11 year old transgender

[BC_chick]

If one says that gender identity must match the biological sex then why is wrong to say the gender identity should change rather than the biological sex?

Because it's the factor that CAN be changed.

[BC_chick]

Tim, have you ever heard of David Reimer?

David Reimer (August 22, 1965 – May 5, 2004) was a Canadian man who was born as a healthy male, but was sexually reassigned and raised as female after his penis was accidentally destroyed during circumcision.^[1] Psychologist John Money oversaw the case and reported the reassignment as successful, and as evidence that gender identity is primarily learned. Academic sexologist Milton Diamond later reported that Reimer failed to identify as female since the age of 9 to 11,^[2] and that he began living as male at age 15. Reimer later went public with his story to discourage similar medical practices. He later committed suicide, owing to suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and a troubled marriage.

This story is a prime example of gender-identity. This is what happens when someone is raised in what they believe is the wrong body.

[TimG]

Because it's the factor that CAN be changed.

You are kidding right? Gender identity in this chart is purely a mental question. That means it is, by definition, a lot easier to change than the biological sex.

As for self-mutilation to deal with a mental health issue... as it's been pointed out to you, it's NOT a mental-health issue. You keep saying it is, doctors and psychologists say it isn't. Your opinion vs. WHO... it's not a really a tough call there.

I am aware of the fact that activists can bully organizations like the WHO into adopting their religious mantras. So simply stating that the WHO says this or that does not mean a lot - especially when the stated position is non-nonsensical.

In fact, here is evidence of this bullying:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2220064/I-sick-I-transgender--World-Health-Organisation-urged-transsexualism-list-mental-disorders.html

The bottom line is you have people who are facing issues because their biological sex does not match their gender identity. It is NOT a physical illness because their body is healthy. They ONLY reasonable statement is to say they have mental health issues no matter what the activists would like to believe.

The only real difference of opinion is how the mental health issue should be addressed. You say mutilation is the best option. I say it is an option only in cases where biology is ambiguous to start with.

We differ only in degree and not on the question of whether this is a mental health issue.

Edited September 5, 2013 by TimG

[TimG]

This story is a prime example of gender-identity. This is what happens when someone is raised in what they believe is the wrong body.

This is hardly an example that supports your case given the fact that his problems were caused by a failed sex change. Edited September 5, 2013 by TimG

[Moonlight Graham]

Giving a kid hormones to delay puberty until it's legal to do a sex change operation is bizarre behaviour to say the least.

From the article:

Wren has started monthly drug injections to pause female puberty. When he's about 16, he'll decide whether he wants to start injecting male hormones. At 18, he'll be legally old enough to have sex reassignment surgery.

Wren says he's not sure yet if he wants to take that final step. He's just excited to start Grade 7.

It's a pretty controversial decision, for the public and I'm sure for the kid and the parents too. Hormones can change not only biology but personality as well.

[Moonlight Graham]

The kid needed counselling and the parents ignored it for 6 or 7 years, now want a pat on the back. Typical.

Why do you say the parents want a pat on the back? What evidence do you have of this. The kid seems a lot more vocal about all this than the parents.

[Moonlight Graham]

People who are born with unambiguous genitalia that think they are another gender are likely facing psychological problems that are not going to be addressed by mutilating the body they were born with.

Do you have any supportive evidence for this? You don't think it's medically possible to be born with the body/genitals of a female but the hard-wired personality of a male (and vice versa)?

People who are born with unambiguous genitalia that think they are another gender are likely facing psychological problems that are not going to be addressed by mutilating the body they were born with.

This part I can see an argument for. Why can't this child accept who they are as they were born (body of a female but personality of a male), instead of trying to artificially change their biology in order to fit into society's ideas of gender and sex? It would make it harder on the child when they're an adult, on the other hand, and I understand why they feel they want to do this. I guess ultimately it should be up to the individual on what they want to do with their bodies. It gets very tricky though when dealing with someone as young as 11, but for a person (even a kid) who has felt this way their whole life maybe it's fine and very unlikely they would change their minds in the future, i'm not sure. I've known several gay adults since they were children, and they were clearly gay even at a very young age (long before puberty).

