SCOTUS case: Trans rights for minors

[superrific]

Again, you are viewing this as a binary: people are either transgender or they are not. People are not computers with a 1 or a zero. It is much more nuanced than that. Societal factors absolutely influence the "biological need" to transition because the "biological need" is not a yes/no, either/or thing for many transgender or transgender-curious people.

All right. I can state fairly confidently that you don't know what you're talking about here. And the reason I'm confident is that nobody knows the reality. We actually don't know how to think of transgenderism -- is it a spectrum? If so, what's the shape of it? What causes gender dysphoria? What makes one trans person want to transition and another trans person not to? Nobody knows the answers to these questions.

My instinct is to agree with you that there is more nuance than a simple yes/no would allow. When I look back on my life, sometimes I think I had "a little trans" in there. I've often thought that I would be (or have been) have been happier as a woman, but that's pretty far short of being transgender. It might be nothing more than "grass is greener" sentiments. But maybe it means I'm a 2 or a 3 on your hypothetical 1-10 scale. Or maybe a four. Or maybe not at all.

One reason that we don't know these things is that we generally do not understand how our minds or brains work. We have some scattered knowledge, but the biological basis for mental health disorders, identity, choice, etc. is not understood. I'm quite confident that in 50 years, people will look back on 2020s psychiatry sort of the way we view 1950s psychiatry. I expect that some conditions we think to be related will prove to be completely different in nature, with only superficial similarities in effect; there will also be some conditions that we think of as quite different, that will be shown to be related.

Point is: we probably shouldn't get into lengthy arguments between people who are generally on the same side, about questions none of us can actually answer.

 

[superrific]

And there it is.

Race isn’t controllable. But apparently gender dysphoria is. Says the guy that has never questioned his own gender identity, but feels like enough of an expert on the subject to confidently pronounce that someone who does suffer from it isn’t really feeling what they think they are feeling.

Plus, race is controllable. LOL. It's not necessarily controllable on an individual level (though there are plenty of people, especially biracial people, who do end up "choosing" their race) but it absolutely is controllable on a social level.

 

[superrific]

Surgeries are current performed on minors between the age of 13-17. Those who are opposed to limiting surgeries to only adults (18+) are:

finesse
superrific
uncatech
strangepackage
rodheel

that's just from the first page

I never expressed any opinion on surgeries at all. Once again, you're putting words in people's mouths because it's the only thing you can argue against.

My position is that I don't have nearly the medical understanding to evaluate whether surgeries should be performed on minors. And my medical understanding vastly exceeds yours.

You are by far one of the most arrogant people on this message board. Your own self-image and the reality of you are so far apart that it's comical.

 

[finesse]

One of my daughters in law is the child of a woman who is half black and half Native American and a man from El Salvador who was mostly Hispanic. She identifies as black.

 

[ZenMode]

1. The answer is evidence. You know, the thing you claim to value in your sig line. This isn't a question of agreement or disagreement. It's a question of reality. The difference between corporal punishment and transgender health is that the research clearly demonstrates that the former is harmful and the latter is beneficial. Now, 50 years ago, the effects of corporal punishment were not as well know. Somebody belting their kid back then -- maybe they didn't know better.

But you brought up the analogy. And again, your analogy fails because of evidence. Flat earth and round earth are not equally valid theories. That's a fact. Corporal punishment and transgender health are not equally valid options. There exists knowledge in this world, and that doesn't change just because you don't value it.

The analogy wasn't about technically whether something is right or wrong or should be legal or illegal.
There are plenty of things that aren't illegal or, even with supporting data/research, people disagree on. It's the need to apply derogatory labels to anyone who disagrees.

2. "You support segregation"? Wow, talk about missing the point. Let me try to make it simple. The reason we use that analogy is that we're starting from the assumption that you do not support segregation. That you think it's wrong. So when we point out that the logic being used here for trans kids is the same as segregation, we're asking you to recognize that you're wrong about trans in the same way Americans were wrong about segregation.

