When did Gemma O Doherty go batshyt crazy?

batgoat · 27-02-2019 07:41PM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

Well some sections of Muslims adhere to this but I am not an expert so if you can explain it then I will accept your explanation.
As for Catholicism, the doctrine does clearly state that sex is for procreation only. It can be pleasurable of course but the goal must be for procreation and not merely pleasure.

Mind explaining your username?

Auntie Semite · 27-02-2019 07:44PM

batgoat wrote: »

Mind explaining your username?

It was a joke name, I didn't realise you couldn't change your username.
I guess I will have to re register. I would assume people knew it was a joke name

baby and crumble · 27-02-2019 07:46PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Not to individuals but the statistic before and after do not change in regards to self harm so I guess so. There was no change in behaviour, people didnt change behaviour so there was no benefit. (I think it was 96% self harmed and 40% attempted to commit suicide) that is in a study of 400.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/96-of-transgender-youth-engage-in-self-harm-study

It’s funny to me how different groups of people can use the same material and come to entirely different conclusions.

I believe I quoted similar numbers in a previous post, however the conclusions that most professionals (mental health, psychology, social work and education) draw with their significant experience and access to other triangulated studies is that the vast number of those transitioning find their suicidal ideation reduced post transition and report increased positive mental health.

You’ll excuse me if I don’t take the commentary from an organization that is clearly transphobic in its messaging as more acceptable than the myriad of professionals.

Hotblack Desiato · 27-02-2019 07:50PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Not to individuals but the statistic before and after do not change in regards to self harm so I guess so. There was no change in behaviour, people didnt change behaviour so there was no benefit. (I think it was 96% self harmed and 40% attempted to commit suicide) that is in a study of 400.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/96-of-transgender-youth-engage-in-self-harm-study

lifesitenews? FFS, really?

The Nal · 27-02-2019 08:17PM

I'm finding her 5G paranoia most amusing.

Auntie Semite · 27-02-2019 08:25PM

The Nal wrote: »

I'm finding her 5G paranoia most amusing.

Why?
What do you know about it.. Are you sure it is safe?
I know very little about it but I don't think there's anything wrong about worrying or having concerns about new technology and any potential negative effects.

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 08:42PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

lifesitenews? FFS, really?

Sure why not? the sample size was 400.

try this come from Canada https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5630273/

"Transgender youth had a higher risk of reporting psychological distress, self-harm, major depressive episode, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. Risk ratios ranged from 3.8 to 16.1. Transgender boys/men and non-binary youth were most likely to report self-harm and non-binary youth also reported lower overall mental health."

27-02-2019 09:01PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

as if it's a choice between sending someone to Belvo or Clongowes, or else towards a life of crime!

Belvedere and Clongowes are absolutely no impediment to a life of crime, as we well know.

Read the first statement in that post again. I am saying that it isn't a binary choice between the State subsidising fee-paying schools, and a rise in criminality.

It would be a far more efficient use of the Education budget if we reallocated public money away from fee-paying schools, and into areas where school retention figures are lowest. This cannot happen over night, but could be workable over, say, a ten-year phase.

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 09:21PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Read the first statement in that post again. I am saying that it isn't a binary choice between the State subsidising fee-paying schools, and a rise in criminality.

It would be a far more efficient use of the Education budget if we reallocated public money away from fee-paying schools, and into areas where school retention figures are lowest. This cannot happen over night, but could be workable over, say, a ten-year phase.

There is the assumption that it is a money problem. You need to see Youthreach. It is a massive money pit with little to no metric results.
"There are some men you just cant reach".
By the time these students have gotten to Youth Reach the damage is done and the opportunity has been lost. If there is no respect from the parent for education its not going to filter through to the kids.

It payment to fee paying schools is the payment that "every child" is entitled to. Public schools are much more efficiently run than private ones. IF you could see the contracts handed out in public sector that has been disclosed in the past you would understand why.