Edited September 5, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[TimG]

You don't think it's medically possible to be born with the body/genitals of a female but the hard-wired personality of a male (and vice versa)?

Sure its possible. But the issue is what is appropriate response by medical professionals. Take the example of schizophrenia. People with the disease experience hallucinations which are a real as any normal sensory input. What would the appropriate professional be if a schizophrenic claimed his left hand was plotting against him and that he wanted it removed? Would the appropriate response be therapy and drugs to control the delusions or is the appropriate response to surgically remove the left hand?

What is the difference between the hallucinations experienced by schizophrenic and the belief that one is in the 'wrong body'? The feelings are 100% real to both. To me they are mental health issues that need to be recognized and treated.

Why can't this child accept who they are as they were born (body of a female but personality of a male), instead of trying to artificially change their biology in order to fit into society's ideas of gender and sex?

Exactly. I think the genderbread diagram is a useful framework for discussion because it makes it clear that biological sex and gender identity are separate axes and it makes no sense to try and force them to be the same. Someone may believe they are a man in woman's body but they should focus on accepting that reality instead of trying to "fix" their biology.

Note that this argument is different than saying that they should start seeing themselves as their biological sex. Accepting one self would mean accepting the mismatch between the two and not trying to change it with extremely invasive medical procedures. IOW - thinking that one is a man in a woman's body or vise versa is not a mental disorder in itself. It is only a mental disorder if it leads to pathological behaviors such as a desire for self mutilation.

Edited September 5, 2013 by TimG

[BC_chick]

This is hardly an example that supports your case given the fact that his problems were caused by a failed sex change.

Actually, it does support my case. You can't "pray the straight away" any more than you can the transgender. People are born hard-wired with their gender-identity.

[dre]

Note that this argument is different than saying that they should start seeing themselves as their biological sex. Accepting one self would mean accepting the mismatch between the two

Seems like its easier for you to SAY "accepting the mismatch between the two" than it is for some people that really face that challenge to actually do it. I can only guess, but I think you are underestimating the challenge this poses to some of these people, and the tone of your posts suggests you really have no interest in understanding what these people face at all.

I admit... i dont understand it either. But you have failed miserably to establish any credibility at all. Your use of emotionally charged terms like "self mutiliation" (i lost count after 15 times), and your obviously sophormic and just plain belligerent stance on this subject makes you pretty much irrelevant...this is something that would be expected from an 8-12 yearold.

Edited September 5, 2013 by dre

[TimG]

Seems like its easier for you to SAY "accepting the mismatch between the two" than it is for some people that really face that challenge to actually do it.

A large number of humans suffer from self-esteem/self-image issues. These issues show up as pathological behaviors that range from substance abuse to obsessions with work or exercise. I fail to see why the struggles faced by a person in the 'wrong' body is any worse that the struggles of a heroin addict. In the case of all problems with no direct biological cause the accepted treatment is therapy designed to help the person to stop deluding themselves and face life the way it is.

Your use of emotionally charged terms like "self mutilation" (i lost count after 15 times)

It is amazing how much framing affects the argument. You cannot say my description is inaccurate - just that it is belligerent. But why is my approach any different from people who try to frame sex changes as perfectly "normal"? They are trying to manipulate the discussion as much as I am. Edited September 5, 2013 by TimG

[Black Dog]

A large number of humans suffer from self-esteem/self-image issues. These issues show up as pathological behaviors that range from substance abuse to obsessions with work or exercise. I fail to see why the struggles faced by a person in the 'wrong' body is any worse that the struggles of a heroin addict. In the case of all problems with no direct biological cause the accepted treatment is therapy designed to help the person to stop deluding themselves and face life the way it is.