There is no valid comparison to segregation. Nobody is saying we should only allow white people or men get GAS. We live in a world where reasonable people recognize that children shouldn't be allowed to do certain things. That's not segregation. It's an understanding of human development. An understanding of human development isn't the basis for a derogatory comparison....for reasonable people.

If your response is the risible claim that "this has nothing to do with that," it's disappointing. It doesn't actually make you a segregationist and nobody has accused you of that. It just means you're being stupid.

I have no doubt you'd find it disappointing given that you see the segregation analogy to be reasonable.

3. Building a wall is xenophobic to an extraordinary degree and again, this isn't a matter of opinion. It is an opinion that xenophobia is bad. But the whole point of walls is to keep foreigners away because you are uncomfortable with them coming into the country. That is exactly what xenophobia is. Why did the Chinese build the Great Wall? Xenophobia. Maybe, in that case, justified xenophobia since there were armies marauding in the region during that time period. But a fear of outsiders nonetheless.

Building walls is to be able to manage who comes into the country. Knowing who's coming into the country is why we currently have walls, that's why we have ports of entry with CBP agents screening people before allowing them into the country. That's why countries require passports and have passport checking stations, sometimes with walls on either side- they want to monitor who is coming into their country.

It is irresponsible to NOT know everyone that comes into the country.

As we discussed previously, if it were Iran and not Mexico on our southern border, I bet you'd suddenly find walls to be completely acceptable, reasonable and even necessary.

Again, no amount of your silly word tricks changes reality. Scotland is not a country by any reasonable definition of that term, whether or not they use the phrase because of the historical legacy from a 1707 treaty when words meant different things and the theory of government and international relations was completely different. Walls are xenophobic whether you like the label or not. Segregation is bad. Corporal punishment is bad. Transgender health interventions are not bad. These are truths and/or facts. You can't change them by denying them.

I'm not playing word games. Take it up with the UK and Scotland government.

 

[Calheel]

All right. I can state fairly confidently that you don't know what you're talking about here. And the reason I'm confident is that nobody knows the reality. We actually don't know how to think of transgenderism -- is it a spectrum? If so, what's the shape of it? What causes gender dysphoria? What makes one trans person want to transition and another trans person not to? Nobody knows the answers to these questions.

My instinct is to agree with you that there is more nuance than a simple yes/no would allow. When I look back on my life, sometimes I think I had "a little trans" in there. I've often thought that I would be (or have been) have been happier as a woman, but that's pretty far short of being transgender. It might be nothing more than "grass is greener" sentiments. But maybe it means I'm a 2 or a 3 on your hypothetical 1-10 scale. Or maybe a four. Or maybe not at all.

One reason that we don't know these things is that we generally do not understand how our minds or brains work. We have some scattered knowledge, but the biological basis for mental health disorders, identity, choice, etc. is not understood. I'm quite confident that in 50 years, people will look back on 2020s psychiatry sort of the way we view 1950s psychiatry. I expect that some conditions we think to be related will prove to be completely different in nature, with only superficial similarities in effect; there will also be some conditions that we think of as quite different, that will be shown to be related.

Point is: we probably shouldn't get into lengthy arguments between people who are generally on the same side, about questions none of us can actually answer.

There has been a fair amount published on gender identity. And while I am admittedly not an expert, I am familiar enough with the literature to confidently state that gender is not a simple binary concept.

I'm also not so sure I am on the same "side" as WaynetheDrain. He rejects the notion that societal contagion contributes to/causes the biological need to transition. That such thoughts are akin to being a troglodyte in 2024. I understand that conservatives have downplayed in bad faith the biological role in sexual and gender identity, and that WaynetheDrain is likely reacting to that viewpoint. But I cannot claim viewpoint kinship with someone who discounts the role of societal influences.

