sabat wrote: » I can't think of any other "scientific" field where literally the only evidence is words coming out of a child's mouth.
conorhal wrote: » What is the current legal and medical situation regards minors and transitioning in this country? Genuine question, I've no idea if any particular guidelines or legal positions exist.
Bannasidhe wrote: » I have no idea tbh. I just happen to know a lot of young people (and not so young) who are/have transitioned. Some of whom I have known since they were very young children. Children who were so badly behaved the experts wanted to proscribe them various 'ADHD' drugs but their mother refused. Now they are happy, healthy adults and have a great relationship with their very supportive and loving mother.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » On this issue, he literally is 'some randomer'. He has no experience and no expertise. And tell me more about your research with licence payers to assess their opinions? Are we going down the Trump road of majority opinion taking precedence over experts?
sabat wrote: » "Mother" (single?) not "parents" who knows better than doctors? (not that I agree with this type of diagnosis or medication) There's a couple of clues right there as to the root of the child's mental disorder...
donkeykong5 wrote: » Heard Graham linehan on the niall boylan show today. Sounded fine to me. Will definitely tune in tonight.
Will I Am Not wrote: » He’s in the public eye for his views. Hardly a left field choice for RTE if they’re looking for an opposing voice. Prime Time is a current affairs television programme, it’s not a televised think tank exclusively for experts.
Will I Am Not wrote: » I’ve not done any research but it’s evident that a lot of the general public hold similar views to Linehan. I’m sure you’ve noticed from reading through the many threads here over the years?
Bannasidhe wrote: » Yeah, sometimes marriages break up. Feck off with your amateur psychology. They did not have a mental 'disorder' as you wish to style it - they had gender dysphoria. And now they have transgendered and no longer suffer from gender dysphoria or any other disorder you may care to suggest to suit whatever agenda you are trying to push.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » There’s a hell of a lot of argument to authority here, but psychiatry is a very very weak authority. .
jobbridge4life wrote: » Prime Time is a publicaly funded current affairs and investigative programme. Of course it should insist on having informed, and reasonable individuals on to inform the public. Not just any individual of public noteriety with an axe to grind on any issue. I await Katy Price's opinion on the ethics of the industrialisation of agrian land for the purpose of electricity generation. The first clause of your first sentence ought surely have been enough to dissuade you from further typing?
Will I Am Not wrote: » Heard him on 2 different radio shows today and all he seems to want is people to be able to discuss and research without being shut down.
Will I Am Not wrote: » Maybe if we didn’t live in a society where people risk their careers and privacy coming forward on certain topics they could have got an “expert” on... Ok so, everyone paying a TV licence is fine and dandy with everything.
jobbridge4life wrote: » Weaker than?
Will I Am Not wrote: » Heard him on 2 different radio shows today and all he seems to want is people to be able to discuss and research without being shut down. I don’t follow him on Twitter or anything so I’m not aware if he has actually said anything terrible but he seemed fairly reasonable on both shows today.
jobbridge4life wrote: » 1. We live in a society where Graham Linehan deciding to dedicate his time to ranting about trans issues, in spite of having precisely zero actual experience in this field, has been as a result gifted several public platforms to air his opinions. 2. There is no shortage of trans, or female, or just plain educated on the topic, individuals offering themselves as alternative. I await their appearance on prime time. 3. TV licence? Graham hasn't lived or paid tax in this country for decades.
AlphabetCards wrote: » The thing is, that he is usually the first to try get everyone who he doesn't agree with off the air. Now that the tables have turned he has quietened down.... for now.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Weaker than any other science. Not a science in fact. Subject to fads and political, or pharmaceutical company, influence.
