metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I go by the science and have checked numerous sources, plus I am not stereotyping the data as you are doing.
IOW, I'm done.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ohio Governor's Transgender Decision
- Thread starter metis
- Start date
IOW, I'm done.
Thanks for the discussion!
1 - I'm going by the data as well
2 - As for stereotyping, if you're referring to the use of language, I would say I'm categorizing
I'm doubtful I want to continue either.
WPATH is not 'comprised mostly' of activists and not doctors that were establishing standards of conduct, this was obviously false and I provided the numbers to disprove it. If you choose to disregard them because you believe their standards use 'activist language' that's more a reflection of your own biases than anything.
WPATH is not 'comprised mostly' of activists and not doctors that were establishing standards of conduct, this was obviously false and I provided the numbers to disprove it. If you choose to disregard them because you believe their standards use 'activist language' that's more a reflection of your own biases than anything.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's why people should have to take statistics and science literacy before graduating high school so they inderstand such quantifying adjectives. And also stressing the importance of understanding the topic your about to rant about from a top a soapbox. It's always been known for some they do more harm than good. For starters that potential is there for all treatment (with a number of routine procedures, especially related to the knees, not shown to offer any real benefit going unscrutinized), but also this "issue" is why the Standards of Care was developed in the first place. It's why any medical group or facility worth a damn will constantly evaluate current policy and adjust where needed.
And of course we still yet must consider the larger picture. And that is thatoverall so few regret transitioning there's no reason to dismiss it outright as some are doing amd wish to ban it.
Well, well, well. The Ohio Legislature has voted and overridden the Governor's veto. Imagine that.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ohio-vote-highlights-intensified-transgender-rights-battles-across-us-2024-01-10/#:~:text=Jan%2010%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20Ohio's,transgender%20rights%20across%20the%20U.S.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ohio-vote-highlights-intensified-transgender-rights-battles-across-us-2024-01-10/#:~:text=Jan%2010%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20Ohio's,transgender%20rights%20across%20the%20U.S.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
I am not entirely certain I buy that. The information I found (some quick googling), kept leading back to a WSJ article by Dr. Roy Eappen. I couldn't read it due to a paywall, but one article by a doctor isn't convincing enough to me to restrict medical care.
Also, I would question whether trans kids reporting that they are gay as adults necessarily leads to the conclusion that they are not trans or could have benefited from care, or even that as kids they would have received life changing medical care in the first place.
Well there is a lot of evidence concerning GD resolving as gay. But putting that aside for now:
I'm fully supportive of kids with GD getting talk therapy. It's the use of drugs and surgeries on kids that I think is the issue. First off, there is no high quality evidence that these irreversible and dangerous interventions are more effective than talk therapy.
To reiterate, the "standard of care" being touted in this discussion was derived from "The Dutch Protocol". A couple of HUGE problems with the Dutch Protocol:
- it was limited in terms of sex and age group
- they DID NOT USE CONTROL GROUPS
In other words, even if a kid's mental health improved, they CANNOT CONCLUDE that it was because of drugs or surgeries. A lot of kids with GD have improved mental health when all they receive is talk therapy and the time to go thru puberty naturally.
Or it could be that due to the lack of good evidence they thought it would be better to stop sterilizing confused young gay kids?
Will you admit that you were wrong about WPATH being an organization primarily of non-doctors and that the standards of care were primarily established by activists and not doctors?
Unless you can acknowledge that you've moved the goal posts when proven wrong, there's no point in continuing the conversation.
Unless you can acknowledge that you've moved the goal posts when proven wrong, there's no point in continuing the conversation.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Republicans hate freedom and liberty when it's for things they morally object to. Imagine that.
I'm happy to agree that many of the doctors with WPATH are also activists, how about that for a compromise?
In any case, that's a separate point than the language point. And in addition, there are MANY unanswered claims in this thread, so even if I was wrong about activism in WPATH (which is not yet established), that's only one concern of many.
