Lesbian transgender couple declares their plan to transition their 5-year-old son

klaaaz · 13-02-2019 3:09pm

Gravelly wrote: »

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?

As you're a member of the fashion police, do you regularly judge how people dress?

Zorya · 13-02-2019 3:10pm

seamus wrote: »

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.

Gravelly · 13-02-2019 3:10pm

klaaaz wrote: »

As you're a member of the fashion police, do you regularly judge how people dress?

Only lumberjacks.

Muckka · 13-02-2019 3:11pm

There's an overbearing scent of activists privelage going on here.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-02-2019 3:12pm

Gravelly wrote: »

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!!

mcmoustache · 13-02-2019 3:22pm

seamus wrote: »

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.

Zorya · 13-02-2019 3:25pm

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.

Gravelly · 13-02-2019 3:25pm

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

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-02-2019 3:28pm

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).

PhiloCypher · 13-02-2019 3:32pm

Gravelly wrote: »

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.

Gravelly · 13-02-2019 3:33pm

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.

seamus · 13-02-2019 3:39pm

Zorya wrote: »

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

How Soon Is Now · 13-02-2019 3:44pm

klaaaz wrote: »

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.

mcmoustache · 13-02-2019 3:49pm

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.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-02-2019 3:59pm

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.

klaaaz · 13-02-2019 4:05pm

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.

How Soon Is Now · 13-02-2019 4:13pm

klaaaz wrote: »

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?

Calhoun · 13-02-2019 4:14pm

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.

sabat · 13-02-2019 4:14pm

klaaaz wrote: »

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.

Pac1Man · 13-02-2019 4:17pm

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.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 13-02-2019 4:17pm

seamus wrote: »

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?

Chris_Heilong · 13-02-2019 4:32pm

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.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-02-2019 4:34pm

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.

klaaaz · 13-02-2019 4:41pm

sabat wrote: »

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.

mcmoustache · 13-02-2019 4:42pm

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.

Gimme A Pound · 13-02-2019 4:54pm

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.

And I didn't say the parents were abusive, just like I didn't say the problem was just the boy wearing dresses.

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.

klaaaz · 13-02-2019 4:55pm

Calhoun wrote: »

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 ?

13-02-2019 4:59pm

seamus wrote: »

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 fairness

Jody said that before Jayden began demanding to wear girl's clothes, she had not even been aware that "a child could be transgender."

Jayden was born a boy, but has worn dresses for the past year.

It makes it sound like it was a pivotal part of the whole thing coming up, hence my post earlier
Could be as likely they had a long speech which wasn't published talking about how it's not about a dress

Calhoun · 13-02-2019 5:12pm

klaaaz wrote: »

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.

How Soon Is Now · 13-02-2019 5:20pm

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?

DEFTLEFTHAND · 13-02-2019 5:50pm

It changed in 2012 I think. Up to that point 'Gender Identity Disorder' was considered a mental health condition.

More studies or something must have happened to lead to such a reversal.

Or maybe social political pressures of sorts.

7aubzxk43m2sni · 13-02-2019 5:53pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

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.

I don't understand your logic here. It's not mental illness because there's an issue at the level of the brain that appears to explain their issue?

There are strong links between inflammation of the brain and depression, does that mean depression is not a mental illness?

If your intention is to defend transgenderism / gender dysphoria as "not a mental illness" I don't think referring to those who want to chop off healthy limbs is a good approach to take.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-02-2019 5:56pm

Andy Alive Greengrocer wrote: »

And I didn't say the parents were abusive, just like I didn't say the problem was just the boy wearing dresses.

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.

Doesn't challenge anything I wrote.

klaaaz · 13-02-2019 6:01pm

Calhoun wrote: »

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.

You said there was an indoctrination plan to get them young. I countered that the proof from said Prime Time episode was that only 12 teenagers out of over 900,000 pupils under 18 switched gender, that's an actual fact.

If there is dodgy actions between child drag stars and the LGBT community, that's illegal and it's nothing to do with transgender people as drag is not transgender.

I think you have mixed up the language though. There is a difference between transition and a medical transition, do you have a problem with teenagers transitioning(not medical)?

As said I don't see an actual religion like "predatory" to "get them young", not in this country as the numbers of a paltry 12 young people transitioning don't support your sensationalism.

