(I try to avoid getting my news from Focus on the Family, because they are obviously agenda-based organization only interested in advocating their side.)
I know you don't care, but this is important to a lot of families.
It’s been eight months since Gov. Greg Abbott directed the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate the families of trans youth for providing gender-affirming care. Since then, some families have left the state. Those that stayed have weathered anxiety and the dizzying back-and-forth of legal battles to determine whether investigations will stop.
The vast majority of people who transition are happy with their transition. You are being duped by people who are using a few individual cases to distract from the much bigger issue - equality for trans people and access to medical services that help the vast majority of them.
Stella Keating, a 16-year-old transgender girl from Washington state, said it was the honor of her lifetime to testify as a witness in support of the Equality Act.
You were expressing outrage on yesterday's thread (featuring an adult) so I can presume that you don't want to allow anyone to have access to sex reassignment surgery? You're just using the young person for drama in your argument? But an outright ban is what you support.
I don't know her. I don't know her family. And I don't take at face value anything that comes from Focus on the Family.
And your determination to sue doctors is clearly an attempt to prevent these procedures at all. An adult signs a waiver they are taking responsibility. If they feel differently down the road, that doesn't mean the surgeon did anything wrong. It means "buyer's regret."
The idea that people go into these decisions casually (or that they are "groomed" to make these decisions) is insulting to people for whom this quite possibly will be the most difficult decision of their life.
not old enough to get a tattoo or vote or drink a beer, but old enough to have a double mastectomy and take blockers because she is confused during puberty.
Detransition facts and statistics that are unbiased are hard to come by in 2022. However, how many trans people detransition? What reasons do detransitioners cite for their detransition? Detransition is when a person who has already transitioned returns to live as the gender assigned by their birth sex. Transition
What Abbott is doing is awful, and incredibly dangerous for
Dec 14, 2022, 12:50 PM
[ in reply to Re: ###### up ]
parental rights.
But the Left has their head in the sand about the dangers of sexual transitions for kids. IMO, there should be immense pressure within medical circles to address it within that community. Otherwise, it leaves the door open for populist nutjobs like Abbott to come in and make it all the worse.
Listen to this person. As I have said 10,000 times, social media is the vehicle through which all your woke bullchit gets around and screws up people. Gen Zers are on their phone 24/7, especially females. Truth matters not - whatever is on their phone is the way it is. This is bad when they are immersed in the echo chamber getting feeds from the party of lie-cheat-steal-and-perverts.
All of what rational people know as nonsense ends up being reality for these people. And, thanks to your support of the lefty/commie movement they get the messaging: kill cops, no justice no peace, people matter property doesn't, defund police, the biggest threat to democracy is ____, you have a right to free _____, you are oppressed, you are a victim of ____, ...
The only thing I'm on is Facebook, but I guarantee your (NC_Tiger) paranoid ### is on that, Twitter, TikTok, and probably Trump's stupid right-wing one, lapping up whatever hateful or fear-mongering line of BS they feed you.
We have grown men on here who literally think TikTok is a good source of news, and you're worried about Gen Z.
LOL I am truly not on any of those. I have thought about Twitter, but not pulled the trigger. I really do not have time. Of course I see tons of tiktok, twitter, FB links people send out (I think FB blocks them now if you do not have an account) and repost links, but I literally don't have accounts.
I don't know about news, but TikTok is a source for studying people, what they are saying, what they think is worth posting about. Again, I don't go on it, but if you are not addicted, seems like it can be informative to some extent or at least entertainment.
Actually, I do look at YikYak some. It's mainly a college thing, but I like to read what kids are thinking and posting about from time to time.
Below is a post that showed up on my facebook this morning. When I first scrolled past it, I thought someone had posted a current day image with Mary and Joseph looking at their phones.
We are witnessing a Dr. Frankenstein moment in history.
The melodrama from you is over the top. The first M>F sex change was around 1930. The first F>M sex change was 1938. There is nothing new about this. It is only that the medical science has improved. There is no "moment." There is only a sudden need for political outrage for something that has been going on for three-quarters of a century.
One of these transgender folks is going to carry their doc up to the top of a windmill as an angry mob of townspeople pursues he/she/they/whatever, and then the trannie is gonna toss the doc off the top of the windmill, and then the townspeople are going to burn it down with the trannie inside?
I actually have absolutely no problem with people not being allowed to complete a surgical transition until they are 18. None whatsoever.
But anyone who thinks that "trans transition regret" is a bigger problem in this country than the ostracizing of members of the trans community, they absolutely have their heads in the sand. They are allowing the shiny object to distract from the more serious problem.
The anti-trans crowd, like the anti-CRT crowd, are just people being ginned up by right-wingers who see divides on social issues as a path to votes.
The trans community guarantees it will be marginalized because it is abnormal. You want to be ostracized? Become abnormal on purpose. The trans groomers and recruiters are disgusting.
It's a mental illness. It will always be considered abnormal and members of that 'community' will be ostracised by normal people.
Medicine accommodating this illness in kids is morally reprehensible.
It's a mental illness. It will always be considered abnormal and members of that 'community' will be ostracised by normal people.