I'm all about not sterilizing confused young gay kids based on weak evidence.
Not authorizing public schools from promoting something doesn't equate to restricting freedom and liberty.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's not even the issue. It's healthcare, not schools. Thanks for showing how little you actually care.
Amd, when you won't acknowledge a group of people as your equals and refuse to acknowledge them in school does relegate them to second class citizens while other groups of people get free air time.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
I haven't seen it. It could exist, and I don't disagree it's a possibility. I suspect that the evidence would suggest that a percentage of people with GD in youth continue to suffer from it into adulthood without discovering they are homosexual, or that discovery of their sexuality not factoring into their gender identity.
In other words, if there is a percentage of youth that suffer in some form from gender identity issues, gender affirming care should still be an option available for them and their care providers.
What percentage of kids undergo surgery or utilize drugs for GD? I don't think it is common at all. My guess is therapy and gender affirming care in the form of using social recognition is far more common.
But again, how common is using surgery or drugs? I don't think this is widespread. According to this article from Reuters, it really isn't:
Number of transgender children seeking treatment surges in U.S.
About 42,000 U.S. children ages 6 to 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria in 2021, nearly triple the number in 2017, a unique data analysis for Reuters found.
In 2021, between 6 and 17:
- under 2000 used puberty blockers.
-under 5000 used hormone therapy.
- between 13 and 17 under 300 recieved top surgery.
How accurate these estimates are is up for debate, and it's from 2021, but it doesn't seem widespread. Is this any reason to legislate against this medical care being available for the small percentages that may need them?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's the psychologist/psychiatrist domain-- not mine.
He says, opining to a point
Those numbers are probably low, and even if they're not, that seems a pretty callous stance.I haven't seen it. It could exist, and I don't disagree it's a possibility. I suspect that the evidence would suggest that a percentage of people with GD in youth continue to suffer from it into adulthood without discovering they are homosexual, or that discovery of their sexuality not factoring into their gender identity.
In other words, if there is a percentage of youth that suffer in some form from gender identity issues, gender affirming care should still be an option available for them and their care providers.
What percentage of kids undergo surgery or utilize drugs for GD? I don't think it is common at all. My guess is therapy and gender affirming care in the form of using social recognition is far more common.
But again, how common is using surgery or drugs? I don't think this is widespread. According to this article from Reuters, it really isn't:
Number of transgender children seeking treatment surges in U.S.
About 42,000 U.S. children ages 6 to 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria in 2021, nearly triple the number in 2017, a unique data analysis for Reuters found.www.reuters.com
In 2021, between 6 and 17:
- under 2000 used puberty blockers.
-under 5000 used hormone therapy.
- between 13 and 17 under 300 recieved top surgery.
How accurate these estimates are is up for debate, and it's from 2021, but it doesn't seem widespread. Is this any reason to legislate against this medical care being available for the small percentages that may need them?
The other thing to consider is that it might well be that none of these 8,000 kids / year need any of these irreversibly damaging interventions, or that only a tiny fraction do
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
I don't feel it's callous at all because I am allowing for the freedom of families to make their own decisions with trusted medical professionals rather than outright restricting potentially helpful medical services.
The other thing to consider is that it might well be that none of these 8,000 kids / year need any of these irreversibly damaging interventions, or that only a tiny fraction do
I have yet to see evidence that this is the case.
1. I am not yet convinced that the percentage of youth with GD lose this condition on becoming homosexual adults.
2. I am not yet convinced that these people who have undergone the various treatments were not those for whom GD was causing significant harm that was mitigated by the treatments.
In the spirit of collaborative discussion, I feel like you do agree that gender issues in youth can cause significant harm and since you are making the case that at least a percentage of these folks may grow out of it and may end up accepting bisexuality or homosexuality, could we find common ground in working towards a community where these things are openly and compassionately discussed without judgement and with acceptance?
In other words, would it not be helpful to nurture a society where we don't stigmatize LGBTQ folks and people can feel free to talk about these things without fear of ostracism?