Big Bag of Chips · 13-02-2019 6:03pm

manonboard wrote: »

From a young age into teenage life, parents do let their children explore sexually in what they consider age appropriate ways. From self touching to playing doctor like most of us did.

wtf did you do when playing doctors?

I "listened" to people's hearts with a plastic stethoscope and tapped their knee with a plastic hammer!

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-02-2019 6:04pm

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

My answer to that was are they always correct in everything they do or say?

Erm I dealt with that. Your response to me explaining why that is a poor answer to give.... is to simply repeat the same thing at me again? Not really a two way conversation going to happen in that case then is there?

It is simply a complete non-sequitur of an answer to give. A complete dodge of the point. Entirely irrelevant. They might in fact be 100% right in everything else they said or did before. That would not mean they are here. They might be 100% wrong in everything they ever said or did before.... that too would not mean they are here and now.

The questions I asked remain unanswered then. Exactly how are we defining "Mental Illness" here? What are the trait and attributes that make something fit the definition? And how does Transgenderism specifically fit it?

Or are we (by which I mean you) doing what I suspect we are doing.... which is merely projecting an emotional response to it onto the term, and saying "Ah sure that all sounds a bit mad, shure they must be nuts".

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

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?

Well that is exactly the question YOU would have to answer to make the diagnosis of Mental Illness stick. It might not be subjectively different to you, sure it all seems a bit nutty in the head to you I am sure, but the underlying causes are the basis for a diagnosis, not the symptoms that the patient presents with!

If you presented with big red blotches on your skin you might have a viral infection.... or you might be having a skin reaction to a toxic chemical. Both MASSIVELY different things. It would not the red blotches (the symptom) that would be used to classify your condition. It would be the UNDERLYING CAUSES of that symptom.

So why should this be any different? Two people presenting a behaviour that seems nutty to you.... is a subjective measurement of YOU, not them. Whether we classify them as having a mental illness, or something else, depends on the underlying causes of their condition, not the symptoms of the condition itself.

Thankfully no one in the world of medicine works by your rubric or we would be classifying all kinds of things as people just being "mentally ill" including maybe epileptics and people with Tourettes. Shure dey is all actin' a bit mad Mary.... museny be rite in da head!

Franz Von Peppercorn · 13-02-2019 6:07pm

Mental illness or not in adults isn’t the question here either. It’s about the specific case of a child that might be transitioned.

7aubzxk43m2sni · 13-02-2019 6:09pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Well that is exactly the question YOU would have to answer to make the diagnosis of Mental Illness stick. It might not be subjectively different to you, sure it all seems a bit nutty in the head to you I am sure, but the underlying causes are the basis for a diagnosis, not the symptoms that the patient presents with!

If you presented with big red blotches on your skin you might have a viral infection.... or you might be having a skin reaction to a toxic chemical. Both MASSIVELY different things. It would not the red blotches (the symptom) that would be used to classify your condition. It would be the UNDERLYING CAUSES of that symptom.

So why should this be any different? Two people presenting a behaviour that seems nutty to you.... is a subjective measurement of YOU, not them. Whether we classify them as having a mental illness, or something else, depends on the underlying causes of their condition, not the symptoms of the condition itself.

Again I'm having trouble with your analogies. If a person believes they were born in the wrong body, then the symptom for them is their body and specifically their genitalia. I think it's fair to say we don't know the underlying cause.

Isn't surgery treating the symptom and not the cause?

circadian · 13-02-2019 6:13pm

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Anyone else believe that this wrong. I have a difficult time believing that the child hasn't been influenced by his parents in wanting to change from a male to a female.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/trangender-couple-transition-5-year-old-son-to-girl

The Blaze? Get the **** outta here with that, ain't nobody got time for that ****.

7aubzxk43m2sni · 13-02-2019 6:17pm

circadian wrote: »

The Blaze? Get the **** outta here with that, ain't nobody got time for that ****.

Great contribution to the thread, fair play

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-02-2019 6:18pm

Axel Uninterested Question wrote: »

I don't understand your logic here. It's not mental illness because there's an issue at the level of the brain that appears to explain their issue? There are strong links between inflammation of the brain and depression, does that mean depression is not a mental illness?

I do not think "depression" is one thing just like "Cancer" is not one thing. I think it is a catch all term for a number of conditions, all which present looking similar but have different underlying causes. Some hormonal. Some dietary. Some stress. Some as you say involving things at the level of the brain.

My "logic here" as you put it is that something physically wrong with the brain is not alone a basis for the term "mental illness". Is a brain tumor a "Mental Illness"? No. Is Tourette? No.