Your argument falls apart when you place the caveats that you have. Why is it okay for individuals with ambiguous genitalia to mutilate themselves to fit the gender binary but not transgendered people? Why shouldn't they learn to accept the junk they have and "face life the way it is"?

Also, why is ambiguous genitalia the only conceivable biological cause? From the wiki article you linked to earlier:

Evidence suggests that people who identify with a gender different from the one they were assigned at birth may do so not just due to psychological or behavioural causes, but also biological ones related to their genetics, the makeup of their brains, or prenatal exposure to hormones

It is amazing how much framing affects the argument. You cannot say my description is inaccurate - just that it is belligerent.

Sure, and I had a guy mutilate me when i had my tonsils out.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Black Dog

[TimG]

Why is it okay for individuals with ambiguous genitalia to mutilate themselves to fit the gender binary but not transgendered people? Why shouldn't they learn to accept the junk they have and "face life the way it is"?

Obvious physical defects should be corrected. A kid born with 6 fingers - removing the extra one is perfectly reasonable. A kid born with 5 fingers - removing one is barbaric.

If you can't see the difference then you are being deliberately obtuse.

I am also not saying choice for adults should be restricted.

If someone wants radical plastic surgery then its their choice.

But they have no right to expect others to respect their choice.

Michael Jackson was free to make himself look white but there was nothing wrong with people suggesting that his choices were the result of unaddressed mental health issues.

My objection is to the attempt to paint sex changes as a "normal" choice for people facing gender identity issues (particularly kids). The first and only choice for people with no biological basis for gender identity issues should be learning to live with their body as it is.

As I said above. I do not believe the struggles of the person facing gender identity issues are any worse than the struggles of someone fighting a heroin addiction or anorexia. So I don't buy the argument that sex change operations are necessary. I see then as a cop out by a community of activists seeking to rationalize their own choices.

[Black Dog]

Obvious physical defects should be corrected. A kid born with 6 fingers - removing the extra one is perfectly reasonable. A kid born with 5 fingers - removing one is barbaric.

If you can't see the difference then you are being deliberately obtuse.

Ah so it's a completely arbitrary line you've drawn (a line which we've seen you cross for porn stars and pop stars). Got it.

I am also not saying choice for adults should be restricted.

If someone wants radical plastic surgery then its their choice.

But they have no right to expect others to respect their choice.

Michael Jackson was free to make himself look white but there was nothing wrong with people suggesting that his choices were the result of unaddressed mental health issues.

I don't think any transgendered individual would really give a crap about your opinion, so you're safe there.

My objection is to the attempt to paint sex changes as a "normal" choice for people facing gender identity issues (particularly kids). The first and only choice for people with no biological basis for gender identity issues should be learning to live with their body as it is.

Why? I doubt any mental health professionals would ever advocate a one-size-fits-all approach to any issue (oh but I forgot: they are all in the pockets of Big Tranny).

As I said above. I do not believe the struggles of the person facing gender identity issues are any worse than the struggles of someone fighting a heroin addiction or anorexia.

Who said they are worse? They are, however, different and should be treated differently.

So I don't buy the argument that sex change operations are necessary. I see then as a cop out by a community of activists seeking to rationalize their own choices.

Oh I see: trannies weird you out. Gotcha.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Black Dog

[TimG]

Ah so it's a completely arbitrary line you've drawn (a line which we've seen you cross for porn stars and pop stars).

Do you have comprehension problems? The line is not arbitrary and you should understand it. If you don't - well that's your problem.

I don't think any transgendered individual would really give a crap about your opinion, so you're safe there.

Actually they do. Why else would there be such a concerted campaign to "normalize" sex change operations. If they really did not care what society at large thought they would not be so vocal.

Why? I doubt any mental health professionals would ever advocate a one-size-fits-all approach to any issue

It is not a one size fits all. It is the 'don't advocate radical surgery as a solution for mental health issues' approach. It is a reasonable and ethical approach with all issues except there appears to be this blind spot where medical ethics is discarded when it comes to transgender.