You are simply trying to justify your own bigotry. People simply want equality.
The trans groomers and recruiters are disgusting. More myths from the intolerant. Nobody is "recruiting" anyone. I would ask where you people get this stuff, but I already know.
It's funny how people create new ways to describe a reality-based perspective as bigotry.
Once the 'furry community' gets the recognition it deserves, people who correctly identify those otherkin as mentally ill will become bigots all over again.
I posted this quote and the source link in yesterday's thread. This is on the causes of suicidal thoughts and attempts in transgender individuals. This is medical science, not people just pulling bs out of their #####. These aren't people considering or attempting suicide because they are mentally ill, these are people dealing with mistreatment and neglect from families as well as a lack of support in their communities.
Data indicate that 82% of transgender individuals have considered killing themselves and 40% have attempted suicide, with suicidality highest among transgender youth. Using minority stress theory and the interpersonal theory of suicide, this study aims to better understand suicide risk among transgender youth. The present study examines the influence of intervenable risk factors: interpersonal and environmental microaggressions, internalized self-stigma, and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and protective factors: school belonging, family support, and peer support on both lifetime suicide attempts and past 6-month suicidality in a sample of transgender youth (n = 372). SPSS 22 was utilized to examine the impact of the independent variables on both suicidality and lifetime suicide attempt through two separate logistic regressions. Fifty six percent of youth reported a previous suicide attempt and 86% reported suicidality. Logistic regressions indicated that models for both lifetime suicide attempts and suicidality were significant. Interpersonal microaggressions, made a unique, statistically significant contribution to lifetime suicide attempts and emotional neglect by family approached significance. School belonging, emotional neglect by family, and internalized self-stigma made a unique, statistically significant contribution to past 6-month suicidality. Results have significant practice and policy implications. Findings offer guidance for practitioners working with parents and caregivers of trans youth, as well as, for the creation of practices which foster interpersonal belonging for transgender youth.
Sex “reassignment” doesn’t work. It’s impossible to “reassign” someone’s sex physically, and attempting to do so doesn’t produce good outcomes psychosocially.
In 2014, a new review of the scientific literature was done by Hayes, Inc., a research and consulting firm that evaluates the safety and health outcomes of medical technologies. Hayes found that the evidence on long-term results of sex reassignment was too sparse to support meaningful conclusions and gave these studies its lowest rating for quality:
Statistically significant improvements have not been consistently demonstrated by multiple studies for most outcomes. … Evidence regarding quality of life and function in male-to-female adults was very sparse. Evidence for less comprehensive measures of well-being in adult recipients of cross-sex hormone therapy was directly applicable to [gender dysphoric] patients but was sparse and/or conflicting. The study designs do not permit conclusions of causality and studies generally had weaknesses associated with study execution as well. There are potentially long-term safety risks associated with hormone therapy but none have been proven or conclusively ruled out.
The Obama administration came to similar conclusions. In 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services revisited the question of whether sex reassignment surgery would have to be covered by Medicare plans. Despite receiving a request that its coverage be mandated, it refused, on the ground that we lack evidence that it benefits patients.
Here’s how the June 2016 “Proposed Decision Memo for Gender Dysphoria and Gender Reassignment Surgery” put it:
Based on a thorough review of the clinical evidence available at this time, there is not enough evidence to determine whether gender reassignment surgery improves health outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries with gender dysphoria. There were conflicting (inconsistent) study results—of the best designed studies, some reported benefits while others reported harms. The quality and strength of evidence were low due to the mostly observational study designs with no comparison groups, potential confounding, and small sample sizes. Many studies that reported positive outcomes were exploratory type studies (case-series and case-control) with no confirmatory follow-up.
The final August 2016 memo was even more blunt. It pointed out:
Overall, the quality and strength of evidence were low due to mostly observational study designs with no comparison groups, subjective endpoints, potential confounding (a situation where the association between the intervention and outcome is influenced by another factor such as a co-intervention), small sample sizes, lack of validated assessment tools, and considerable lost to follow-up.
That “lost to follow-up,” remember, could be pointing to people who committed suicide.
And when it comes to the best studies, there is no evidence of
All I can think of when I see this, or listen to AM radio,
Dec 14, 2022, 2:03 PM
or peruse Twatter, all I can think of is Biden, Obama, Trump, and GWB, maybe even AOC and Cheney, all sitting back in a bar somewhere, smiling, laughing, and drinking beer while they keep the game going, while the dolts argue over stupid things.
This is bipartisan, the NEED of politicians to have people arguing over dumb stuff, instead of paying attention to the important problems we face. Argue over illegals, while Congress gladly does zilch about it, nor any President because those 535 people ALL know how important illegals are to our economy and their future votes.
I mean think about it. We have a never-ending pandemic, that's not even a pandemic. People are sick, kids are sick, productivity is down, record people have left the labor force, we have $30-SOMETHING TRILLION in debt, we can't balance a budget, I have mortgage payments and bills, and the toilet is clogged, and we have high inflation, houses are completely unbuyable, stocks are whatever, crypto has lost billions, the Fed is raising rates, and here we are......gender affirming surgery?