There are formal definitions of "Mental Illness". The question is which one are we using here, and which attributes of Transgenderism is being mapped onto it? For example one definition offered by Mental Health America is "A mental illness is a disease that causes mild to severe disturbances in thought and/or behavior, resulting in an inability to cope with life’s ordinary demands and routines." another is "A mental disorder, also called a mental illness or psychiatric disorder, is a behavioral or mental pattern that causes significant distress or impairment of personal functioning"

I am not seeing how Transgenderism fits that definition at all. Anyone Transgender I have met seems to be operating and coping perfectly well with the ordinary demands and routines of life.

Axel Uninterested Question wrote: »

If your intention is to defend transgenderism / gender dysphoria as "not a mental illness" I don't think referring to those who want to chop off healthy limbs is a good approach to take.

Why not? The simple fact of the comparison is that behaviour that might SEEM insane to us has perfectly rational explanations when we look for them. So merely seeming a bit nutty or outright insane to us might not be. Tourettes for example is now classes as a "neurological disorder" not a "Mental Illness" and as tourette.org notes "Although often treated by psychiatrists, Tourette is not a mental or psychiatric illness. Rather, it is a movement disorder that often occurs along with other psychiatric conditions". Yet their behaviour might seem pretty damn insane to us in our ignorance.

The comparison to BID is a useful one. It shows how people can be genuinely miserable and be suffering in what appears to us to be a 100% healthy and functioning body. And there are genuine explicable underlying causes for why it is happening to them. It is not that they are mentally ill.

But no my intention is not yet to "defend" anything as a case for the prosecution has not yet been made. A person merely ASSERTED it was a mental illness. No arguments, evidence, data or reasoning was presented. So there is nothing to actively defend against. All I can do is question the basis of their thinking and see if anything useful falls out. But that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. There is no "defence" warranted or required at this time.

circadian · 13-02-2019 6:19pm

Axel Uninterested Question wrote: »

Great contribution to the thread, fair play

The Blaze is economical with the truth, at best. I'm sure there's a story here but the Glenn Beck agenda will see to it that it's twisted to make a sensational "OMG this child is being forced to transition by evil trans parents" Alex Jones type reaction.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-02-2019 6:24pm

Axel Uninterested Question wrote: »

Again I'm having trouble with your analogies. If a person believes they were born in the wrong body, then the symptom for them is their body and specifically their genitalia. I think it's fair to say we don't know the underlying cause.

Then you appear to be understanding my analogy just fine because that there is EXACTLY my point. Unless we know the underlying cause, we can not simply arbitrarily classify it. Or at least we should not. We can not just scream "Mental Illness" at it, unless we know the underlying causes of it to make that call. Just like I can not scream "Viral Infection" at red blotches on your skin unless I have some reason to think a virus and not, say, a chemical burn is in play.

Axel Uninterested Question wrote: »

Isn't surgery treating the symptom and not the cause?

Well yes. Quite possibly. Just like when we take the perfectly functioning arm off someone with BID and it alleviates their suffering. We might in fact be doing exactly what you say here.

But what other choice do we have at this time? If we find the underlying causes and concoct a treatment we can OFFER that to them too. That would be great. But until that day we have people presenting as miserable and we have one treatment to help them it seems. So why not offer it?

I would MUCH rather reach into the brain of someone with BID and correct their Body Map to stop the negative feedbacks which cause their perfectly functioning arm to be a horror to them that they want removed. I can not do that. No one can. So do we let them go on in misery for the rest of their life? Or do we offer them the ONLY thing we know could actually help?

That's the question many doctors agonise over and debate. Hacking off a perfectly functioning arm goes against the ethics of many doctors. And not others. But I know few of them, regardless of which side they are on, who scream "Mental Illness" at the issue just because it all seems a bit mad.

Zorya · 13-02-2019 6:35pm

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

wtf did you do when playing doctors?

I "listened" to people's hearts with a plastic stethoscope and tapped their knee with a plastic hammer!

For someone very close to me playing doctors as a very small child involved kissing little girls on their bare bums. The bold article. The girls were queued up around the block, apparently. The bolder articles. :mad:

How Soon Is Now · 13-02-2019 6:41pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

But no my intention is not yet to "defend" anything as a case for the prosecution has not yet been made. A person merely ASSERTED it was a mental illness. No arguments, evidence, data or reasoning was presented. So there is nothing to actively defend against. All I can do is question the basis of their thinking and see if anything useful falls out. But that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. There is no "defence" warranted or required at this time.