 

[superrific]

The analogy wasn't about technically whether something is right or wrong or should be legal or illegal.
There are plenty of things that aren't illegal or, even with supporting data/research, people disagree on. It's the need to apply derogatory labels to anyone who disagrees. There is no valid comparison to segregation. Nobody is saying we should only allow white people or men get GAS. We live in a world where reasonable people recognize that children shouldn't be allowed to do certain things. That's not segregation. It's an understanding of human development. An understanding of human development isn't the basis for a derogatory comparison....for reasonable people.I have no doubt you'd find it disappointing given that you see the segregation analogy to be reasonable. Building wals is to be able to manage who comes into the country. Knowing who's coming into the country is why we currently have walls, that's why we have ports of entry with CBP agents screening people before allowing them into the country. That's why countries require passports and have passport checking stations, sometimes with walls on either side- they want to monitor who is coming into their country.

It is irresponsible to NOT know everyone that comes into the country.

As we discussed previously, if it were Iran and not Mexico on our southern border, I bet you'd suddenly find walls to be completely acceptable, reasonable and even necessary.

I'm not playing word games. Take it up with the UK and Scotland government.

I'm not going to argue with you any more. You either cannot or choose not to understand pretty much anything. You don't understand the arguments. You are trying to draw distinctions that don't matter. You're again talking about building a wall with Iran. You keep trying to claim Scotland is a country. It's a veritable smorgasbord of nonsense coming from you.

We're done. I don't beat up on children in real life and for the same reason I'm not going to beat up on you any further on this topic. Go ahead, whine to your heart's content. "Waah, waah, they are so intolerant of my views that have no basis other than my own self-serving assertions" -- I mean, it's a free country. You can go to your grave thinking you've been a victim. In reality, you just need to read more. Try learning something instead of assuming you have all the answers.

 

[EhringhausSouth]

And there it is.

Race isn’t controllable. But apparently gender dysphoria is. Says the guy that has never questioned his own gender identity, but feels like enough of an expert on the subject to confidently pronounce that someone who does suffer from it isn’t really feeling what they think they are feeling.

I never said gender dysphoria was controllable. It likely isn't. I am saying that it leads to delusion. Counseling and adults not pretending with the minor is the appropriate course of action in my view. Now, once the person reaches 18 years of age, by all means, pretend and play dress up all you want. Chop your junk off, sew one one, whatever, but don't expect reasonable people to play along too.

 

[ZenMode]

I'm not going to argue with you any more. You either cannot or choose not to understand pretty much anything. You don't understand the arguments. You are trying to draw distinctions that don't matter. You're again talking about building a wall with Iran. You keep trying to claim Scotland is a country. It's a veritable smorgasbord of nonsense coming from you.

We're done. I don't beat up on children in real life and for the same reason I'm not going to beat up on you any further on this topic. Go ahead, whine to your heart's content. "Waah, waah, they are so intolerant of my views that have no basis other than my own self-serving assertions" -- I mean, it's a free country. You can go to your grave thinking you've been a victim. In reality, you just need to read more. Try learning something instead of assuming you have all the answers.

For the record, I've never been victimized by anyone on line....ever. Making observations isn't being victimized.

 

[Zoo_View]

I never said gender dysphoria was controllable. It likely isn't. I am saying that it leads to delusion. Counseling and adults not pretending with the minor is the appropriate course of action in my view. Now, once the person reaches 18 years of age, by all means, pretend and play dress up all you want. Chop your junk off, sew one one, whatever, but don't expect reasonable people to play along too.

• “I never said gender dysphoria was controllable. It likely isn’t. I am saying that it leads to delusion.”
• “Pretend and play dress up”
• “Counseling and adults not pretending with the minor….”

Do you support “conversion therapy” for gays and lesbians who are minors?

From which medical school did you graduate?

