As Kids, They Thought They Were Trans. They No Longer Do. (or why it's ok for parents to question)

[SpankyMcFarland]

I wouldn’t have a strong opinion on pronouns either way. 

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

 

In all the media I've seen on this, all they do is get reactions from people in the queer community and how they feel about it. Haven't seen them talk to one single parent to ask them their views however. 

What exactlyvdo you think is wrong with that?

Some coverage is better than others.  

If a government bans something that isn't happening and makes a big show of it, the it's about politics and virtue signaling not problem solving.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-gender-affirming-care-guidelines/

[Michael Hardner]

13 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

 They should be allowed to make such important decisions only when they've reached the 'age of reason'. 

I was thinking this way too, until I read up on the legal background. The justice system and medical community have decided that maturity to make decisions over one's own body is variable.

That is to say it doesn't happen at any specific age.  The doctor can assess the patient and decide if they have domain. Underage children can have abortions without their parents knowledge, I think. Also therapies fall into this category.

 

[OftenWrong]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Some coverage is better than others.  

If a government bans something that isn't happening and makes a big show of it, the it's about politics and virtue signaling not problem solving.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-gender-affirming-care-guidelines/

You claim it is 'not happening' which is probably false. The things addressed in this legislation are happening, although low in number of incidence. Yet that number began rising dramatically, specifically the number of young people expressing interest or desire to undergo sex change procedures in Canada.

Here is a link, although the data discusses recent US stats. -

Canada too quick to treat gender dysphoria in minors with hormones, surgery

"A major, ongoing U.S. college health study found the percentage of students identifying as transgender or gender non-conforming soared from about .05 per cent between 2008 and 2015 to three to four per cent recently."

But I have read similar info about the sudden increase in interest in Canada. You can find your own links, if you want to educate yourself.

Second, why has there been such a level of media attention to the subject, both in news and social media? This is what sways public interest. Politicians are not just pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

Third, I've shown you in the past where a Teacher's association provides info and resources to teachers in Ontario about teaching wokism in the classroom, when you doubted it. Do you remember that? Part of this legislation regulates the types of materials, books that are permitted to be used in elementary schools, requiring sex ed materials to be approved before they can be given to students.

That doesn't mean they cannot be used, or that this material cannot be taught at all.

Bottom line, this is an issue that stands out strongly in the media. Trudeau has already weighed in, attacking Danielle Smith and her policy.

 

Evidently he finds it important to discuss, at the highest level.

 

[OftenWrong]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I was thinking this way too, until I read up on the legal background. The justice system and medical community have decided that maturity to make decisions over one's own body is variable.

That is to say it doesn't happen at any specific age.  The doctor can assess the patient and decide if they have domain. Underage children can have abortions without their parents knowledge, I think. Also therapies fall into this category.

 

As a parent who raised three kids, from both genders, I am absolutely against giving them autonomy to make decisions that will affect the rest of their lives before they are mature enough to understand.

The role of government and lawyers, or medical boards goes too far if they think they have the right to interact privately with my child without my knowledge. I am their legal guardian. Not some committee or chivatto in a federal office. That is crossing the line.

Edited February 4 by OftenWrong

[Perspektiv]

41 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

The role of government and lawyers, or medical boards goes too far if they think they have the right to interact privately with my child without my knowledge. I am their legal guardian. Not some committee or chivatto in a federal office. That is crossing the line.

I can't believe people are okay with that level of government overreach.

[OftenWrong]

4 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

I can't believe people are okay with that level of government overreach.

Too many years of liberal poison causing permanent structural changes, and now too little, too late to be redeemed. The poor f*cker is struggling with identity.

I mean Canada of course...

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

1. You claim it is 'not happening' which is probably false. The things addressed in this legislation are happening, although low in number of incidence.  

2. But I have read similar info about the sudden increase in interest in Canada. You can find your own links, if you want to educate yourself.

3. Second, why has there been such a level of media attention to the subject, both in news and social media? This is what sways public interest. Politicians are not just pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

4. Do you remember that? 

1. Did you read the Globe article.  Some parts of the legislation address things that aren't happening, while others address non problems already addressed.

2. Proof is on your claims, but I have read about this as I posted above.

3. People get emotional over this.  If it bleeds it leads.

4. I don't see any point in tying this to other topics like teaching racism.

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

 

1. As a parent who raised three kids, from both genders, I am absolutely against giving them autonomy to make decisions that will affect the rest of their lives before they are mature enough to understand.

