Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Lesbian transgender couple declares their plan to transition their 5-year-old son
Options
Comments
-
-
Nine or ten at the very extreme end. The very rare occurrences where a transitioning child has entered precocious puberty. It would be a misrepresentation to claim that 9/10 is typical.
The gates are still the same though as they are for any transitioning adolescent. So the age is somewhat irrelevant.
Very rare? The age of puberty onset is constantly decreasing, so that 9 or 10 is now considered within the normal range for girls, and boys about 10 or 11, also steadily decreasing. Precocious puberty is now below 7 or 8.
By the way there is a huge market in puberty blockers and cross sex hormones online, so the idea that this is some sort of civilised carefully-supervised, medical thing is wrong. It is less than a couple of years since transgenderism was defined as a mental illness. Recently the word dysphoria was removed to be replaced with incongruence, and yet in the trans community - if one reads their words and watches their videos - dysphoria is admitted to be huge and what's worse, persistent in spite of all medical intervention.
More and more there is an element in the medical community that is coming to the conclusion that therapy to deal with the causative dysphoria is the smart way to go - not hormones and surgery. I believe this approach will win out eventually for th vast majority of trans identifying youngsters and the people who pressed for the severely damaging hormones and surgeries, which are crippling brain and body, will have been on the wrong side of history.0 -
-
There's an overbearing scent of activists privelage going on here.0
-
The one transgender lad (sorry lady) I know sort of slinks rather than sashays, and he/she dresses like a lumberjack, so, in my limited experience, no, but perhaps you do?
That was a sketch on Monty Python's Flying Circus!!Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
0 -
Advertisement
-
The taking of blockers and other hormones won't happen until much later on and not until after considerable amounts of assessment and discussion. If the child still feels like they want to transition at that point, fine.
I have no issue myself with a boy or girl being treated like the opposite gender if that's what they want to do. I mean, we remember George from the famous five and it wasn't really that controversial. I don't buy the argument about being teased either because, honestly, kids will get teased about just about anything and this is just one more thing to add to the pile.
I'm much more hesitant about hormone treatment and all that stuff for kids though. It's a very drastic intervention that you can't easily reverse so you would need to take every precaution to ensure that it was the right choice. This isn't something where you can medically test for a diagnosis and then provide an intervention. It's far more subjective and the consequences of getting it wrong are very high.
I do understand why waiting until the kids come of age isn't ideal either because of the changes to their physiology.
This is far from a simple subject, unfortunately.0 -
Eric Weinstein, who is a bit up himself for my tastes, but still, a clever enough chap, ( being a solid scientist etc, though his involvement with Thiel the transhumanist gives cause for pause), nonetheless he has an interesting angle on the transgender ideology. NOTE - this is not regarding trans people, who we all agree are welcome as adults to do whatever they want. But regarding the ideology and especially social media platforms handling the debate, Weinstein says....I believe it’s being fashioned cynically as the preferred weapon with which to hunt those who will never give a single inch of scientific ground to political pressure.
Treating Trans M/F *exactly* the same as born M/F would be medical malpractice. Etc. So what you’re really doing is saying that biology, history, science and medicine are only allowed to exist at the whim of political activists.
It appears to be a deliberate device for smoking out any person w/ high independence & moderate to high intelligence who refuses to knuckle under to authoritarians. The game is revealed: Trans is the shibboleth to smoke out holdouts.
I propose a counter measure. Let me put forward the Galileo Principle: the use of science is an ABSOLUTE defense against bigotry & discrimination by political activists. Science simply trumps activism... Line in the sand. Full stop.0 -
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »That was a sketch on Monty Python's Flying Circus!!
That just occurred to me now!
Won't be able to get the song out of my head for the rest of the day
0 -
mcmoustache wrote: »I have no issue myself with a boy or girl being treated like the opposite gender if that's what they want to do. I mean, we remember George from the famous five and it wasn't really that controversial. I don't buy the argument about being teased either because, honestly, kids will get teased about just about anything and this is just one more thing to add to the pile.