Oh I see: trannies weird you out. Gotcha.

Pathetic. You don't like my opinions on the ethics of medical interventions so instead of actually debating the merits you figure you can claim that my motivations are wrong. Sorry to disappoint you. Edited September 5, 2013 by TimG

[Black Dog]

Do you have comprehension problems? The line is not arbitrary and you should understand it. If you don't - well that's your problem.

Of course it's arbitrary. Five fingers? Fine, normal. Six fingers (unusual, but hardly life-threatening or otherwise medically significant)? OH MY GOD KILL IT WITH FIRE. Not to mention you are fine with fixing a micropenis, but if there's a biological cause for transexuality with no obvious external manifestation, you change your tune. gender and biological sexuality are more than the contents of one's trousers.

Actually they do. Why else would there be such a concerted campaign to "normalize" sex change operations. If they really did not care what society at large thought they would be so vocal.

You're confusing freedom from stigma and discrimination with giving a crap about your feelings.

It is not a one size fits all. It is the 'don't advocate radically surgery as a solution for mental health issues' approach. It is a reasonable and ethical approach with all issues except there appears to be this blind spot where medical ethics is discarded when it comes to transgender.

When someone says, literally, "the first and only choice for X is Y", yeah, that's one-size-fits-all approach that discounts individual circumstances and subjectivity.

Pathetic. You don't like my opinions on the ethics of medical interventions so instead of actually debating the merits you figure you can claim that my motivations are wrong. Sorry to disappoint you.

The problem here is your ethics on medical intervention are all over the map. Like cybercoma said, you are fine with a porn star getting fake tits or other (shall we say) career-enhancing procedures, but when it comes to people struggling with real issues, you head to the fainting couch. That suggests to me there's more going on here than ethical concern-trolling.

[g_bambino]

Maybe this hits a bit close to home because I used to look up to my older brother when I was little and I wanted to badly to be a boy. My mom was ok with me dressing like a boy and having short hair but she put her foot down when I wanted a buzz cut when my brother and his friends all did..

Good on their parents for allowing them to explore whatever they want.

Are you commending your mother for putting her foot down on you at a certain point? Because, that's obviously not allowing you to explore whatever you want. I don't think children should be allowed to explore whatever they want; they are not capable of raising themselves. Hence, there should be temporary limitations imposed by parents and/or caregivers, teachers, and society; there are still such limitations in place (around sex, for example). I tend towards the opinion that gender and/or sexual identity fall into the field of matters about which kids don't have enough experience to make sound decisions on.

The author of a letter to the editor recently published in a newspaper raised an interesting point: A child under the age of 12 who murdered another child is regarded as being not responsilble for his actions because his capability of understanding and reasoning is so limited, yet an 11 year old girl who chooses to identify herself as a boy is adulated for her "bravery" and everyone immediately falls over one another to accomodate her.

[g_bambino]

The problem here is your ethics on medical intervention are all over the map. Like cybercoma said, you are fine with a porn star getting fake tits or other (shall we say) career-enhancing procedures, but when it comes to people struggling with real issues, you head to the fainting couch.

How did you glean that? He said very clearly that if someone wants to surgically alter their functioning, "normal" (as in, generally appearing the same as those of the majority of other people of the same sex) genitals into something that appears to be those of someone of the opposite gender, then they should be free to do so; that's hardly heading for the fainting couch. But, despite there being no doubt that it's an extreme, irreversable, and purely cosmetic action, it's seemingly now regarded as basically inevitable for anyone who says they feel like, think they are actually the gender they biologically are not; it's brave and celebrated, whereas encouraging such a person to seek therapy so as to bring them to accept the reality that he is actually a he or she actually a she (depending on what genitals or chromosomes they possess) is, according to the laws of political correctness, offensive because it's supposedly oppressive and insulting. (Regard the reaction to this girl's decision she's a boy; did anybody dare suggest she get treated with mental therapy? There's zero mention of it.) Contrast that with how much of society treats a woman who wants to get fake tits because she thinks the ones she has are less than ideal or are unattractive; she's encouraged to not think that way about herself, to change her self-perception, accept what she is and has as natural and beautiful, and avoid the cosmetic surgery. It's a pretty glaring double standard.

