Transgender Issues

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

1. They are grooming perfectly healthy kids to question their gender. 

2. Pushing this to kids on a mainstream level

1. It seems to me now that you have misunderstood the context that the word 'grooming' is used for.  It's intended to imply directly that people are intending to assault the child.  Is this how you are using it? If not, you should desist.

2. Mainstream medicine is not allowing irreversible changes to be foisted on children.  If you find abuses or mistakes in the system, it doesn't mean that the system is irredeemable.

[Perspektiv]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's intended to imply directly that people are intending to assault the child. 

Or abuse them:

• Victim selection: Abusers often prey on the vulnerable or easily accessible. IE A youth that is totally lost.
• Gaining access and isolating the victim: Abusers will attempt to physically or emotionally separate a victim from those protecting them. IE schools keeping transitioning from parents. Social media influencers seeking privacy with children. Disturbing if men do it, but if you identify as they/them, nobody bats an eye?
• Trust development and keeping secrets: No need to elaborate here.
• Attempt by abusers to make their behavior seem natural, to avoid raising suspicions. What gender? 

Only difference is kids aren't being molested. They are being sold the questionable meal that they don't have genders and now have support to get care.

No problem if the youth has gender dysphoria.

Disturbing if they are simply questioning, but then transition and regret.

I left out the push and pull abuse tactics that leave victims off balance, to where they don't even realize what they dealing with is abuse.

They only know once they try to get out.

Look at any detransitioner speaking up. 

This is a community that cares for its people? Sounds about right as long as the ideology is advanced.

[Perspektiv]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Mainstream medicine is not allowing irreversible changes to be foisted on children

Hormone blockers are irreversible.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

Hormone blockers are irreversible.

And they not only affect the child, but they can also leave the child sterile so it affects their ability to ever bring another human into the world as well and that may not seem like a big deal when you're 8 but it can be crippling emotionally when you're an adult.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Hormone blockers are irreversible.

Never looked into it before.  I googled and read this, which disagrees with you.

 

https://www.healthline.com/health/are-puberty-blockers-reversible

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Or abuse them:

•  

Only difference is kids aren't being molested. They are being sold the questionable meal that they don't have genders and now have support to get care.

 

Pretty selective use of the term groomer.  I think it's borderline dishonest to call people that without knowing what is in their hearts.

It's like me calling religious people groomers.  I disagree with demonizing your opponents this way.

I thought you were a more respectful debater.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Pretty selective use of the term groomer.  I think it's borderline dishonest to call people that without knowing what is in their hearts.

It's like me calling religious people groomers.  I disagree with demonizing your opponents this way.

I thought you were a more respectful debater.

"Rather than refute your argument i will point out that you're a bad person for making it".

The ultimate ad hominem   What a putz.

[Perspektiv]

27 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Pretty selective use of the term groomer. 

Not really. 

28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

without knowing what is in their hearts.

Sorry, but telling kids they don't have a gender, making them confused about who they are, then telling them they can divorce their parents and make these people their family, sounds like grooming to me. 

I have seen so many more kids confused about their gender. I was a teen and confused about my sexuality. I can only imagine how much more distressing not knowing your gender could be. 

I used to be part of such a community. And seeing thousands of people questioning what gender that they are, was mind boggling to me.

Being a teen is confusing enough. This doesn't help anyone. It hurts the cause as creates more opposition on top of the risk in dragging along collateral kids in your quests to help kids who suffer from gender dysphoria.

Regarding their hearts, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, as you know. 

Its possible to love someone too much that you wind up hurting them. 

Worse even, be blind to it due to that love.

33 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's like me calling religious people groomers.

Many religious groups are. If your end game ends up hurting many I would say its perfectly fitting. 

IE churches that enforce tithing a percentage of your pay as a must, even if a person is in debt. This is grooming, and doesn't benefit anyone but the church abusing of the faith people have in it. 

Churches are some of the most protected entities socially,  but doesn't make it right. Heck, you technically described the current trans movement beautifully.

38 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I thought you were a more respectful debater

Have I personally disrespected you, or am I challenging the point you are making that I disagree with?

While you may not like the point I made, does this equate a lack of respect for someone you're debating with? 

[Michael Hardner]

16 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Sorry, but telling kids they don't have a gender, making them confused about who they are, then telling them they can divorce their parents and make these people their family, sounds like grooming to me. 

 

Yeah but nobody listening to you would figure out what you meant if you called someone a groomer in this context without further discussion.

You're using deceptive practices.

Very slippery.

I believe that both sides of an argument need to agree on terminology.  Otherwise, are you fine with me using whatever word I find justified to describe you?

[Perspektiv]

38 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Otherwise, are you fine with me using whatever word I find justified to describe you?