1. How about an abortion?  The thing is, your authority as a parent is limited by the state.  I get that you're against this and I empathize.

[OftenWrong]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Did you read the Globe article.  Some parts of the legislation address things that aren't happening, while others address non problems already addressed.

2. Proof is on your claims, but I have read about this as I posted above.

3. People get emotional over this.  If it bleeds it leads.

4. I don't see any point in tying this to other topics like teaching racism.

1. How about an abortion?  The thing is, your authority as a parent is limited by the state.  I get that you're against this and I empathize.

The legislation covers some aspects of teaching in schools, I include the topic broadly under 'wokism'.

I often provide links to substantiate my claims, and it from these that I form my opinions after reading. Is not about how I feel so much as what I find out. Being well informed is more important than judging from my own personal sphere, of which these things hardly touch and SEEM irrelevant.

Do I wish that government would stay focused on their limited role to run the economy and legislate? Of course. But is not what we have now. Politics an stuff.

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Some coverage is better than others.  

If a government bans something that isn't happening and makes a big show of it, the it's about politics and virtue signaling not problem solving.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-gender-affirming-care-guidelines/

If the gov't bans something that isn't happening and it doesn't affect anything just shut up and get on with your day. Trying to make ANY news about it just feeds the stupid.

But that's not what happened here at the tend of the day.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1. The legislation covers some aspects of teaching in schools, I include the topic broadly under 'wokism'.

2. Do I wish that government would stay focused on their limited role to run the economy and legislate? Of course. But is not what we have now. Politics an stuff.

1. I don't think that term is very helpful. As Donald Trump himself pointed out, nobody can define it except maybe as a flagship campaign strategy for failed candidate Ron DeSantis.  And the OP bases it's case on statements from the founding psychologist of the first pediatric gender Care clinic in the USA.  I doubt Melissa would call her anti-woke.

2. Now that you've admitted that the government needs to intervene in the current situation, you can look at what's happening and make a comment. That's about right for the public sphere.

The New York Times has now upped the ante by challenging liberal views on this topic.

48 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

1. If the gov't bans something that isn't happening and it doesn't affect anything just shut up and get on with your day.  

2. But that's not what happened here at the tend of the day.

1. At best we can admit that they're just playing politics, which seems to be what you're saying. At worst we can say it's virtue signaling.

2. That's exactly what happened. If you read the Globe and mail article, there are some points explaining why.

 

[WestCanMan]

On 2/3/2024 at 4:28 AM, Michael Hardner said:

The New York Times article is really good.

 

But the main point of it is this

“What should be a medical and psychological issue has been morphed into a political one,” Powell lamented during our conversation. “It’s a mess.”  

Who turned it into a political issue? 

This was presented by the wokies as an absolute necessity and then backed by woke leftist leaders who also push every other woke BS narrative having to do with trans, and kids, such as the sharing of girls' bathrooms, man-ho storytime for kiddies, etc.

It's true that this shouldn't be political in nature, only because it's not even a realistic topic to begin with. Schools, guidance counsellors and doctors never should have tried to muscle parents out of the discussion, period.

I think that leftists are just realizing now how far underwater they are on this issue so they're back-tracking to higher ground. 

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. Who turned it into a political issue? 

2. This was presented by the wokies as an absolute necessity and then backed by woke leftist leaders who also push every other woke BS narrative having to do with trans, and kids, such as the sharing of girls' bathrooms, man-ho storytime for kiddies, etc.

3. It's true that this shouldn't be political in nature, only because it's not even a realistic topic to begin with. Schools, guidance counsellors and doctors never should have tried to muscle parents out of the discussion, period.

4. I think that leftists are just realizing now how far underwater they are on this issue so they're back-tracking to higher ground. 

1. I would say the culture warriors.
2. You sound like a culture warrior.  A trans girl using the bathroom isn't a big deal, shouldn't be and for sure is none of your concern.
3. Now the Government of Alberta is muscling parents out of the discussion.  If you don't want counsellors and doctors involved, how do you expect it to happen ?  No counselling ?  No doctors ?
4. Sounds more like DeSantis' campaign actually.  

You should read the Globe article and the NY Times one.  They're informative.

[Zeitgeist]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I was thinking this way too, until I read up on the legal background. The justice system and medical community have decided that maturity to make decisions over one's own body is variable.

That is to say it doesn't happen at any specific age.  The doctor can assess the patient and decide if they have domain. Underage children can have abortions without their parents knowledge, I think. Also therapies fall into this category.