I'm much more hesitant about hormone treatment and all that stuff for kids though. It's a very drastic intervention that you can't easily reverse so you would need to take every precaution to ensure that it was the right choice. This isn't something where you can medically test for a diagnosis and then provide an intervention. It's far more subjective and the consequences of getting it wrong are very high.
I do understand why waiting until the kids come of age isn't ideal either because of the changes to their physiology.
This is far from a simple subject, unfortunately.
It actually is - while the kid is five. As long as there's no coersion.
When he's nine or ten THEN it gets tricky, but even then there's no way in hell he's going to be taking hormone blockers simply because it's what the parents want.
People can exagerate this as much as they like or claim it's a mantal health issue or it's not normal or that the parents are being abusive, but THAT's the simple fact.
Unless they get them on the black market and force them down his throat (at which point yes - I'll agree - it's abusive).Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
0 -
Again with the "me, me, me"
Read the whole post and you might grasp the bigger message.
Oh I get your bigger message . They had it coming for standing out. Everyone should just dress according to their surroundings. I just chose to focus on another aspect of your post. If you want everyone laser focused on your "bigger message" maybe dont write such rambling posts.0 -
Advertisement
-
PhiloCypher wrote: »Oh I get your bigger message . They had it coming for standing out. Everyone should just dress according to their surroundings. I just chose to focus on another aspect of your post. If you want everyone laser focused on your "bigger message" maybe dont write such rambling posts.
RamblingPostphobic.0 -
The fact that you seem to believe that children get put on blockers at the very start of puberty belies your ignorance on the whole topic.Very rare? The age of puberty onset is constantly decreasing, so that 9 or 10 is now considered within the normal range for girls, and boys about 10 or 11, also steadily decreasing. Precocious puberty is now below 7 or 8.
If people are going online to get drugs to give their kids, that's a whole other matter of child abuse that has nothing to do with the clinical treatment of gender dysphoria.By the way there is a huge market in puberty blockers and cross sex hormones online, so the idea that this is some sort of civilised carefully-supervised, medical thing is wrong.
The general consensus is that individually-tailored treatment is the most effective.More and more there is an element in the medical community that is coming to the conclusion that therapy to deal with the causative dysphoria is the smart way to go - not hormones and surgery.
Nobody is abandoning hormones or surgery, but merely ensuring that these treatments are provided to those for whom they will be most effective.
This mirrors most modern treatments, like cancer, where the patient is assessed on a regular basis and the next steps chosen dependent on the most beneficial clinical outcome. As opposed to making a decision at the start of treatment and sticking it out till the end.
Absolutely. And nobody is treating it glibly.mcmoustache wrote: »I'm much more hesitant about hormone treatment and all that stuff for kids though. It's a very drastic intervention that you can't easily reverse so you would need to take every precaution to ensure that it was the right choice. This isn't something where you can medically test for a diagnosis and then provide an intervention. It's far more subjective and the consequences of getting it wrong are very high.
I do understand why waiting until the kids come of age isn't ideal either because of the changes to their physiology.
This is far from a simple subject, unfortunately.
This notion that there are 5/15 year olds being given hormones after a trip to the GP while wearing a dress, is fearmongering nonsense peddled by transphobes. The number of adolescents being treated hormonally is incredibly small, and no modern health system are doing it willy-nilly (pun intended).
In short, there's a panic from conservative quarters about something that's just not happening.0 -
So you cannot back up your claim that transgender is a mental illness, the HSE do not treat it as a mental illness so does that mean the medical community is full of "ultra feminists"? :rolleyes:
You see where I said or in my post. I didn't say the medical community is full of anything did I?
Can you tell me one hundred percent it's not a mental illness without any doubt?
Can you also tell me that no one in the medical profession has ever been wrong about anything they have came to a conclusion on?
No you can't.0 -
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »It actually is - while the kid is five. As long as there's no coersion.
