswomen etc etc) and far more flouncing about men who engaged in arts and cultural activities who came from privileged classes who were able to step outside those norms because they were top of the tree.

I just think there's a lot more going on with gender identity than we think and I also think our societies are far less open-minded than we actually think.

I'm not saying that a small % or people aren't trans. btw, I'm just saying that society takes a rather narrow minded and binary view of gender identity and still insists that you're either take package A or B and have to have all the attributes of A or B and can't have anything in between.

I'd prefer a society where everyone felt comfortable in their own skin. I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. We are going the right direction but we are still only traveling along the journey.

Malayalam

EdgeCase wrote: »

My view of it is that as a society we actually place way, way, way too much stress on gender differences and accentuate them enormously. It shouldn’t really make any difference, in practical and social terms whether you’re male or female, but it still does in many cases.

Hormones also do a lot more than just express your gender attributes. Biology is very efficient and uses systems to do multiple, unconnected things. So, certainly using the technology that is available today, you'll always have side effects and complications from anything that disrupts whatever hormones you have. They're doing a lot more than just causing secondary sexual features. The biggest issues I would be very concerned about would be growth and bone density. You're also potentially rendering someone unable to ever reproduce, if they don't go through puberty as they'll never develop the ability to do that.

I'm not going to attempt to analyse the psychology of being trans as I don't know enough about it or have any experience of it, but I do think that we should have a society that isn't so caught up on gender stereotyping.

We all start out the same and frankly, most of the time, if you strip away the differences in clothing, hair styles and so on, there's a hell of a lot less differences than we tend to think. Even watching some of my own relatives grow up, I'm very aware of the fact that some people still quite actively instil those stereotypes. I was really annoyed for example when someone called my toddler neice a "little tomboy" and told her father to stop her playing football. She loves football and it has nothing to do with her gender or future orientation either. Likewise, I see guys having every "female" attribute bullied out of them - they can't show a softer side, a caring side, be artsy, be flamboyant etc etc ... Many of those things aren't even featured that were always "feminine". Look back in history and you'll find male fashions where guys were the peacock and dressed and acted far more flamboyantly than the modern industrial, grey suited, worker bee fashion forced them into.

My view of it is that both men and women were forced into artificially accentuated roles that kept both in their place. Women were expected to be unambitious homemakers, soft and fluffy and men were expected to be either cannon fodder or industrial robots and have no emotions, as those were likely to reduce their industrial efficiency.

It's norworthy that upper class men and women conformed to those stereotypes far less than working class and even middle classes. You'd see powerful women doing interesting things and far more flouncing about men who engaged in arts and cultural activities who came from privileged classes who were able to step outside those norms because they were top of the tree.

I just think there's a lot more going on with gender identity than we think and I also think our societies are far less open-minded than we actually think.

I'd prefer a society where everyone felt comfortable in their own skin. I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. We are going the right direction but we are still only traveling along the journey.

I agree. A kid who does not feel comfortable in the gender they are born in should in a conscious society be able to live comfortably exactly as they wish to express themselves. Gender stereotypes are enforced for sure. The irony is this transgenderism which denies biological gender is ALL about biological gender. What is it the gender creative child is missing? They want to act like the opposite sex, wear the clothes, have the interests and activities, the life expressions, then go ahead and do exactly that. Live your life! A child does not need to atrophy body parts. As the body changes towards puberty we must be able to sensibly help a child accommodate those changes psychologically rather than chopping off or suppressing the body part. Everyone is learning from birth that life does not always (usually!) go as we wish, and that we have to develop resilience and tolerance. We are not as tall, slim, brilliant, beautiful, multi-limbed, magical, strong as we wish, we cannot sing, fly, run fast - we learn to ACCEPT with fortitude that this is the human condition with its limitations. Then of course if the child reaches adulthood and still feels dysphoria, the science is there to adjust them.

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

3 The person convicted of hate speech against Susie Green and her family was not convicted solely on the basis of 1 or 2 words as indicated abive. It was concerted harassment, publicly outing Susie Green and her child, inciting transphobic hatred against them on public platforms.

First of all, the person wasn't convicted of hate speech, only interviewed under caution. And no she didn't "out" anybody. How could someone who has said numerous times publicly on tv, social media and even Tedtalks that her son underwent gender surgery at 16 be outed? Also, the child who is now an adult has appeared numerous times on tv and newspapers telling their story. There is nothing to "out". Talk about misrepresenting facts.

It wasn't concerted harrassment, Susie Greens main complaint was that she used the word castrated to refer to the surgery her child underwent. She also accused the charity of child abuse which isn't really untrue is it? Children are not capable of making choices which will affect them for the rest of their lives. Don't forget that a judge previously ruled that they must have no contact with one family after their influence caused severe problems for one child

A taxpayer-funded transgender charity has been banned by the High Court from any contact with a family after the mother, who was being advised by the group, forced her seven-year-old son to live as a girl.

The latest accounts for Mermaids UK, published last week, reveal it has been granted £35,000 by the Department for Education (DfE) and a total of £138,000 by the national lottery’s Awards for All fund and the BBC’s Children in Need appeal.

It can also be revealed that until last week Mermaids was advertising “same day” cross-sex hormone treatment for children. NHS guidelines do not allow the treatment, which causes irreversible bodily changes and can compromise fertility, for anyone under 16.

You can look up the facts if you want or you can provide links to the "transphobic hatred" that this person put out. All her tweets are still there.

Also, I'll ask again, please provide links to the hatred, threats and harrassment of trans people perpetrated by so called terfs which you claimed was rife earlier in the thread.

morebarn2

I know it’s Liveline, and usually a head wreck, but they are discussing this with a trans caller on the radio.

NuMarvel

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Sixteen.

For long term, life changing, irreversible decisions. No, I do not agree.

How can you not agree that it's a fact? This has been the case here in Ireland for over 20 years:

Section 23 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997 provides that young people of 16 and over may give valid consent to medical, surgical and dental treatment.

Source: Citizens Information website

jobbridge4life

Why are people so obsessed with transgender issues? I mean we are talking about an almost vanishingly small subset of the population. So small that many of us may go through our lives without ever crossing paths with a trans individual. Yet there is a vocal and angry group of people on Boards, and elsewhere, who are not trans, have no trans relatives, have no reason whatsoever to be bothered, that literally cannot let a day pass without commenting on trans people?

An_Toirpin

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Why are people so obsessed with transgender issues? I mean we are talking about an almost vanishingly small subset of the population. So small that many of us may go through our lives without ever crossing paths with a trans individual. Yet there is a vocal and angry group of people on Boards, and elsewhere, who are not trans, have no trans relatives, have no reason whatsoever to be bothered, that literally cannot let a day pass without commenting on trans people?

It is culturally very influential. It is complete science denial so it bothers people.

ohnonotgmail

An_Toirpin wrote: »

It is culturally very influential. It is complete science denial so it bothers people.

LOL.

An_Toirpin

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Why are people so obsessed with transgender issues? I mean we are talking about an almost vanishingly small subset of the population. So small that many of us may go through our lives without ever crossing paths with a trans individual. Yet there is a vocal and angry group of people on Boards, and elsewhere, who are not trans, have no trans relatives, have no reason whatsoever to be bothered, that literally cannot let a day pass without commenting on trans people?

Trans is not so much the issue as is intersectionalism which is intellectually toxic.