"Her penis" - not at all Orwellian - argh

[icehorse]

Lol, I think you need to read the room and leave the echo chamber.

Not as long as the room is calling for the curtailing women's rights and advocating for the unnecessary maiming of children.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

The existence of rare exceptions to biological categories does not render those categories wrong.

It's been shown to you that it's not rare. The difference between gender and biological sex has also been explained to you, to which you continue to ignore.

Once again:

That does not provide examples of gender affirming care. I asked you for *examples* of it.

Not as long as the room is calling for the curtailing women's rights and advocating for the unnecessary maiming of children.

Interesting. No one is calling for curtailing women's rights. As well, related, what're your thoughts on circumcision?

 

[icehorse]

It's been shown to you that it's not rare.

When? That 30 minute video? If so, there are millions of species of animals, and he mentioned maybe a dozen exceptions to the norm?

The difference between gender and biological sex has also been explained to you, to which you continue to ignore

It seems that you assume that anyone who disagrees with you on this topic is unaware of the distinctions between sex and gender. But I do understand the distinctions, so your blanket argument doesn't apply here. If you think I'm wrong, show me specifically where I've said something about sex vs. gender that you think is wrong. You didn't like my tree climbing example, but you failed to come up with a different one, and you didn't explain what you thought was wrong about tree climbing.

That does not provide examples of gender affirming care. I asked you for *examples* of it.

Hmmm. I gave you a summary of the protocol that doctors are following. This protocol has been followed tens of thousands of times. But ok, let's see where this goes:

When a GD kid who hasn't yet gone thru puberty is given puberty blockers, that's an example.
When a GD kid who hasn't yet gone thru puberty is given GAC specified hormones, that's an example.

Both of those things happen frequently in the world of GAC.

Interesting. No one is calling for curtailing women's rights.

This gets back to the law of unintended consequences. I don't think anyone on this forum is consciously supporting the curtailing of women's rights. But I think that in supporting the trans activist agenda, you are unintentionally curtailing women's rights. This is the zero-sum problem I've mentioned before.

As well, related, what're your thoughts on circumcision?

I don't know all the details in terms of if it's ever medically necessary, but when it's not, I'm opposed.

That said, circumcision does NOT come with a lifetime of medical interventions, it rarely causes complications, it's rarely dangerous, and it rarely ends normal sexual functions. The same cannot be said of GAC.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

When? That 30 minute video? If so, there are millions of species of animals, and he mentioned maybe a dozen exceptions to the norm?

The complexities of human genetics has also been explained to you.

It seems that you assume that anyone who disagrees with you on this topic is unaware of the distinctions between sex and gender. But I do understand the distinctions, so your blanket argument doesn't apply here.

No you don't, and you've demonstrated this throughout this entire thread alone. No, I will not be wasting time combing through every specific little instance; it's clear from the very title of this thread.

As well, your "tree climbing" example was and is asinine, ten, and eleven. Because as stated, climbing a tree is not a gendered activity, nor is it a form of gender expression as (which was also given) it is for a "man" to wear a dress and heels.

When a GD kid who hasn't yet gone thru puberty is given puberty blockers, that's an example.
When a GD kid who hasn't yet gone thru puberty is given GAC specified hormones, that's an example.

Both of those things happen frequently in the world of GAC.

No they don't. Not only are there bans in 18 states for puberty blockers (which are safe), the average cost for such hormonal treatments are $1,200 per month, and range from $4,500 to $18,000 for medical implants.

Gender affirming care is more often than not using preferred pronouns. Dressing in a way that makes one comfortable in their own body. Grooming and accessorising.

A ciswoman plucking facial hairs or even shaving to maintain a feminine appearance is gender affirming care.

I think that in supporting the trans activist agenda, you are unintentionally curtailing women's rights.

And you're wrong. These scare-tactic hypotheticals of "safe-spaces" being invaded either flat don't happen or are not what you make of them, and bogus issues like sports are just that; a bogus smoke screen.

I don't know all the details in terms of if it's ever medically necessary, but when it's not, I'm opposed.

I'll help you out here; there is no medical need for circumcision. Ever. It is flatly and purely genital mutilation, and worse in that it's without consent.

That said, circumcision does NOT come with a lifetime of medical interventions, it rarely causes complications, it's rarely dangerous, and it rarely ends normal sexual functions. The same cannot be said of GAC.

Guess again. As well circumcision does reduce glans sensitivity and thus often sexual enjoyment for men.