My point wasn't that the actual transition was always difficult. It was that correctly making the decision to transition is difficult. Outside of intersex kids, there isn't an objective medical test like a scan or fluid analysis that can be performed to determine that transitioning is the correct intervention.
Instead, you need consultation between the child, the parents, doctors, psychologists and so on. This introduces a lot of scope for human error which is what makes it very difficult. I'm not making the case that kids should never be transitioned. Just that figuring out whether it's the right approach is.0 -
mcmoustache wrote: »My point wasn't that the actual transition was always difficult. It was that correctly making the decision to transition is difficult. Outside of intersex kids, there isn't an objective medical test like a scan or fluid analysis that can be performed to determine that transitioning is the correct intervention.
Instead, you need consultation between the child, the parents, doctors, psychologists and so on. This introduces a lot of scope for human error which is what makes it very difficult. I'm not making the case that kids should never be transitioned. Just that figuring out whether it's the right approach is.
Indeed. As Seamus said, this idea that kids are getting hormone blockers because their parents want a transgender child and make him wear dresses to get them is laughable.Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
0 -
How Soon Is Now wrote: »You see where I said or in my post. I didn't say the medical community is full of anything did I?
Can you tell me one hundred percent it's not a mental illness without any doubt?
Can you also tell me that no one in the medical profession has ever been wrong about anything they have came to a conclusion on?
No you can't.
Being transgender is not a mental illness, being transgender will not land that person in a mental hospital or being sectioned under the Mental Health Act. You have no backup to claim that being transgender is a mental illness.0 -
Being transgender is not a mental illness, being transgender will not land that person in a mental hospital or being sectioned under the Mental Health Act. You have no backup to claim that being transgender is a mental illness.
Do you see how where gonna keep going back and forth with the same thing here!?
Neither of us will change our opinions here as far as I'm concerned I know why I feel it is what it is.
You know why you believe what you believe.
Your argument is its not medically classed as a mental illness my argument is not everything medical professionals come to a conclusion with is correct.
Good knows how many people die or end up going down the wrong path based on medical advice.
Look at our own country and there's enough examples in the media for you to look up.
So I'm sure theres a doctor or a scientist out there who claims it's a mental illness what's the difference in there claims compared to any other?0 -
Typical behavior from trans people that i would expect after seeing the RTE program last week.
Like most religions it follows an indoctrination plan of getting them young.0 -
Being transgender is not a mental illness, being transgender will not land that person in a mental hospital or being sectioned under the Mental Health Act. You have no backup to claim that being transgender is a mental illness.
They're seeking medical intervention when there is physically 0% wrong with their bodies. If you remove what goes on in their heads from the equation there is no issue. It could hardly be more clear cut.0 -
We don't know enough about the brain to determine whether it is a mental illness or a chemical imbalance. It's something though.
To say the HSE don't treat it at the moment means something in the short term but nothing in the long run.
Maybe in years to come we can view our brain's roadmap to see why people behave the way they do.
Regardless, the protection of the child should be paramount. These parents are obviously a danger.0 -
Advertisement
-
The fact that you seem to believe that children get put on blockers at the very start of puberty belies your ignorance on the whole topic.
If people are going online to get drugs to give their kids, that's a whole other matter of child abuse that has nothing to do with the clinical treatment of gender dysphoria.
The general consensus is that individually-tailored treatment is the most effective.
Nobody is abandoning hormones or surgery, but merely ensuring that these treatments are provided to those for whom they will be most effective.
This mirrors most modern treatments, like cancer, where the patient is assessed on a regular basis and the next steps chosen dependent on the most beneficial clinical outcome. As opposed to making a decision at the start of treatment and sticking it out till the end.
Absolutely. And nobody is treating it glibly.
This notion that there are 5/15 year olds being given hormones after a trip to the GP while wearing a dress, is fearmongering nonsense peddled by transphobes. The number of adolescents being treated hormonally is incredibly small, and no modern health system are doing it willy-nilly (pun intended).
