Tennessee bans lots of Drag Shows and gender-affirming care for kids

[ADigitalArtist]

It is not true that people with XXY or X0 syndromes are usually treated with corrective surgeries. That's just simply not the case

I agree (Sort of. Turners syndrome often has streak gonads removed, but I get that's not what you mean), but Turners and Klinefelter is a very small portion of intersex as a whole. And asking 'what are they as opposed to what they feel' aboit intersex people is fraught, as is labeling them by chromosomes.

It seems to me doctors are capable of determining what's medically necessary, yes?

If it were that cut and dry there wouldn't be human rights advocate groups for intersex looking to stop unnecessary cosmetic surgeries.
Not to mention, in quasi related subject, things like circumcision debates. Or cosmetic surgeries for non-painful low risk physical deformities which has a track record for causing pain and issues down the line, but still offered routinely.

 

[Left Coast]

I agree (Sort of. Turners syndrome often has streak gonads removed, but I get that's not what you mean), but Turners and Klinefelter is a very small portion of intersex as a whole. And asking 'what are they as opposed to what they feel' aboit intersex people is fraught, as is labeling them by chromosomes.

The thing is, intersex people today are a very broad category that includes literally anyone who does not have a completely "ideal" or "typical" male or female body.

From the original article in 2000 where the 1.7% statistic comes from:

So anyone who has any sort of birth defect relating to their genitals or reproductive system is categorized, in this way of thinking, as "intersex." That, I think, is a world apart from what most people imagine we're talking about when we talk about intersex people, by which I think the typical person imagines either a "hermaphrodite" with external genitals of both sexes or someone with sex chromosomes other than XX or XY. Among the chromosomal anomalies, Klinefelter's is the most common, according to the Google gods.

If it were that cut and dry there wouldn't be human rights advocate groups for intersex looking to stop unnecessary cosmetic surgeries.
Not to mention, in quasi related subject, things like circumcision debates.

I agree that doctors shouldn't perform surgeries that are unnecessary without consent. Speaking as a circumcised man, I don't personally mind that I was circumcised. I know nothing different and I feel no sense of loss for not having a foreskin. But I also think that's quite different from some of these complicated intersex cases with truly ambiguous genitals. From what I've read, surgeries we're typically done in these cases out of concern for the child's future well-being, ie to eliminate distress they'd feel from having an abnormal body that isn't like their peers. That isn't some malicious awful thing; that's out of compassion for the child. Has that led to bad outcomes where the person later in life wishes they hadn't been operated on? Sure. But I don't think we need to villainize the medical system for that. Seems like an honest error in a complicated case where there's not a clear right answer in the moment.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It also implies a biological definition of boyness and girlness, which I'm surprised to see from you.

There is a biological aspect to it. This is why we can say the brains of trans people look more like the brains of the identified sex than their birth sex, along with how we universally express gender and even see it in other social animals.
There isn't a concrete and universal definition and approach for how boys and girls are raised and how they should behave, but it is universal we raise boys amd girls different.

This depends entirely on the degree of "intersexedness" of the child and whether doctors make the right choice in the case of children with ambiguous genitalia.

For something so profound it should have to wait for the individual.

I'm not sure what number constitutes "many." These conditions are rare to begin with and those who receive surgery as children and are subsequently unhappy with that surgery are an even smaller subset of that minority. I'm aware of anecdotal cases that have been highlighted in media, and it's certainly true that doctors have made the wrong call in some cases.

More than it being enough to take consideration.

 

[SomeRandom]

The thing is, intersex people today are a very broad category that includes literally anyone who does not have a completely "ideal" or "typical" male or female body.

From the original article in 2000 where the 1.7% statistic comes from:

View attachment 72642

So anyone who has any sort of birth defect relating to their genitals or reproductive system is categorized, in this way of thinking, as "intersex." That, I think, is a world apart from what most people imagine we're talking about when we talk about intersex people, by which I think the typical person imagines either a "hermaphrodite" with external genitals of both sexes or someone with sex chromosomes other than XX or XY. Among the chromosomal anomalies, Klinefelter's is the most common, according to the Google gods.



I agree that doctors shouldn't perform surgeries that are unnecessary without consent. Speaking as a circumcised man, I don't personally mind that I was circumcised. I know nothing different and I feel no sense of loss for not having a foreskin. But I also think that's quite different from some of these complicated intersex cases with truly ambiguous genitals. From what I've read, surgeries we're typically done in these cases out of concern for the child's future well-being, ie to eliminate distress they'd feel from having an abnormal body that isn't like their peers. That isn't some malicious awful thing; that's out of compassion for the child. Has that led to bad outcomes where the person later in life wishes they hadn't been operated on? Sure. But I don't think we need to villainize the medical system for that. Seems like an honest error in a complicated case where there's not a clear right answer in the moment.

I mean, to be fair, medicine like all science is subject to updates.
Phasing out cosmetic surgeries on infants with various intersex conditions may just be a consequence of the times changing.