Pass me another beer!!!!!! I promise you Republicans are loving that this as the issue du jour, and so do Democrats. Anything but what's important.
gubmint pays for these unnecesary, elective surgeries and the extensive, long-term aftercare required.
Did you mention a deficit?
Do you think gubmint paying for all this is revenue neutral?
Suddenly - this issue becomes actually relevant, just as does every new thing under the sun gubmint is suddenly discovered to be responsible to pay for.
Re: Problem is revenue neutral is NOT vote neutral
Dec 14, 2022, 2:22 PM
Republicans spend just as much as dems, just on different stuff. NO ONE balances a budget. NO ONE cuts spending. NO ONE stops illegals from working in the US cheaper than Americans. NO ONE raises the minimum wage. NO ONE builds a border wall or enforces immigration laws, NO ONE changes social security, NO ONE does anything BUT SPEND MONEY, because that is who we vote for. It's a flaw in the system, an age-old nemesis of democracies. This is why Jerome Powell is not an elected politician. He'd have inflation at 200% and our rates at .5% if he was elected by "the people".
It is what it is. Government also pays for $2,000 toilet seats for the military. I mean it's bipartisan, we just have to understand the bigger picture is we do not have a political problem, and there is no political solution. No one votes to have their retirement age jacked up 10 years, or their subsidies cut. Farmers don't vote for people who want to cut crop subsidies. No one votes for less. And then no one wants higher taxes, or a flat tax, that makes too much sense. No one VOTES for solutions, they vote for whoever tells them what they like to hear. And that varies among people, but NO ONE wants to hear bad news, or that they may have to take some responsibility for something greater than themselves. So the gender affirming people wail and moan for funding for surgeries, and military brass wails for more $2,000 toilet seats. And like I said, they're all in a bar joking, laughing, and MORE THAN HAPPY to have people arguing over fictitious problems instead of the REAL PROBLEMS politicians ignore so they can be reelected.
But it's possible to address more than one issue at a time. Especially since, as you noted, our preference and votes don't make much difference anyway.
You and I are in lockstep about the seriousness of the spending.
Soon, we'll be offered digital WEF Bucks to replace a portion of our worthless paper assets. Or nothing.
Our options are limited. This scenario has been decades
Dec 14, 2022, 4:16 PM
heck, generations in the making. It doesn't just "get fixed" without a major change. I've mentioned before our problems are structural, not political. Our founders knew we needed a stronger federal government than the Articles of Confederation, BUT they also knew it had to be limited and they chose to have a system of checks and balances, which has worked fairly well over time. BUT, things like the Equal Protection Clause, and the creation of a federal income tax, those Amendments altered the system.
As long as Congress can run for reelection for eternity, and as long as there is a federal income tax with trillions to spend and cheap debt to leverage those tax dollars with, the problem will never fix itself, until the system collapses. The best (probably only) viable solution would take probably just as long to implement, 40 years or so. The solution I would have is simple. An Article V convention of the states. No one ever mentions this part of the Constitution, and for good reason. For it to have a prayer of working, it MUST be limited to TWO amendments ONLY. Term limits for Congress, and a balanced budget amendment, to be phased in over 10 years.
It may even be too late for that, but that's really the only viable solution to a problem that has no other solution other than an eventual collapse. Take away the carrot of reelection, and a "career" in Congress (never intended by the founders), and force politicians to only spend what they receive from taxpayers, short of those two solutions, we have little recourse.
The USSC rules all programs and spending not specifically provided for in the Constitution are unconstitutional.
That is the way the Father of the Constitution saw it. "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - Annals of Congress, House of Representatives, January 10, 1794
The programs and spending are discontinued and the fed gubmint is cut down to size.
That's probably less plausible even than your Hail Mary solution.
The much, much, much more likely scenario involves an unthinkable economic disaster.
I object to neither and suspect most folks who have a problem with ###### being covered are the same ones who object to contraceptives being covered. Data?
It is unbelievably stupid to go down this road with minors. As one who participated in sex reassignment surgery in residency and seeing these folks before and after surgery, I am appalled that the standards for proceeding with hormone therapy and surgery have been lowered so dramatically.
I don't recall anyone under 21 having this surgery. ALL individuals were required to have had an extensive psychiatric evaluation for a minimum of 18 months along with cross dressing for 18-24 months and being on hormone therapy before ANY surgery was offered.
This is an irreversible procedure. With so much discussion of gender these days, children are indeed confused about their gender and sexuality. My daughter as a counselor sees some very confused kids down to elementary school ages.
I think there are indeed some folks with true gender dysmorphia who may benefit from sex reassignment surgery once they have undergone very thorough psychiatric evaluations. From a purely anecdotal experience, I will say many of these transexuals still were not particularly happy individuals following surgery. However, some were extremely happy.
However, performing hormone therapy and surgery on minors is not something to be celebrated and opposing this has nothing to do with hate but with wanting to protect children.
The scary part, especially with the child, was how quickly it seemed to be determined that hormone therapy was needed. The other scary part, according to Chloe's testimony, intervention would have been considered conversion therapy.
50