[ed,: c/e]

Edited September 6, 2013 by g_bambino

[Black Dog]

But, despite there being no doubt that it's an extreme, irreversable, and purely cosmetic action, it's seemingly now regarded as basically inevitable for anyone who says they feel like, think they are actually the gender they biologically are not; it's brave and celebrated, whereas encouraging such a person to seek therapy so as to bring them to accept the reality that he is actually a he or she actually a she (depending on what genitals or chromosomes they possess) is, according to the laws of political correctness, offensive because it's supposedly oppressive and insulting. (Regard the reaction to this girl's decision she's a boy; did anybody dare suggest she get treated with mental therapy? There's zero mention of it.)

[ed,: c/e]

You and the other fella seem to have this notion that gender reassignment surgery is like getting a filling. AFAIK, therapy is usually part and parcel of the process (indeed in some places it is required before surgery can be performed). Nor is surgery the inevitability you make it out to be. Not everyone gets it, not everyone wants it.

To be clear: no one is saying everyone who ponders that they may have been handed the wrong body should be handed free gender reassignment surgery without passing GO. Simply saying that maybe it's insulting to regard it as either a cosmetic affectation or a destructive pathology.

Contrast that with how much of society treats a woman who wants to get fake tits because she thinks the ones she has are less than ideal or are unattractive; she's encouraged to not think that way about herself, to change her self-perception, accept what she is and has as natural and beautiful, and avoid the cosmetic surgery. It's a pretty glaring double standard.

What society is this? Because it's not one I'm familiar with.

[TimG]

To be clear: no one is saying everyone who ponders that they may have been handed the wrong body should be handed free gender reassignment surgery without passing GO. Simply saying that maybe it's insulting to regard it as either a cosmetic affectation or a destructive pathology.

I suggest you read the op:

Wren has started monthly drug injections to pause female puberty. When he's about 16, he'll decide whether he wants to start injecting male hormones. At 18, he'll be legally old enough to have sex reassignment surgery.

Wren says he's not sure yet if he wants to take that final step. He's just excited to start Grade 7.

So the facts are a child who is deemed too young to be culpable if she commits a murder has claimed to want to change sex. Based on this desire the parents have started injecting potentially harmful hormones to delay puberty and are counselling their child that a surgical sex change is the "final step" (read "normal").

Obviously a lot of details are left unsaid but if we take the op at face value it appears that sex change operations ARE being treated like getting a filling. If the world actually worked they way you claim it does then the kid would have not been put on drugs and sex change surgery would be described as a "last resort" if she can't reconcile life with the body she has.

The semantic difference between describing something as a "last resort" and a "final step" is huge.

I have been arguing that the attitude towards transgenderism illustrated by the actions of the parents in the op is wrong. You now seem to be at least partially agreeing with me by claiming that there should be years of therapy before gender reassignment is seriously entertained as an option.

Upon reflection I will moderate my previous statement on sex change being only legitimate for people with biologically ambiguous gender and say that it should be a last resort. There is a parallel with heroin addicts drug were everyone agrees that getting off heroin is the best solution but for a small minority of addicts controlled injections of heroin or methadone is an option to consider as a last resort.

Edited September 7, 2013 by TimG

[BC_chick]

Are you commending your mother for putting her foot down on you at a certain point? Because, that's obviously not allowing you to explore whatever you want. I don't think children should be allowed to explore whatever they want; they are not capable of raising themselves. Hence, there should be temporary limitations imposed by parents and/or caregivers, teachers, and society; there are still such limitations in place (around sex, for example). I tend towards the opinion that gender and/or sexual identity fall into the field of matters about which kids don't have enough experience to make sound decisions on.