In short, there's a panic from conservative quarters about something that's just not happening.
So, this case. Ok or not?0 -
This seems to be as much an ideology as it is wanting to pretend to be a different sex and when a young child is involved I think maybe child services should step in, I mean there is being liberal and then there is just crazy.0
-
How Soon Is Now wrote: »The proof is in the condition itself can't get anymore black and white then that!
That strikes me as a bit circular. Could you not insert pretty much anything at all as a substitute into the conversation and pretty much throw that sentence at it?
For example if someone claimed to you that homosexuality was a mental illness, and when you queried them on the basis for the claim they merely answered you "The proof is in the condition itself can't get anymore black and white then that!"How Soon Is Now wrote: »Can you tell me one hundred percent it's not a mental illness without any doubt?
So not only are you reversing the burden of evidence here you are also doing so based on unrealistic standards of evidence.
Where else do we require 100% certainty in your experience? We certainly do not do so in science.How Soon Is Now wrote: »Can you also tell me that no one in the medical profession has ever been wrong about anything they have came to a conclusion on? No you can't.
Why would they or should they? We in science, and the medical profession is no different here, are wrong all the time. Absolutely. Very common occurrence.
How do we find out we were wrong however? We do so by evaluating the arguments, evidence, data and reasoning behind claims. And we re-evaluate the resulting conclusions when new arguments, evidence, data and reasoning comes into play.
Since you have offered NONE for your position, then making appeals to previous cases where someone was right or wrong is pretty much a red herring fest. It simply is not relevant.
The conspiracy theorists make a similar move. When they can not substantiate their particular conspiracy they start making non-sequitur comments like "Well OTHER things people called Conspiracy Theory turned out to be true!" as if this somehow lends their own nonsense credence by proxy.
Imagine this rhetoric in, say, a court of law. The prosecutor or defense stand up and say "Well actually I intend to present no evidence at all pertaining to this case. But can you people say with certainty that no one before today was ever wrongfully convicted! Mwuhhahaha come back from THAT one you people you!".How Soon Is Now wrote: »Your argument is its not medically classed as a mental illness my argument is not everything medical professionals come to a conclusion with is correct.
I think thinking in terms of "correct" is the wrong way to go about this as it is hard to simply declare the assignment of things into arbitrary human classifications right or wrong.
I think the useful starting point is to decide what you even mean by the term "Mental Illness" and then explain why any particular thing actually qualifies. What particular attributes of Transgenderism are you using to fit the classification here, and by what definition? What to your mind makes it a mental illness? The opening sentence I replied to in this post is less than informative.
Take the people who actively WANT a perfectly healthy limb to be removed from their body. At first glance the emotional response to these people is to think they are mad. Nut jobs. Out. Of. Their. Fecking. Tree. Who would actively want a perfectly good, perfectly useful, perfectly operational limb to be removed? Sure they must be "mentally ill". How could they not by. Shure dats jus' man.
Turns out no. There is a genuine underlying physical issue at the level of the brain that appears to explain their issue. Something that literally makes their seemingly perfect limb become a source of absolute misery and even pain for them. And when these people do manage to get the limb lopped off, usually by traveling to countries with less stringent medical ethics on the matter, they return reporting new levels of relief and well being.
So how do we classify that? Mental Illness? Why? Because the brain is involved? Well then is brain cancer a mental illness? Is a brain tumor a mental illness? Hardly a useful manifestation of the term. Or do we realize it is a genuine physical issue, just in the brain rather than in a limb or organ?
Without a useful definition of mental illness, and without a useful knowledge of the causes and explanations of Transgenderism (and I find myself somewhat suspecting the explanations when we find them will not be a million miles different to that of the Body Dysmorphic Disorder I described above with limbs).... it is hard to force the peg of one through the hole of the other.