I have been called every name in the book, including every racial slur. I mean, down to having been spit on and told to go back to my country, to projectiles thrown from a speeding car in another racially charged attack, which luckily only resulted in bruising, etc.

I could quite confidently say that if anyone sunk to that level, that I wouldn't be affected. My skin is quite thick.

Heck, had someone mock my mothers death and I played along to their shock. I was cracking jokes at her funeral. Am wired different.

I don't demand for people to treat me in any way. I have earned every ounce of my professional respect. I don't expect for it to be given to me.

Someone doesn't like me because am black, or a woman clutches her purse because I am walking near her, is part and parcel with having my skin tone.

I guess its hard for me to feel sympathy for this community not because they aren't facing similar challenges to us, but the sheer entitlement level in some, is sickening.

53 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

if you called someone a groomer

I am eluding to just like Mormon churches, where you manipulate people into potentially doing something destructive in the name of the collective gains, but discarding individual ones. 

Find me detransitioners who are supported by the trans community.

If this community genuinely was trying to protect people, don't you think that one of the most protected would be someone who regretted transitioning? 

Has nothing to do with protecting people, and everything to do with advancing an agenda. 

Harder to fight an agenda when its is being introduced into preschool, and taught in a way to make if seem trendy, when many truly suffering from dysphoria are anything but.

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

I have been called every name in the book, including every racial slur. I mean, down to having been spit on and told to go back to my country, to projectiles thrown from a speeding car in another racially charged attack, which luckily only resulted in bruising, etc.

I could quite confidently say that if anyone sunk to that level, that I wouldn't be affected. My skin is quite thick.

Heck, had someone mock my mothers death and I played along to their shock. I was cracking jokes at her funeral. Am wired different.

I don't demand for people to treat me in any way. I have earned every ounce of my professional respect. I don't expect for it to be given to me.

Someone doesn't like me because am black, or a woman clutches her purse because I am walking near her, is part and parcel with having my skin tone.

I guess its hard for me to feel sympathy for this community not because they aren't facing similar challenges to us, but the sheer entitlement level in some, is sickening.

I am eluding to just like Mormon churches, where you manipulate people into potentially doing something destructive in the name of the collective gains, but discarding individual ones. 

Find me detransitioners who are supported by the trans community.

If this community genuinely was trying to protect people, don't you think that one of the most protected would be someone who regretted transitioning? 

Has nothing to do with protecting people, and everything to do with advancing an agenda. 

Harder to fight an agenda when its is being introduced into preschool, and taught in a way to make if seem trendy, when many truly suffering from dysphoria are anything but.

Very long post to admit that you are going to continue to use deceptive language.

 

[Perspektiv]

30 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Very long post to admit that you are going to continue to use deceptive language

On that we can agree to disagree.

[Michael Hardner]

18 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

On that we can agree to disagree.

How?  Are you saying 'groomer' communicates something else clearly?

 

Because your post is about something else .. activists and you being called names.

[Perspektiv]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are you saying 'groomer' communicates something else clearly?

Yes. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I wasn't clear.

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Because your post is about something else

In your opinion.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

1. Yes. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I wasn't clear.

2. In your opinion.

1. 2. Where did you address the epistemic issue of word meaning.  I think that I missed it.  

You talked about other things but didn't address the core issue of word meaning.

[Perspektiv]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Where did you address the epistemic issue of word meaning

In this thread.

[Michael Hardner]

30 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

In this thread.

The Mormon analogy ?

 

Really weak.  Anyone could use the term groomer if that were legitimate.

 

 

[Perspektiv]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The Mormon analogy ?

No. 

That was me using your use of religion to refute the point I had already been making. 

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

No. 

That was me using your use of religion to refute the point I had already been making. 

This is even weaker

 

"Only difference is kids aren't being molested. They are being sold the questionable meal that they don't have genders and now have support to get care."

You're actively taking part in the sh1t show of exaggeration and shrieking that is the culture war.  You have no business taking the high road here.  You should debate responsibility.

[Perspektiv]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

This is even weaker

In your opinion. 

24 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You should debate responsibility.

You just don't agree with the points I made. Doesn't make them wrong.

[Americana Antifa]

18 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

They are grooming perfectly healthy kids to question their gender. 

Do you have any examples of this? Any evidence that it's happening on a large scale?

 

18 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Its considered transphobic to consider gender as a binary. 

By who? Who says it's transphobic? It is objectively wrong, but it's not transphobic.

[Perspektiv]

5 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

Do you have any examples of this?

Numbers don't lie. There has been a sudden spike in children identifying as trans. A growing number of detransitioners. One that likely will grow along with litigation.

Adults over 18 identifying as trans has remained relatively stable. 

Why is that? Why is it that the volume changes dramatically from some states to others?

Just maybe kids are being groomed and radicalized to questioning their gender and given "supportive" environments to do so. 