Hotblack Desiato · 27-02-2019 09:33PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Sure why not?

Because lifesitenews are completely and utterly biased and have shown they will publish literally anything if it supports, or can be twisted into looking like it supports, their agenda.

skooterblue2 wrote: »

try this come from Canada https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5630273/

"Transgender youth had a higher risk of reporting psychological distress, self-harm, major depressive episode, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. Risk ratios ranged from 3.8 to 16.1. Transgender boys/men and non-binary youth were most likely to report self-harm and non-binary youth also reported lower overall mental health."

Yes that's already been posted in the thread more than once, your point?

Hotblack Desiato · 27-02-2019 09:37PM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

What do you know about it.. Are you sure it is safe?

It's not really any different from any other wireless technology as far as the transmitters go

I've yet to hear any conspiracy nuts complaining about 500kW TV transmitters, but they go crazy about ~50W mobile phone masts

humberklog · 27-02-2019 09:40PM

ACI....quare name, great stuff!

TaurenDruid · 27-02-2019 09:42PM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

It was a joke name, I didn't realise you couldn't change your username.
I guess I will have to re register. I would assume people knew it was a joke name

Do you often make racist jokes, or is it usually just reserved for when you're watching Gemma O'Doherty on her YouTube channel?

Have you only started making racist jokes _since_ starting to watch GO'D?

"If that's racist, bring it on!"

Odhinn · 27-02-2019 09:42PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It's not really any different from any other wireless technology as far as the transmitters go

I've yet to hear any conspiracy nuts complaining about 500kW TV transmitters, but they go crazy about 5W mobile phone masts

5G+UN+EU+"Global Marxism" = Fried brains, we all go gay. I think.

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 09:52PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Yes that's already been posted in the thread more than once, your point?

Well you werent happy with my first source, so I gave you a second one, do you need a third one?

Hotblack Desiato · 27-02-2019 10:01PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Well you werent happy with my first source, so I gave you a second one, do you need a third one?

You haven't provided any credible source to back up the bolded part

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Not to individuals but the statistic before and after [transition] do not change in regards to self harm so I guess so. There was no change in behaviour, people didnt change behaviour so there was no benefit.

baby and crumble · 27-02-2019 10:05PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Well you werent happy with my first source, so I gave you a second one, do you need a third one?

The point is that research can often be used to illustrate any point of view depending on what spin you want. And I say that as a researcher.

However you do have work on a consensus, and by bent of experience and expertise you should preference the analysis of those who are experts at looking at data and interpreting it. I will always preference analysis from academic researchers who have access to the FULL dataset rather than the commentary from a biased source.

You also seem to equate poor mental health in trans youth etc to mean that their suicidal ideation etc is because they are trans and that the problem is their trans identity, rather than an outcome of oppression, legal discrimination and hearing constant narratives telling them they are sick and wrong, and living with the fear of losing loved ones and jobs.

humberklog · 27-02-2019 10:20PM

The logo looks like a woman that's just chopped off her balls with her big cock.

Go A-CI!

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 10:52PM

baby and crumble wrote: »

The point is that research can often be used to illustrate any point of view depending on what spin you want. And I say that as a researcher.

However you do have work on a consensus, and by bent of experience and expertise you should preference the analysis of those who are experts at looking at data and interpreting it. I will always preference analysis from academic researchers who have access to the FULL dataset rather than the commentary from a biased source.

You also seem to equate poor mental health in trans youth etc to mean that their suicidal ideation etc is because they are trans and that the problem is their trans identity, rather than an outcome of oppression, legal discrimination and hearing constant narratives telling them they are sick and wrong, and living with the fear of losing loved ones and jobs.

Whaooo there. You cannot blame me for them having poor mental health or cannot get a job. I will often say the same thing again and again on the employment front. Dont try to stand out, employers dont want an outstanding employee, they want a cog to fit their machine. Its the cog that doesnt fit the machine they want to disgard. Oh they say we want diversity in work place and it is our strenght but before they have advertised the job they have already decided on the type of employee they want and what they want them doing and who they want them exposed to.