It would appear that classification of it as a "Mental Illness" is done based on nothing but a similar emotional reaction people have to someone wanting their own functioning limb(s) removed. It seems a a bit mad to us, so they must be mad.0 -
They're seeking medical intervention when there is physically 0% wrong with their bodies. If you remove what goes on in their heads from the equation there is no issue. It could hardly be more clear cut.
The same can be said for those getting facelifts or botox, or numerous other medical treatments to alter their bodies.0 -
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »Indeed. As Seamus said, this idea that kids are getting hormone blockers because their parents want a transgender child and make him wear dresses to get them is laughable.
Oh I know. The number being transitioned in this country is very small which suggests that medical professionals aren't making hasty decisions here. I'd even expect this number to jump significantly over the coming years before levelling off and I wouldn't see that as a cause of concern either since this is relatively new.
I would also not be too dismissive of the concerns raised and I know that that's not easy when a lot of posters are clearly just using this complicated issue as a trans-bashing stick.0 -
And I didn't say the parents were abusive, just like I didn't say the problem was just the boy wearing dresses.Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »Possible, yes, because I've seen it happen. Personally. Possibly not, though - which is why I'm against coersion.
Are you saying that transgender is a mental health issue?
From the article:
Furthermore, it refers to the child's choice several times.
I agree. Never said contrary,
Again: I'm NOT saying "the child is trans!!" - I'm saying it's not impossible.
OP said he had a hard time believing the child hand't been influenced by the parents. Based on what? Does he know the parents personally? Because if not, then that's close-minded.
Again - it's possible. Not definite, not probably, maybe not even likely.
Possible.
Yes, they may well be pushy parents - I'm open to that too - but social workers in the UK are not known for their tolerance of alternative lifestyles when it comes to kids. So while I'm open to it, I think it's less likely. And if they are deemed to be abusive, yes - I agree - take the kid away from them
Kid well get older and devlope and then choose a gender. Maybe male, maybe female. Up to them. If the parents push, yes - they are wrong. But pushy parents are nothing new. If the force, then yes, they are being abusive and I'd be with you.
And the evidence at the moment is that the parents are NOT being abusive.
I don't have a problem with people being trans, there's enough medical evidence supporting it being a legitimate condition, I don't believe it's a mental illness - if it were it would be treated with psychiatric drugs and counselling (and that is done at the start to rule it out first).
I have a problem with the idea of "he's wearing dresses - let's commence the gender reassignment process as soon as he's old enough", and I have a problem with the consensus that a five-year-old can make such an informed choice.
The above is not right - and no amount of "So? It's no big deal - you must be a trans hater" changes that.0 -
Typical behavior from trans people that i would expect after seeing the RTE program last week.
Like most religions it follows an indoctrination plan of getting them young.
The religion of sensationalism right there!
So 12 teenagers out of over 900,000 pupils under 18 who changed their gender in this country is an indoctrination plan ?0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 79126
This notion that there are 5/15 year olds being given hormones after a trip to the GP while wearing a dress, is fearmongering nonsense peddled by transphobes. The number of adolescents being treated hormonally is incredibly small, and no modern health system are doing it willy-nilly (pun intended).
In short, there's a panic from conservative quarters about something that's just not happening.
The article, which may well be pushing an agenda, does seem to learn in that direction, in fairnessJody said that before Jayden began demanding to wear girl's clothes, she had not even been aware that "a child could be transgender."
It makes it sound like it was a pivotal part of the whole thing coming up, hence my post earlierJayden was born a boy, but has worn dresses for the past year.
Could be as likely they had a long speech which wasn't published talking about how it's not about a dress0 -
The religion of sensationalism right there!
So 12 teenagers out of over 900,000 pupils under 18 who changed their gender in this country is an indoctrination plan ?
Who said anything about a particular set of individuals, are you trying to straw man me or are you one of the individuals impacted?
As per the prime time program and if you take cursory glance at some of the transsexual threads in the LGBT forum there is a want by the Trans community to remove medical intervention when transitioning.