On the contrary to your claims, gender affirming care does not have these kind of risks either, and even in the Finnish trials that you've touted a few times, they still recommended gender affirming care despite there being insufficient research on the issue.

 

[icehorse]

The complexities of human genetics has also been explained to you.

There is what's overwhelmingly normal, and there are rare variations.

Let me ask you this, what percentage of trans people have the rare variations you're talking about?

As well, your "tree climbing" example was and is asinine, ten, and eleven. Because as stated, climbing a tree is not a gendered activity, nor is it a form of gender expression as (which was also given) it is for a "man" to wear a dress and heels.

And I asked you to provide a different example of something that you would consider a "gendered activity". Please provide one so that we can proceed.

No they don't. Not only are there bans in 18 states for puberty blockers (which are safe), the average cost for such hormonal treatments are $1,200 per month, and range from $4,500 to $18,000 for medical implants.

Gender affirming care is more often than not using preferred pronouns. Dressing in a way that makes one comfortable in their own body. Grooming and accessorising.

A ciswoman plucking facial hairs or even shaving to maintain a feminine appearance is gender affirming care.

Thousands of kids have been put on GAC drugs.

And yes, I agree that less invasive ideas like dressing and grooming are sometimes used. But let's step back for a minute and ask the more basic question:

When a GD kid comes to a doctor for help, what's the most basic goal the doctor should be trying to achieve?

And you're wrong. These scare-tactic hypotheticals of "safe-spaces" being invaded either flat don't happen or are not what you make of them, and bogus issues like sports are just that; a bogus smoke screen.

Well here's an easy to find link for you, on just one of these issues. A list of 800, and counting times that trans women have knocked women and girls off the podium:

List of Female Athletes by Sport | She Won

 

[icehorse]

On the contrary to your claims, gender affirming care does not have these kind of risks either, and even in the Finnish trials that you've touted a few times, they still recommended gender affirming care despite there being insufficient research on the issue.

Answer my "basic goal" question and we can proceed from there, thanks.

 

[icehorse]

I'll help you out here; there is no medical need for circumcision. Ever. It is flatly and purely genital mutilation, and worse in that it's without consent.

I accept your knowledge on this topic. But notice I've never supported this intervention, and my opponents on this thread ARE supporting GAC.

As for consent, I agree that circumcision is overwhelmingly done without consent, but guess what. GAC is frequently done even when the doctors admit that the kid and their parents do not understand the implications of the treatment.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

There is what's overwhelmingly normal, and there are rare variations.

Yeah, it's more common than you think. Add to that the element of natural testosterone and estrogen levels.

And I asked you to provide a different example of something that you would consider a "gendered activity". Please provide one so that we can proceed.

The absolute ridiculousness of an example being right there in the segment you quoted is perfectly illustrative of your consistent bad-faith arguing.

Thousands of kids have been put on GAC drugs.

Citation needed.

And yes, I agree that less invasive ideas like dressing and grooming are sometimes used. But let's step back for a minute and ask the more basic question:

Most commonly used. As well your "basic question" is not basic at all, and is a loaded hypothetical that neither of us are qualified to answer.

Well here's an easy to find link for you, on just one of these issues. A list of 800, and counting times that trans women have knocked women and girls off the podium:

List of Female Athletes by Sport | She Won

Wow, a transphobic site with (so far as I saw) no credible sources listed anywhere. Shocking. Also a smokescreen issue; sports are not the end-all-be-all of existence, and this argument hinges on sexist outlooks on women while simultaneously ignoring athletically exceptional women. Do better.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Project much?

You have often claimed that GAC is well researched, proven, and tested. It is none of those things. You claim it's carefully administered. We agree that that ought to be what's happening, but it's frequently not. Videos and transcripts from WPATH itself document how top WPATH leaders promote and perform untested procedures, use pseudoscience research techniques, and do indeed rush to treatment. They also acknowledge how many of their patients have comorbidities such as autism, and cannot and do not understand the implications of GAC.

So it is YOU, when you support GAC that are weaponizing confused young kids and their families. Pushing for them to rush into dangerous, unproven treatments that carry a lifetime of medical complications and expenses. And once again, GAC has no high quality evidence to support its effectiveness!


I will admit to not swallowing your nonsense. When you start engaging in good faith, you'll be treated with more respect. I will ask you again, for the umpteenth time, to provide a link to studies that compare GAC drugs to talk therapy only. As long as you keep dodging this request, you're hurting kids with GD. You want me to respect you for that?