This may just be an area where more research is needed. Since surgery was used rather like a Band-Aid in the past (with regards to intersex conditions specifically.)
Without medical cause, doctors might have to update their go to procedures in such cases in the future.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The thing is, intersex people today are a very broad category that includes literally anyone who does not have a completely "ideal" or "typical" male or female body.

While intersex is a broad category, even just talking about the deprecated term 'hermaphrodite' and 'pseudohermaphrodite' Turners and Klinefelter would be in the minority. They're the majority of chromosomal abnormalities but not genital abnormality, which is other DSD intersex conditions like AIS, CAH, 5ARD (which often also comes with AIS), chimerism, and sex reversal DSDs.

I agree that doctors shouldn't perform surgeries that are unnecessary without consent. Speaking as a circumcised man, I don't personally mind that I was circumcised. I know nothing different and I feel no sense of loss for not having a foreskin. But I also think that's quite different from some of these complicated intersex cases with truly ambiguous genitals. From what I've read, surgeries we're typically done in these cases out of concern for the child's future well-being, ie to eliminate distress they'd feel from having an abnormal body that isn't like their peers. That isn't some malicious awful thing; that's out of compassion for the child. Has that led to bad outcomes where the person later in life wishes they hadn't been operated on? Sure. But I don't think we need to villainize the medical system for that. Seems like an honest error in a complicated case where there's not a clear right answer in the moment.

If it were up to me circumcision would be banned strictly on the basis as it is unnecessary 99% of the time. And even though many circumcised dudes don't know anything else it is unquestionably a sensitivity reducing procedure.

Ditto for clitoral reshaping which is considered female genital mutilation in all cases except for intersex people people with ambiguous genitals, even though it poses no danger.

To me cosmetic surgery for kids in hopes they won't feel dysphoria or dismorphia later is an unambiguously wrong approach. Likening facial reconstruction for kids with down syndrome to look more normal is inherently an ablist frame of reference.

If an adult decides to get cosmetic surgery that's one thing. But an adult deciding that the possible consequences of surgery for their child is worth it for non-medical gains is another.

But this is getting a little afield of the thread lol.

 

[Left Coast]

There is a biological aspect to it. This is why we can say the brains of trans people look more like the brains of the identified sex than their birth sex, along with how we universally express gender and even see it in other social animals.
There isn't a concrete and universal definition and approach for how boys and girls are raised and how they should behave, but it is universal we raise boys amd girls different.

We agree!

For something so profound it should have to wait for the individual.

If there isn't a medical concern that needs to be addressed, I tend to agree.

More than it being enough to take consideration.

I don't think anyone is saying we shouldn't take intersex people's conditions into consideration. Of course we should. The issue is that the answer of what to do is not always clear.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

There is a biological aspect to it. This is why we can say the brains of trans people look more like the brains of the identified sex than their birth sex, along with how we universally express gender and even see it in other social animals.
There isn't a concrete and universal definition and approach for how boys and girls are raised and how they should behave, but it is universal we raise boys amd girls different.

I'm not a fan of 'pink brain and blue brain' views of gender and sex because half of the studied individuals do not have so called male or female sexed brains at all. And since more than half of the population aren't nonbinary, suggests that 'boy brains' and 'girl brains' are vastly overstated categories and may not even be distinguished from socialization or hormones, rather than some inherent femaleness or maleness.

So the movement to make trans brains like gendered brains smells like the desire to find a gay gene, oversimplifying a complex strata of behavior, socialization, hormones, broader genetic ranges, etc.

With that said, I agree there are absolutely biological components. But probably a lot more complex amd with less clear bright lines between nature and nurture than we think.

 

[Left Coast]

While intersex is a broad category, even just talking about the deprecated term 'hermaphrodite' and 'pseudohermaphrodite' Turners and Klinefelter would be in the minority.

Correct because their external genitals are not generally abnormal. People with Turner Syndrome are female. People with Klinefelter's are male. Which is why I said that surgery is not generally done on them for that reason! That's all I said, haha.

If it were up to me circumcision would be banned strictly on the basis as it is unnecessary 99% of the time. And even though many circumcised dudes don't know anything else it is unquestionably a sensitivity reducing procedure.

My circumcised penis is unquestionably the most sensitive part of my body I'm aware of. Without getting too graphic I have absolutely zero problems experiencing...pleasure and stimulation of that organ. Would I be EVEN MORE sensitive if I had foreskin? Hard to imagine but...sure, maybe? But again, I feel no loss or violation from my own circumcision as a baby.

Ditto for clitoral reshaping which is considered female genital mutilation in all cases except for intersex people people with ambiguous genitals, even though it poses no danger.

To me cosmetic surgery for kids in hopes they won't feel dysphoria or dismorphia later is an unambiguously wrong approach. Likening facial reconstruction for kids withdrawn syndrome to look more normal is inherently an ablist frame of reference.

That gets into a whole other discussion of "ableism" that is far afield from public bans of drag shows, lol. I don't think it's remotely immoral to not want your child to have a disability, or to attempt to mitigate their suffering as a result of their disability.

But this is getting a little afield of the thread lol.