Bannasidhe wrote: My experience - and I have a fair bit - is it's the other way around. As young teenagers they identified as gay and later as transsexual. After transition most - but not all - then identify as heterosexual. So the gender they were/are attracted to sexually stays the same but their own body changes so it becomes the opposite gender they are attracted to not the same gender. This isn't a hard and fast rule as every individual is different but it has been my experience with the majority of young people I know who have/are transitioning. And no. None of them are pre-pubescent. All are late teens/early twenties. All are taking hormones, most are waiting for various surgeries - waiting until their bodies have adapted to the hormones and can cope. I will also say that I have seen them go from deeply unhappy angry kids lashing out at the world to happy adults secure in their own bodies and post-trans gender identity.
Will I Am Not wrote: » I was being asked if I had researched when I said there are lots of licence payers that would be coming from the same position as Linehan. Nothing to do with him paying tax or having a licence Honestly don’t see what the big deal is with him being on PT. It’s just the usual “I don’t like what he says, get him off” type of thing. The only surprise is RTÉ actually having him on, knowing his opinions.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » There’s a hell of a lot of argument to authority here, but psychiatry is a very very weak authority. In particular psychological diagnosis is largely based on what the patient says, it’s not like we have a clue about the brain or can use medical imaging to determine most diagnosis. That’s obviously problematic for children.
Will I Am Not wrote: » I’ve not done any research ...
DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: » If people are confident in their opinions and viewpoints they should have no problem debating them in a public forum.
Wrongway1985 wrote: » What sort of expertise are you looking for on this? Guy has aired views publically before so an easy selection for them and given the reaction to his inclusion they are probably justified. Do I think it's okay, don't see anything wrong with it can explain themselves. If even coming off looking like an oaf so be it very rarely watch RTE myself but will be tuning in to see what all this mad fuss is really over. The protestors are doing so to censor his views I thought?
Gravelly wrote: » The trans activists are remarkably similar to the Irish conservative catholics of yesteryear. The virulent attacks on non-believers, the refusal to entertain any debate whatsoever, the constant appeal to unquestionable authority, the use of children as pawns, and the censorship of alternative voices.
ligerdub wrote: » I'm glad that there are success stories, and I'm sure there are. That doesn't change the fact that there are bound to be a lot of stories that did not go so well, what happens then is fairly negative for those people. This happy go lucky/secure adult post transition narrative doesn't correlate to the numbers.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » What numbers are these that you're referring to?
In total, there have been three large scale follow-up studies and a handful of smaller ones. I have listed all of them below, together with their results. (In the table, “cis-” means non-transsexual.) Despite the differences in country, culture, decade, and follow-up length and method, all the studies have come to a remarkably similar conclusion: Only very few trans- kids still want to transition by the time they are adults. Instead, they generally turn out to be regular gay or lesbian folks. The exact number varies by study, but roughly 60–90% of trans- kids turn out no longer to be trans by adulthood.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Except it's not the usual 'I don't like what he says'. It is the unusual 'He has no expertise or experience.' Presumably if one of your children or a child close to you was encountering serious psychiatric difficulties, you'd be steering towards bulletin board experts or indeed local comedians rather than any medically qualified experts to deal with them? Not inviting him onto Prime Time is not 'shutting him down'. He still has the right to free speech, to tweet, to publish video, to publish articles. He just shouldn't be positioned as an authoritative voice to an audience largely new to the topic. When did you decide this? Do a national public broadcaster not a particular responsibility to be accurate and fair in their flagship news programme? You lost me at 'I've not done any research'. This has nothing to do with 'the confidence' or otherwise of debaters. This is about the responsibility of the national public broadcaster to show fair and accurate content on a very sensitive topic on their flagship news programme. Maybe a psychiatrist or psychologist or endocrinologist who has spent a decade or two dealing with transgender people - like Prof Donal O'Shea maybe? Or maybe somebody who has done a Masters and a PhD on the topic, and has a few years experience dealing with people? Or maybe experts by experience, people who have been through the process (or indeed not through the process) themselves and can speak to their own experience? There is no suggestion about 'censoring his views'. But giving him a national audience of people, many of whom will be new to the topic when he has no expertise or experience is insane. They might as well pick a random poster from this thread and stick them on the air.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