No I have not. What I've said over and over again is that we have to be able to distinguish between trans people and trans activists. And ALL of my attacks are aimed at the activists and that part of the medical community that engages in GAC for kids.

You want to say all that but yet you don't know how research works. You make this obvious when you harp on about control groups.
You claim all that, yet many, many medical organizations do not agree with you. And each one of them collectively has far more experience, studies and resources to draw on when researching the topic.

Everybody else isn't with you, and your woke nonsense is crumbling.

Here, yeah most people are with me.
I have a far better grasp of this than you, including how the prejudices you hold have been easing in society until your team grew so offended by our existence politicized us. It's those activists at PTA meetings outing students and insisting the bathrooms have litter boxes for furries. It's activists who harass women with PCOS when they have to pee. It's acivists like you who repeatedly make threads about the subject spreading lies and misinformation because you just cannot leave someone like me alone.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No I have not.

Yes, you have. Man up and own your ****.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

All hat and no cattle.

All talk and no degree, professional experience or decades of study.

 

[icehorse]

Add to that the element of natural testosterone and estrogen levels.

So it's an interesting article, but a few things jumped out:

1 - the conditions are indeed rare
2 - they use the term "gender" (and variations on that term), but they use it loosely.

So how do you define "gender" and how do you think the authors define "gender"?

The absolute ridiculousness of an example being right there in the segment you quoted is perfectly illustrative of your consistent bad-faith arguing.

Sorry, can you be more specific? What segment are you referring to?

I offered the example of "tree climbing" because I think most people would assume that that tends to be a masculine activity. But I'd also say that it's an activity that many tomboys might pursue as well, and statistically fewer feminine girls would pursue.

So I am offering an example. Perhaps it's flawed. But instead of just insulting me, give me a better example of what YOU'RE talking about.

Citation needed.

This was easy to find:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/

As well your "basic question" is not basic at all, and is a loaded hypothetical that neither of us are qualified to answer.

I disagree. GD is a mental condition. As with all medical interventions, the first principle is to do no harm. Given that, the first goal in treating GD should be to improve the mental health of the kid with GD.

Most kids with GD are not trans. Most of them are gay. We should not take gay kids down the path of exploring whether they might - on the off chance - be trans. That intervention path - even the early stages of it - has many negative side effects, and is premature.

Wow, a transphobic site with (so far as I saw) no credible sources listed anywhere. Shocking. Also a smokescreen issue; sports are not the end-all-be-all of existence, and this argument hinges on sexist outlooks on women while simultaneously ignoring athletically exceptional women. Do better.

And... we're back to understanding factual, falsifiable claims, sigh.

That site contains a long, long list of specific, easily verifiable, factual claims. It does not matter WHO makes a factual claim, it matters only whether or not the claim is true.

For example, I hate trump. But every once and a while he says something true. The fact that I hate him does NOT change the truth or falseness of his claims. (Although, as a tangent, I would say he lies a lot.)

As for the importance of sports, you brought it up, and asked for a link, which I provided.

 

[icehorse]

All talk and no degree, professional experience or decades of study.

I'm quoting experts, I'm providing citations, that's what we do here on RF, right?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That and ad hominems. I remember when I began hearing they/them and wanted to understand what was happening. Are there two? Is it twins? Looked it up and within two minutes had it sorted. (Star Trek explained it in forty five seconds.) We’ve been saying they at times we mean he or she or they forever. It’s not that far of a stretch. It’s not the big deal people are making it out to be and they’re embarrassing themselves. It’s a convenient bandwagon for those who need a scapegoat. A target for discrimination.

Yeah. I still get caught up in the modern usage of they as a plural, but that's on me. Language changes and evolves, especially English with its finely honed skills and thousand plus years experience in assimilating words from other languages (and yet it's so emotionally dry).
Amd then the thread title itself, the "expansion" of language (really more of a revival of an archiac usage with they/them) amd discussing "new" ideas (rather just unknown to most modern Westerners as it isn't relevant to them) and claiming it's all Orwellian. Which of course the implications, that it's related to Ingsoc and Newspeak, is just absurd as what we see happening today is the opposite of what happens with the ever shrinking Newspeak, something that fundamentally and radically changed the core and fundamental principles of English to the degree even future generations in a post-Ingsoc world would have difficulty understanding the texts from before Ingsoc.
Yeah. "Her penis" is going to send shockwaves that reverberate through time that confuses future generations to the point they won't know how to reproduce (doublegood win for BB).

 

[icehorse]

Yes, you have. Man up and own your ****.