 

Correct.  The state has deemed itself more worthy of providing moral guidance to youth than parents, once they reach 16.

31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say the culture warriors.
2. You sound like a culture warrior.  A trans girl using the bathroom isn't a big deal, shouldn't be and for sure is none of your concern.
3. Now the Government of Alberta is muscling parents out of the discussion.  If you don't want counsellors and doctors involved, how do you expect it to happen ?  No counselling ?  No doctors ?
4. Sounds more like DeSantis' campaign actually.  

You should read the Globe article and the NY Times one.  They're informative.

You presume that doctors and educators are neutral parties but parents are not. Why? Their professionalism? You see the ideology dominating our disciplines through their various colleges of certification.

Quite simply no one is neutral, but the family unit, which can only be run by the parents, must take precedence over the state.  This is basic subsidiarity.  Parents know their kids because they’re with them the most and home is the most local society that exists to a child.

Quite simply, until a child reaches adulthood, parental guidance and discretion is as sacred as the rights of an individual adult.  Child rearing certainly must reside primarily with the parents, not the state’.

Edited February 4 by Zeitgeist

[WestCanMan]

28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say the culture warriors.

Not entirely true, but definitely the leaders and SJWs from the left were the ones who managed to make this stupid topic into "a thing". 

Quote

2. You sound like a culture warrior.  A trans girl using the bathroom isn't a big deal, shouldn't be and for sure is none of your concern.

No? Not a big deal?

How is it that you pretend to be the president of the Bleeding Hearts Club and yet you don't care about the fact that guys can pretend to be girls to get into the other bathroom?

If you had a daughter going into grade 8, and starting HS where there were boys who had access to the girls' bathroom, would you suddenly care?

Why does something have to affect you personally you before you care? 

Why would you put the rights of a single trans person ahead of the rights of every single girl in a school? 

Quote

3. Now the Government of Alberta is muscling parents out of the discussion.  If you don't want counsellors and doctors involved, how do you expect it to happen ?  No counselling ?  No doctors ?

Doctors, counsellors, and parents. 3 parties to the conversation, and only 1 vote.

Quote

4. Sounds more like DeSantis' campaign actually.  

He's a good governor and a bad campaigner. He tried to run his campaign in the modern, mealy mouthed, nasty way that is all too normal today and it wasn't necessary in his position. He should have calmly and kindly referred to his resume and left it at that. He did refer to his successes a lot, but he was always edgy and bitter about it. It was hard to watch. 

Quote

You should read the Globe article and the NY Times one.  They're informative.

I don't read NYT for the same reason I don't drink from the toilet. 

Edited February 4 by WestCanMan

[Zeitgeist]

7 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

You claim it is 'not happening' which is probably false. The things addressed in this legislation are happening, although low in number of incidence. Yet that number began rising dramatically, specifically the number of young people expressing interest or desire to undergo sex change procedures in Canada.

Here is a link, although the data discusses recent US stats. -

Canada too quick to treat gender dysphoria in minors with hormones, surgery

"A major, ongoing U.S. college health study found the percentage of students identifying as transgender or gender non-conforming soared from about .05 per cent between 2008 and 2015 to three to four per cent recently."

But I have read similar info about the sudden increase in interest in Canada. You can find your own links, if you want to educate yourself.

Second, why has there been such a level of media attention to the subject, both in news and social media? This is what sways public interest. Politicians are not just pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

Third, I've shown you in the past where a Teacher's association provides info and resources to teachers in Ontario about teaching wokism in the classroom, when you doubted it. Do you remember that? Part of this legislation regulates the types of materials, books that are permitted to be used in elementary schools, requiring sex ed materials to be approved before they can be given to students.

That doesn't mean they cannot be used, or that this material cannot be taught at all.

Bottom line, this is an issue that stands out strongly in the media. Trudeau has already weighed in, attacking Danielle Smith and her policy.

 

Evidently he finds it important to discuss, at the highest level.

 

Trudeau sounds like a dumb naive 20 year old.  No one is picking on trans kids.  This guy is so out of his depth on what the issues are.

[Michael Hardner]

21 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Correct.  The state has deemed itself more worthy of providing moral guidance to youth than parents, once they reach 16.

2. You presume that doctors and educators are neutral parties but parents are not.

3.  Parents know their kids because they’re with them the most and home is the most local society that exists to a child.

4. Quite simply, until a child reaches adulthood, parental guidance and discretion is as sacred as the rights of an individual adult.  