5 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

By who?

Typically newspapers or newspapers, who have obviously adopted "inclusive" language.

It is considered bigoted, or I have seen scathing articles denouncing those who openly stated there were two genders of having bigoted views. Not transphobic, as it would ignore those who identify as non binary.

But in my opinion, to prove it is bigoted, one would need to quantify how many genders that there are, in order to state that stating there are two is incorrect or worse, bigoted.

[Americana Antifa]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Numbers don't lie. There has been a sudden spike in children identifying as trans. A growing number of detransitioners. One that likely will grow along with litigation.

When being left-handed stopped being taboo, there was a spike in left-handedness.

 

When gay marriage became legal at the national level, there was a spike in gay relationships.

 

The spike we're seeing now with trans people is just the result of people feeling comfortable in being openly trans. Eventually, the numbers will even out just like with homosexuality and left-handedness. Though with the current push for trans genocide from the Right, we might start seeing a reversal. 

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Adults over 18 identifying as trans has remained relatively stable. 

Of course. Adults grew up when being trans was less acceptable.

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Why is that? Why is it that the volume changes dramatically from some states to others?

Isn't it obvious? In some states, being trans is way less acceptable. Same reason there are "no" gay people in Iran.

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Just maybe kids are being groomed and radicalized to questioning their gender and given "supportive" environments to do so. 

Do you have any reason to believe that's happening? That kids are being groomed and radicalized, as opposed to just being taught that gay and trans people exist?

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

It is considered bigoted, or I have seen scathing articles denouncing those who openly stated there were two genders of having bigoted views. Not transphobic, as it would ignore those who identify as non binary.

That's because transphobes, being stupid, think this is an argument against trans people. It's like the ancient "I identify as a helicopter" joke.

I'm sure there are some people who say there's only two genders in good faith, they honestly don't know the difference between sex and gender. But this is pretty much only said by transphobes. 

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

But in my opinion, to prove it is bigoted, one would need to quantify how many genders that there are, in order to state that stating there are two is incorrect or worse, bigoted.

It's incorrect because gender is a social concept. Society determines how many genders there are, which is why there have always been societies that recognize three genders.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

You just don't agree with the points I made. Doesn't make them wrong.

You are saying that teaching kids things that are incorrect, in your view, is legitimately called grooming, in your view.

 

You're stretching language to a degree where it becomes elastic.

 

I believe that you are obliged to use words that both sides agree on, that are not loaded or deceptive or disingenuous.

Do you agree with that precept?

I have been agreeing with the reluctance to use the word woman, in mixed company anyway, as anything but a biological term 

Do you see how I'm being fair to you, and you are not accommodating fire the same rule? That is, you are demanding to use language in a way that you specify in both instances and not offering give and take.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

When being left-handed stopped being taboo, there was a spike in left-handedness.

 

When gay marriage became legal at the national level, there was a spike in gay relationships.

 

The spike we're seeing now with trans people is just the result of people feeling comfortable in being openly trans. Eventually, the numbers will even out just like with homosexuality and left-handedness. Though with the current push for trans genocide from the Right, we might start seeing a reversal. 

Of course. Adults grew up when being trans was less acceptable.

Isn't it obvious? In some states, being trans is way less acceptable. Same reason there are "no" gay people in Iran.

Do you have any reason to believe that's happening? That kids are being groomed and radicalized, as opposed to just being taught that gay and trans people exist?

That's because transphobes, being stupid, think this is an argument against trans people. It's like the ancient "I identify as a helicopter" joke.

I'm sure there are some people who say there's only two genders in good faith, they honestly don't know the difference between sex and gender. But this is pretty much only said by transphobes. 

It's incorrect because gender is a social concept. Society determines how many genders there are, which is why there have always been societies that recognize three genders.

And once again Antifa has to lie to make her point.

THe 'spike' in left handedness is based on a survey and given the numbers is more likely a statistical blip than real.  If you blow up the graph  enough it kind of looks impressive tho.

The second graph is not the number of gay relationships -ITS THE NUMBER OF GAY MARRIED COUPLES!   SO AMAZINGLY AFTER GAY MARRAGE WAS LEGALIZED MORE GAYS GOT MARRIED!! IT"S A MIRACLE!!!!

What a stupid argument. 

The sudden increase is children with gender issues is not normal and it's scaring professionals.

But lets listen to a real expert - Dr Susan Brady who's a specialist in transgender kids.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/susan-bradley-how-trans-activists-are-unethically-influencing-autistic-children-to-change-genders

It began, commendably, as activism for the rights of that very small number of people who experience persisting discomfort with their biological gender. But it has evolved into an ideological movement to normalize the practice of changing genders — and in the process is crossing ethical lines with a particularly vulnerable subset of young people struggling with issues of gender identity.