You have gripes, I got that. But you refuse to be specific. You're just standing on the sideline hurling insults with nothing to back them up.

My offer still stands, are you brave enough to take me up on it?

 

[icehorse]

Yeah. I still get caught up in the modern usage of they as a plural, but that's on me. Language changes and evolves, especially English with its finely honed skills and thousand plus years experience in assimilating words from other languages (and yet it's so emotionally dry).
Amd then the thread title itself, the "expansion" of language (really more of a revival of an archiac usage with they/them) amd discussing "new" ideas (rather just unknown to most modern Westerners as it isn't relevant to them) and claiming it's all Orwellian. Which of course the implications, that it's related to Ingsoc and Newspeak, is just absurd as what we see happening today is the opposite of what happens with the ever shrinking Newspeak, something that fundamentally and radically changed the core and fundamental principles of English to the degree even future generations in a post-Ingsoc world would have difficulty understanding the texts from before Ingsoc.
Yeah. "Her penis" is going to send shockwaves that reverberate through time that confuses future generations to the point they won't know how to reproduce (doublegood win for BB).

We're all impressed with how brave you both are

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Sorry, can you be more specific? What segment are you referring to?

THE. SEGMENT. YOU. QUOTED. Read it back as many times as you need.

This was easy to find:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/

Thank you.

So 0.03% of adolescents diagnosed (that's important) with gender dysphoria received hormone blockers. That is nowhere near as widespread or common as you've touted it here.

In fact, the article itself stated: "Gender-affirming care for youths takes several forms, from social recognition of a preferred name and pronouns to medical interventions such as hormone therapy and, sometimes, surgery."

I disagree.

Then provide not only a psychological and physiological makeup for this hypothetical individual, as well as your medical credentials designating not only your professional expertise on this issue but your designation as their primary care physician and psychologist.

As for the importance of sports, you brought it up, and asked for a link, which I provided.

No, I decried your use of "safe spaces" being invaded as a misdirection, and the argument of sports as a bogus smoke screen. Bravo showing it to be a bogus smoke screen, while you still fail to give example of any RIGHTS of women being curtailed by the simultaneous addressing of trans issues.

 

[icehorse]

THE. SEGMENT. YOU. QUOTED. Read it back as many times as you need.

There are over 1100 posts on this thread. I will respond to your request if you point me to exactly what you're talking about. I still don't know what you mean when you say "THE SEGMENT"?

So 0.03% of adolescents diagnosed (that's important) with gender dysphoria received hormone blockers. That is nowhere near as widespread or common as you've touted it here.

Thousands of kids have been given puberty blockers and/or hormones, correct?

Then provide not only a psychological and physiological makeup for this hypothetical individual, as well as your medical credentials designating not only your professional expertise on this issue but your designation as their primary care physician and psychologist.

What part of my claims about how medicine ought to work do you disagree with? Do no harm, are you okay with that principle?

This aspect of dealing with GD is not rocket science.

Most kids with GD are not trans. Assuming that they are trans, which is what GAC does, is bad medicine.

Here's a link to a recent report. There are hundreds of pages of documents, but one of the conclusions is that GAC is frequently bad medicine.

This report is about an organization called WPATH. WPATH is seen in the medical world of gender dysphoria as the foundational, leading authority. Included in the documents is a 10 page list of citations demonstrating that all the major medical organizations follow WPATH's lead.

In this report there are videos and transcripts of top WPATH officials admitting that - in various ways - they are doing and advocating for bad medical practices:

The WPATH Files — Environmental Progress

No, I decried your use of "safe spaces" being invaded as a misdirection, and the argument of sports as a bogus smoke screen. Bravo showing it to be a bogus smoke screen, while you still fail to give example of any RIGHTS of women being curtailed by the simultaneous addressing of trans issues.

I gave you a sports example. It shows women's rights to fair competitions are being curtailed. There are other ways in which women's rights are being curtailed, but it's not up to me to educate you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You have gripes, I got that. But you refuse to be specific. You're just standing on the sideline hurling insults with nothing to back them up.

My offer still stands, are you brave enough to take me up on it?

You've had those specifics and all you do is scream strawman.
But at least now I have an idea where you picked up all these terms and concepts you get wrong.

 

[icehorse]

You've had those specifics and all you do is scream strawman.
But at least now I have an idea where you picked up all these terms and concepts you get wrong.

pick one and let's dig into it. otherwise, stop disrupting the conversation.

And while you're at it, skim through the docs I just linked to in post #1118. Those docs back up what I've been saying all along.