Agreed on that count! Lol

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm not a fan of 'pink brain and blue brain' views of gender and sex because half of the studied individuals do not have so called male or female sexed brains at all. And since more than half of the population aren't nonbinary, suggests that 'boy brains' and 'girl brains' are vastly overstated categories and may not even be distinguished from socialization or hormones, rather than some inherent femaleness or maleness.

So the movement to make trans brains like gendered brains smells like the desire to find a gay gene, oversimplifying a complex strata of behavior, socialization, hormones, broader genetic ranges, etc.

With that said, I agree there are absolutely biological components. But probably a lot more complex amd with less clear bright lines between nature and nurture than we think.

It's like the differences in size between men and women. Of course there is tons of overlap and nothing set in stone, but nevertheless men do tend to be larger and taller than women.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't think anyone is saying we shouldn't take intersex people's conditions into consideration. Of course we should. The issue is that the answer of what to do is not always clear.

I do believe the best approach may be to do nothing and just wait to see where things land. Cases of medical necessity aside, it should be asked why should anything be done? Most kids will tend to lean towards social norms, so why not hold off until we can say we have evidence to support decisions of gender assignment? What if just doesn't become an issue for the child?

 

[Brian2]

I asked you a question about what you said. Hence the question mark. Perhaps you could clarify then. That's why people ask questions.

All you need do is read again what I said in

• #155

 

[SkepticThinker]

All you need do is read again what I said in

• #155

I did. I have the same question.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

All you need do is read again what I said in

• #155

All you did was say it was better when sex norms and mores were so rigid that unmarried women had to hide pregnancies or lose all social respect and credibility, gays were subjected to electroshock therapy, and any deviations from what was considered proper and decent was viewed as pathological.

 

[Brian2]

I did. I have the same question.

An example of young kids being taught that "evil is really good" is what is acceptable in society these days compared to the past.
What is acceptable is what teaches kids what society sees as good even if it was seen as evil in the past.
I have not got a specific example to share except the one I did say about the expectations on teens that they will have sex as teens, and this seems to be seen as a good thing these days, or certainly not as a bad thing.

 

[Brian2]

All you did was say it was better when sex norms and mores were so rigid that unmarried women had to hide pregnancies or lose all social respect and credibility, gays were subjected to electroshock therapy, and any deviations from what was considered proper and decent was viewed as pathological.

I said this.
""The pregnancy bit was always an issue no doubt but the expectations and moral teaching sexually seems to have slipped down from a couple of generations ago.""

Maybe you don't see any slipping down in expectations and moral teachings but we differ there.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I said this.
""The pregnancy bit was always an issue no doubt but the expectations and moral teaching sexually seems to have slipped down from a couple of generations ago.""

Maybe you don't see any slipping down in expectations and moral teachings but we differ there.

We definitely differ because I see great improvements but with lots of room for even more improvement before America loses the sexually repressed and immature stereotype.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Tennessee's Governor has signed a bill banning Drag Shows in many venues, and gender-affirming care for kids.

I think Harry Potter movies and plays (like Harry Potter and the Haunted Child) should likewise be banned. It can't possibly be good for kids to see people dressed like and pretending to be wizards and warlocks.

And all those Shakespeare plays where women dress as men, well, they need to be banned, too.

And parents with children suffering from any sort of gender dysphoria are out of luck getting any sort of help. They'll just have to beat it out of them, I suppose. That'll be better for them, and if not, it'll increase the likelihood they'll commit suicide and thus make the problem go away.

Hurrah for Tennessee, and all the Neanderthals therein.

Here are the links to what the bills actually say if anyone is interested.

Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

wapp.capitol.tn.gov

This bill prevents people from physically changing a Childs body (<18) medically for the reason of treating gender dysphoria or like conditions including hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery. This should be passed in all states. Many people have been harmed such as these people:

Home | #DetransAwarenessDay

www.detransawareness.org

Detrans people deserve a voice in the conversation but are always left out or outright slandered.

Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

wapp.capitol.tn.gov

The bill defines an "adult cabaret performance" to mean a performance in a location other than an adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration.

People are more than able to freely do these things in private clubs, bars, houses etc. Just not in public places. I don't see how this is even controversial. I don't want my kids seeing prurient events in public spaces, most parent don't want that either.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Here are the links to what the bills actually say if anyone is interested.

Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

wapp.capitol.tn.gov

This bill prevents people from physically changing a Childs body (<18) medically for the reason of treating gender dysphoria or like conditions including hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery.

Tell you what -- I might be tempted to look more favourably when they also prevent "physically changing a child's body (<18)" by cutting off an integral and protective bit of his penis -- for no particular reason at all other than esthetic preference of the parent(s)!

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Tell you what -- I might be tempted to look more favourably when they also prevent "physically changing a child's body (<18)" by cutting off an integral and protective bit of his penis -- for no particular reason at all other than esthetic preference of the parent(s)!

So if they added circumcision to the list you would back the bill? I agree it should be added.

 

[Brian2]

We definitely differ because I see great improvements but with lots of room for even more improvement before America loses the sexually repressed and immature stereotype.

Yes I also see improvements and room for more, but I don't see all of the changes in the sexual revolution of last century as necessarily good.