 

[UNCatTech]

Surgeries are current performed on minors between the age of 13-17. Those who are opposed to limiting surgeries to only adults (18+) are:

finesse
superrific
uncatech
strangepackage
rodheel

that's just from the first page

True, as we have tried to explain, GAS is not the day one solution. This is a process, which requires, from my understanding, a significant amount of time for the person to live as the other gender before even considering GAS.

Additionally, you have not said that you only want age requirements for GAS, you have shown that you want age requirements on everything, from the therapy, the puberty blocking medications, etc. So, you are changing your position if you now claim to only want limits on GAS.

And my primary argument is that it is not our choice and it shouldn't be the government's choice. It should be the choice of the person, their doctors, and their parents.

You seem to believe that the government knows better.

I'll have to look through the other threads to see how consistent you are with the position that the government knows better.

 

[UNCatTech]

You want to build a wall to secure the border? You're a xenophobe.

Wrong, you simply don't understand that this is a waste of money and an inefficient plan to help secure the border.

And I think you might be mixing outrage here.

You support segregation and don't believe in interracial marriage.

You really don't see this as racist?

 

[UNCatTech]

Just read the first page. I didn't see any one state they oppose a ban on minor's receiving transition surgeries (although rodoheel was perhaps the closest by implication). The entire thrust of the discussion concerned opposition to Tennessee's law, which is much, much broader than just surgeries.

And some of the opposition was in the nature of more philosophical questions, like the government's interest.

Again, this whole surgery argument is reminiscent of the late term abortion argument. Basically, there are 0.0001% abortions at nine months. Yet, that is what the right argues because it makes for a more dramatic claim. Trans kids aren't getting surgeries -- it is not a real thing. I don't know why people want to argue about things that basically never happen.

Exactly, Zen keeps wanting to take a broad complicated subject and boil it down to one talking point.

This is much bigger than simply GAS, but he keeps going back to that one point.

 

[UNCatTech]

Again, you are viewing this as a binary: people are either transgender or they are not. People are not computers with a 1 or a zero. It is much more nuanced than that. Societal factors absolutely influence the "biological need" to transition because the "biological need" is not a yes/no, either/or thing for many transgender or transgender-curious people.

I'm sure that is a factor in why the counseling and process are long and they don't simply jump straight to GAS, as Zen and trump pretend they do.

Just look at the lie that trump told when he said that a person's son could go to school a boy and come home a girl. There are so many compound lies in that statement, but the simpletons believe him. And the anti-trans crowd love that it's so easy to lie and get support.

 

[finesse]

While skipping the main one. Why is it anybody else's business but family, child and doctors.

 

[UNCatTech]

And there it is.

Race isn’t controllable. But apparently gender dysphoria is. Says the guy that has never questioned his own gender identity, but feels like enough of an expert on the subject to confidently pronounce that someone who does suffer from it isn’t really feeling what they think they are feeling.

Exactly, sounds like the bullshit argument that lead to "Pray away the gay" and other "Conversion therapies".

All, proven bullshit.

Why can't people accept that in a world with 9 billion people that we are going to see all variations of humans and it's none of their fucking business if one of those people wants to change their gender?

 

[ZenMode]

Wrong, you simply don't understand that this is a waste of money and an inefficient plan to help secure the border.

And I think you might be mixing outrage here.

You really don't see this as racist?

Walls are expensive and not everyone sees them as cost effective. I get that.

The implication was that wanting to wait until your an adult, to to decide to have GAS, is akin to being against interracial marriage and being a segregationist.

 

[finesse]

The key question that you have yet to address is why this is your business?

 

[UNCatTech]

Walls are expensive and not everyone sees them as cost effective. I get that.

The implication was that wanting to wait until your an adult, to to decide to have GAS, is akin to being against interracial marriage and being a segregationist.

I don't see the connection.

And I'm not discussing this with you any longer, since you refuse to accept that GAS isn't the first, day one, option.

 

[UNCatTech]

The key question that you have yet to address is why this is your business?

Yes, and this.