I always say try to fit into the role you are going for. There are certain roles that people want their professionals to be lilly white for (Doctors, nurse Teacher, Social worker, solicitor). Society isnt ready for all these changes. You have to fit society, society doesnt have to fit you. If you have 6 sets of piercings on your face, dont apply for a chef or waiter. I was in a food shop the other day and some girl with a nose ring had a runny nose. I was out of that place like a shot.

How does it seem right that a person with a history of self harm/attempted suicide would have mental health issues? I never said it the other way around.

One of my clients is trans gender, I am always extra careful him (despite surgery I still treat him as a male), not because I dont like him, he is a great client funny and polite but because he is high risk and I have to limit my risk to expose to infections from needlestick. That is just common sense.

Auntie Semite · 27-02-2019 11:05PM

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Do you often make racist jokes, or is it usually just reserved for when you're watching Gemma O'Doherty on her YouTube channel?

Have you only started making racist jokes _since_ starting to watch GO'D?

"If that's racist, bring it on!"

What's racist about it? It's a play on words, satirical. Like Adolf Hipster.
A racist joke is generally directed at some person or group.

Auntie Semite · 27-02-2019 11:11PM

Interesting article here (in the excellent Quilette) which amongst other things posits that there is an element of social construction to the current transgender mania
https://quillette.com/2018/03/01/transgenderism-social-construction-diagnosis/

baby and crumble · 27-02-2019 11:24PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

One of my clients is trans gender, I am always extra careful him (despite surgery I still treat him as a male), not because I dont like him, he is a great client funny and polite but because he is high risk and I have to limit my risk to expose to infections from needlestick. That is just common sense.

Thank you so much for proving my entire point.

Why is she (and legally she is now a SHE) high risk? Just because she’s trans? Oh, and if you’re a health and social care professional and this is how you treat your clients you are, frankly, a disgrace.

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 11:25PM

baby and crumble wrote: »

You also seem to equate poor mental health in trans youth etc to mean that their suicidal ideation etc is because they are trans and that the problem is their trans identity, rather than an outcome of oppression, legal discrimination and hearing constant narratives telling them they are sick and wrong, and living with the fear of losing loved ones and jobs.

"About three-fifths of respondents had engaged in unprotected sexual activity during the past 12 months. The risk for HIV infection from unprotected sex was significantly higher among respondents of color than among white respondents. About one-third (30.1 percent) of respondents had attempted suicide. More than half of respondents had been forced to have sex, 56.3 percent had experienced violence in their homes, and 51.3 percent had been physically abused. Twenty-six percent of respondents had been denied medical care because they were transgender.".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15847234

That is kind of difficult to negotiate on. If you are prone to depression and self harm while also having high risk sex then it hard to complain about being discriminated against when partaking in high risk activities.

TaurenDruid · 27-02-2019 11:29PM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

What's racist about it? It's a play on words, satirical. Like Adolf Hipster.
A racist joke is generally directed at some person or group.

Precisely. Such as, oh, say, Semitic people, for example?

How is it in any way "satirical"?

skooterblue2 · 27-02-2019 11:32PM

baby and crumble wrote: »

Thank you so much for proving my entire point.

Why is she (and legally she is now a SHE) high risk? Just because she’s trans? Oh, and if you’re a health and social care professional and this is how you treat your clients you are, frankly, a disgrace.

She maybe a "she" legally but that person engages in high risk activities. You have made a heap of assumption without even understanding my profession and systems. It has to do with which side I insert needles. She isnt even aware of it. I just charge her for materials. She doesnt complain and rebooks at the end of each session and understand she is a high risk client. You do know that "needle stick" is a real thing?

baby and crumble · 27-02-2019 11:59PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

She maybe a "she" legally but that person engages in high risk activities. You have made a heap of assumption without even understanding my profession and systems. It has to do with which side I insert needles. She isnt even aware of it. I just charge her for materials. She doesnt complain and rebooks at the end of each session and understand she is a high risk client. You do know that "needle stick" is a real thing?