The author of a letter to the editor recently published in a newspaper raised an interesting point: A child under the age of 12 who murdered another child is regarded as being not responsilble for his actions because his capability of understanding and reasoning is so limited, yet an 11 year old girl who chooses to identify herself as a boy is adulated for her "bravery" and everyone immediately falls over one another to accomodate her.

I'm not transgender. Even during those couple of years (8-10) when i wanted to dress like a boy, I would get upset when people thought I was a boy. That's because my gender identity was female even though my gender expression wasn't. You can't really compare it to someone who from day one has known they were in the wrong body.

As for comparing it to a kid that murders?!? Really? I need to explain the difference here?

Edited September 7, 2013 by BC_chick

[Guest American Woman]

Eleven is too young to make such a decision. Once puberty hits, perhaps the hormonal changes would make this girl feel differently. At any rate, eleven is too young to make life altering decisions; it's why children aren't legally allowed to do the same things adults are. If she wants to live her life and identify as a boy, that's one thing. To prevent nature from taking its course until she's old enough to legally make such decisions herself is quite another.

[gunrutz]

Eleven is too young to make such a decision. Once puberty hits, perhaps the hormonal changes would make this girl feel differently. At any rate, eleven is too young to make life altering decisions; it's why children aren't legally allowed to do the same things adults are. If she wants to live her life and identify as a boy, that's one thing. To prevent nature from taking its course until she's old enough to legally make such decisions herself is quite another.

Of course its too young by any reasonable measure, unfortunately the unreasonable are in charge, which means that there are no standards no limits, because all of that is bad, morailty is a dirty word, let him or her dress whoever they please, but taking actions that could fundamentally alter someones biology before their brains have fully developed to a point where they can make a mature decision is just wrong. Earlier in the thread someone on the pro side accused somone of making a childish argument, but for some reason they think this child cant be making the same child like decision.

[BC_chick]

Eleven is too young to make such a decision. Once puberty hits, perhaps the hormonal changes would make this girl feel differently. At any rate, eleven is too young to make life altering decisions; it's why children aren't legally allowed to do the same things adults are. If she wants to live her life and identify as a boy, that's one thing. To prevent nature from taking its course until she's old enough to legally make such decisions herself is quite another.

She's not making any decisions to do anything 'life-altering' unless you consider dressing like a boy life-altering. Trust me, it's not, and I'm not even transgender.

As for children under twelve not being charged for crimes... the context of this subject really irks me. A child murdered another living being. Somehow this is going to be discussed in the same conversation where there is no victim and it's a kid doing absolutely nothing but synchorizing their gender-identity and gender-expression?!

One is nobody's business and in the other an innocent child DIED. Honestly, it was gross the first time the two were juxtaposed in a discussion, but it's really bad to see it continue.

ETA, and if you're not continuing gbambino's discussion about criminal negligence under 12 when you say 'children aren't legally allowed to do the same things adults are', then my apologies in advance. You posted right after my response to him/her so I can't tell.

Edited September 8, 2013 by BC_chick

[Guest American Woman]

She's not making any decisions to do anything 'life-altering' unless you consider dressing like a boy life-altering. Trust me, it's not, and I'm not even transgender.

No, I don't consider "dressing like a boy life-altering," and trust me, your having dressed like a boy has absolutely nothing to do with my views on this.

What IS life altering, what I was referring to, is this: Wren has started monthly drug injections to pause female puberty.

ETA, and if you're not continuing gbambino's discussion about criminal negligence under 12 when you say 'children aren't legally allowed to do the same things adults are', then my apologies in advance. You posted right after my response to him/her so I can't tell.

I didn't say one word about children under 12 not be charged for a crime, and since adults aren't allowed to kill anyone either, my comment would hardly apply; but gbambino makes a point - the reason children under 12 aren't charged is because of the advancement, or lack thereof, of their development.

You claim that this is nobody's business, so I'm curious. What about a parent withholding medical care because of religious beliefs? Do you also consider that nobody's business?

Edited September 8, 2013 by American Woman