I don't know how to word the evidence arguments data or reasoning to everything you have put forward.

Why well your clearly clued in on the subject of mental health or at least you think you are.

I'm not I can only put forth my opinion of the matter and what I understand of it which I could explain a lot better in person then in text.

I don't know exactly how you put a basic explanation to what transgender people suffer from but to me and what I've seen of it they clearly have enough issues that it effects who they think they are to a massive degree.

That's why I used the example of someone with split personality which is seen as a mental problem. If your brain is telling you your not the gender you where born there has to be some kinda mental issue there.

If you think I'm wrong grand it makes no difference to me because far as I can see neither of us have anyway of knowing other then what our own brains tell us.

Which again is why I can't just base my opinion on the subject on what certain medical professionals say.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-02-2019 7:01pm

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

I don't know how to word the evidence arguments data or reasoning to everything you have put forward.

And since I do not understand your position at all, I am in no position to help you with that. But these threads tend to last a long time. There is no rush. If you manage to put something together at any point, I will be still here. Take your time.

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

If your brain is telling you your not the gender you where born there has to be some kinda mental issue there.

And again, that is simply not something we have reason to think true at this time.

Which is why I used the BID example. When people first started presenting with the request that they wanted a limb removed it seemed clear to us that there was "some kinda mental issue there".

But now we think we might have an explanation for it. A very simple neurological one. The brain maintains a kind of "map" of the body. The brain does not have a part of that map for the unwanted limb. So the limb feels alien, weird, intrusive and even painful to the patient. So they want it gone.

Simple as that. It COULD be that simple, or something analogous at least, for people who are Transgender. We just do not know at this time. So any kind of classification such as leaping to call it a "Mental Illness" is just arbitrary and subjective. You are merely jumping the gun entirely. All based, it seems anyway, on nothing more than it seeming a bit mad to you.

James Brown · 13-02-2019 7:05pm

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Anyone else believe that this wrong. I have a difficult time believing that the child hasn't been influenced by his parents in wanting to change from a male to a female.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/trangender-couple-transition-5-year-old-son-to-girl

Beats getting upset about politics and taxes and such. If I'd my way baptisms would be illegal until the chisler is old enough to be insane on his or her own time.

How Soon Is Now · 13-02-2019 7:11pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

And since I do not understand your position at all, I am in no position to help you with that. But these threads tend to last a long time. There is no rush. If you manage to put something together at any point, I will be still here. Take your time.

And again, that is simply not something we have reason to think true at this time.

Which is why I used the BID example. When people first started presenting with the request that they wanted a limb removed it seemed clear to us that there was "some kinda mental issue there".

But now we think we might have an explanation for it. A very simple neurological one. The brain maintains a kind of "map" of the body. The brain does not have a part of that map for the unwanted limb. So the limb feels alien, weird, intrusive and even painful to the patient. So they want it gone.

Simple as that. It COULD be that simple, or something analogous at least, for people who are Transgender. We just do not know at this time. So any kind of classification such as leaping to call it a "Mental Illness" is just arbitrary and subjective. You are merely jumping the gun entirely. All based, it seems anyway, on nothing more than it seeming a bit mad to you.

The whole thing is more then just a bit mad in fairness!

To not accept the gender your given threw birth and to change your body in ways that sometimes ruins your entire appearance I just dunno where to start with the issues someone must have.

I don't have the time or need to look into the every ins and outs of the subject and spend my days and night on here discussing it.

I think unless we wanna keep going around in circles here we have to just see it as something we both have different opinions on otherwise it never ends!

Maybe it's best left at that because there's nothing either of us can say to change opinions here.

B.A._Baracus · 13-02-2019 7:24pm

I honestly couldn't give a bollocks about this.
Not that I am a heartless, self-absorbed douche. It's just that there are too many weird people in this world. Nothing you say or do will change it.

So... Why bother. Messed up huh?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-02-2019 7:33pm

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I honestly couldn't give a bollocks about this.
Not that I am a heartless, self-absorbed douche. It's just that there are too many weird people in this world. Nothing you say or do will change it.

So... Why bother. Messed up huh?

Read that twice and still not sure which side of the argument you're on....!

Lesbian transgender couple declares their plan to transition their 5-year-old son

Comments