There is also a general consensus of allowing children as young as 12 avail of the hormone blockers, we have seen some fairly dodgy actions happening between child drag stars and parts of the LGBT community, and finally we have other countries enacting laws that make it child abuse to not allow children as young as 12 transition.
So yah id say there is a concerted effort to get them young like religion, pity other predatory behaviors seem to be shared also.0 -
Advertisement
-
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »That strikes me as a bit circular. Could you not insert pretty much anything at all as a substitute into the conversation and pretty much throw that sentence at it?
For example if someone claimed to you that homosexuality was a mental illness, and when you queried them on the basis for the claim they merely answered you "The proof is in the condition itself can't get anymore black and white then that!"
So not only are you reversing the burden of evidence here you are also doing so based on unrealistic standards of evidence.
Where else do we require 100% certainty in your experience? We certainly do not do so in science.
Why would they or should they? We in science, and the medical profession is no different here, are wrong all the time. Absolutely. Very common occurrence.
How do we find out we were wrong however? We do so by evaluating the arguments, evidence, data and reasoning behind claims. And we re-evaluate the resulting conclusions when new arguments, evidence, data and reasoning comes into play.
Since you have offered NONE for your position, then making appeals to previous cases where someone was right or wrong is pretty much a red herring fest. It simply is not relevant.
The conspiracy theorists make a similar move. When they can not substantiate their particular conspiracy they start making non-sequitur comments like "Well OTHER things people called Conspiracy Theory turned out to be true!" as if this somehow lends their own nonsense credence by proxy.
Imagine this rhetoric in, say, a court of law. The prosecutor or defense stand up and say "Well actually I intend to present no evidence at all pertaining to this case. But can you people say with certainty that no one before today was ever wrongfully convicted! Mwuhhahaha come back from THAT one you people you!".
I think thinking in terms of "correct" is the wrong way to go about this as it is hard to simply declare the assignment of things into arbitrary human classifications right or wrong.
I think the useful starting point is to decide what you even mean by the term "Mental Illness" and then explain why any particular thing actually qualifies. What particular attributes of Transgenderism are you using to fit the classification here, and by what definition? What to your mind makes it a mental illness? The opening sentence I replied to in this post is less than informative.
Take the people who actively WANT a perfectly healthy limb to be removed from their body. At first glance the emotional response to these people is to think they are mad. Nut jobs. Out. Of. Their. Fecking. Tree. Who would actively want a perfectly good, perfectly useful, perfectly operational limb to be removed? Sure they must be "mentally ill". How could they not by. Shure dats jus' man.
Turns out no. There is a genuine underlying physical issue at the level of the brain that appears to explain their issue. Something that literally makes their seemingly perfect limb become a source of absolute misery and even pain for them. And when these people do manage to get the limb lopped off, usually by traveling to countries with less stringent medical ethics on the matter, they return reporting new levels of relief and well being.
So how do we classify that? Mental Illness? Why? Because the brain is involved? Well then is brain cancer a mental illness? Is a brain tumor a mental illness? Hardly a useful manifestation of the term. Or do we realize it is a genuine physical issue, just in the brain rather than in a limb or organ?
Without a useful definition of mental illness, and without a useful knowledge of the causes and explanations of Transgenderism (and I find myself somewhat suspecting the explanations when we find them will not be a million miles different to that of the Body Dysmorphic Disorder I described above with limbs).... it is hard to force the peg of one through the hole of the other.
It would appear that classification of it as a "Mental Illness" is done based on nothing but a similar emotional reaction people have to someone wanting their own functioning limb(s) removed. It seems a a bit mad to us, so they must be mad.
The bases for me mentioning the things you quoted in my posts was to bascially counter "uhhh the HSE don't see this as an mental illness so that's that your wrong"
My answer to that was are they always correct in everything they do or say? It's valid just as much as what was thrown at me numerous time because another medical professional could come out with a theory on why it is a medical illness who's wrong who's not?
What's the difference if your treating someone who thinks he's Simon Paul and Joe to someone who believes there a woman born in a man's body?0
Advertisement