Yes. I’ve worked in health & social care for 2 decades. Don’t condescend to me.

I also know that part of the responsibilities of professionals are to confront their assumptions about their patients and those they support. If you do not have explicit confirmation from her that she engages in the risky activity that that report discusses then to assume she does so just because she’s a member of an at risk community doesn’t mean she engages in those behaviors.

I’m a member of an at risk community, being gay, but that’s doesnt mean I engage in those activities.

Auntie Semite · 28-02-2019 12:01AM

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Precisely. Such as, oh, say, Semitic people, for example?

How is it in any way "satirical"?

Kind of like the way Father Ted had Nazi jokes, but maybe you are offended by them too?
The irony is you are coming across like one of those dour Catholics of yore who couldn't take any kind of humour.
My username is an attempt at humour, perhaps a bad one but still a joke. With respect you should get over it and move on.

28-02-2019 08:22AM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

Both the Catholic and Muslim religions believe sex is for procreation only

And a nonsense position based on nothing at all that is too. There is no evidence whatsoever that sex is for procreation only. There is plenty of evidence it is for more than that.

Even in terms of evolution it makes no sense. There are animals where sex is only for procreation so they have a near 1:1 ratio between copulation and conception. When they have sex - babies happen basically.

Not so for us. Precisely because sex is _not_ just for procreation we evolved away from a 1:1 ratio there and much if not most sex does not result in conception at all.

Auntie Semite wrote: »

Yes I understand a tiny minority of individuals

That can be a misleading statement. What exactly does "tiny minority" mean? For example look how prevelant homosexuality is in our culture. There are homosexuals every where - it is talked about a lot - represented in the media a lot. How many people are _actually_ homosexual however? The % is very low.

1% of a population seems a small number. When you have 5 million people or 50 million people however then the words "tiny minority" start to lose coherency. It is still a lot of people.

Auntie Semite wrote: »

I believe it is a form of mental illness and not something that should be encouraged in children.

There is that vague but intentionally ominous word "encouraged" again that I pulled up in my last post but you simply ignored me. What do you _actually_ mean by this? What kind of "encouragement" are you under the impression is being implemented _exactly_?

Also do you believe it to be a mental illness on any actual basis - or just because you like the phrase? How are you defining mental illness exactly? What attributes of transgenderism are you using to make the definition given fit?

Auntie Semite wrote: »

I'm sure having a wide breadth of knowledge on the subject you are aware that there are many many post op trans people who deeply regret having transitioned and experience suicidal ideation and actually commit suicide over it.

The same can be said about many things from Abortion to Cosmetic Surgery. There are always people who regret the choices they make and suffer even to the point of suicide from their regrets. Hell people even make career choices they regret enough to eventually commit suicide over it.

That does not indict - even a tiny bit - the things they themselves regret. We should of course have supports for such people in our society where possible. To help people cope with decisions they have made which they regret. But to take their regret and pretend it is in any way a relevant argument against the thing they regret is pure desperation on your part.

super_furry · 28-02-2019 08:26AM

Auntie Semite wrote: »

Kind of like the way Father Ted had Nazi jokes, but maybe you are offended by them too?
The irony is you are coming across like one of those dour Catholics of yore who couldn't take any kind of humour.
My username is an attempt at humour, perhaps a bad one but still a joke. With respect you should get over it and move on.

Haha, you see it's funny because the person who's defending Gemma is self identifying as an anti-semite. Classic.

Now do your routine about George Soros, Zionism and how the Holocaust was a hoax.

realitykeeper · 28-02-2019 08:40AM

lbc2019 wrote: »

What’s progressive about it?

One preson`s progress is anothers person`s regress. Conservative values served society well. Liberalism will bring destruction.

When did Gemma O Doherty go batshyt crazy?

Comments