5. Child rearing certainly must reside primarily with the parents, not the state’.

1. I didn't say this.

2. I didn't say this.

3. I agree, and this is the practice in general.

4. I don't think that I agree 100%, nor is that the practice or legal precedent.

5. I agree, and this is the practice in general.

[Michael Hardner]

22 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. Not entirely true, but definitely the leaders and SJWs from the left were the ones who managed to make this stupid topic into "a thing". 

2. No? Not a big deal?

3. would you suddenly care?

4. Why does something have to affect you personally you before you care? 

5. Why would you put the rights of a single trans person ahead of the rights of every single girl in a school? 

6. Doctors, counsellors, and parents. 3 parties to the conversation, and only 1 vote.

7. It was hard to watch. 

8. I don't read NYT for the same reason I don't drink from the toilet. 

1. I think that the problems started when this became a culture war battle.

2. No

3. No.

4. It doesn't.

5. I don't.

6. So, you're tripping over yourself.  From this statement, you agree with me and you disagree with the Alberta bill.

7. I think they did poor research in thinking that the dumb war on wokeness would resonate with the electorate. If you're going to be a one note candidate then pick something impactful like the economy.

8. How about the globe and mail? If you read that then you wouldn't have tripped yourself up as you did in 6.

20 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Trudeau sounds like a dumb naive 20 year old.  No one is picking on trans kids.  This guy is so out of his depth on what the issues are.

I want to be clear that Trudeau is using this issue the same way the Alberta premiere is.

How many people does this really affect? And you've got provincial and national leaders using it to get points.

If Trudeau really cared, he'd say nothing and just wait for all of this to die in the courts.

[WestCanMan]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I think that the problems started when this became a culture war battle.

2. No

3. No.

4. It doesn't.

5. I don't.

6. So, you're tripping over yourself.  From this statement, you agree with me and you disagree with the Alberta bill.

7. I think they did poor research in thinking that the dumb war on wokeness would resonate with the electorate. If you're going to be a one note candidate then pick something impactful like the economy.

8. How about the globe and mail? If you read that then you wouldn't have tripped yourself up as you did in 6.

1. The problem is that some people think it's a topic for discussion. It's not. Parents decide, others discuss. 

2, 3, 4. Your lack of foresight is duly noted

5. Allowing a genetic boy/young man into the girls' bathroom absolutely does affect the rights of every girl in the school

6. Doctors and counsellors can discuss, like always, but parents get the final say, period. There's nothing new or controversial about that. 

7. I think he just did a monkey see, monkey do. It's hard to not get sucked into doing what others are dong successfully.

8. Maybe. I'm not a fan of Canadian media in general. The ones that aren't actively part of the problem aren't calling out the ones who need to be called out. 

[Zeitgeist]

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I didn't say this.

2. I didn't say this.

3. I agree, and this is the practice in general.

4. I don't think that I agree 100%, nor is that the practice or legal precedent.

5. I agree, and this is the practice in general.

Because you support kids at 16 getting procedures without their parents’ consent.  You seem always to affirm whatever is legislated.  It’s like you’re afraid of having an opinion counter to the status quo.

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. The problem is that some people think it's a topic for discussion. It's not. Parents decide, others discuss. 

2, 3, 4. Your lack of foresight is duly noted

5. Allowing a genetic boy/young man into the girls' bathroom absolutely does affect the rights of every girl in the school

6. Doctors and counsellors can discuss, like always, but parents get the final say, period. There's nothing new or controversial about that. 

7. I think he just did a monkey see, monkey do. It's hard to not get sucked into doing what others are dong successfully.

8. Maybe. I'm not a fan of Canadian media in general. The ones that aren't actively part of the problem aren't calling out the ones who need to be called out. 

1. Yes. Some people decided it was a topic for discussion, more accurately for the culture wars. That's why you're posting about it.

5. Maybe slightly? There's a trade off for everything and I think this one is pretty minor.

6. You keep talking past my point so I'll just stop.

7. Maybe so, but he took over the fight and led the conversation for a while there.

8. I think the catch phrase that applies here is we report, you decide?

16 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Because you support kids at 16 getting procedures without their parents’ consent.

 2. You seem always to affirm whatever is legislated.  It’s like you’re afraid of having an opinion counter to the status quo.

1. I definitely did not say that. Also that's mostly not happening.

2. Well in this case I'm doing the opposite of that right?

 

[-TSS-]

People need to realise that there is a difference in the sense that if you follow the media you could be fooled to believe that all this woke and trans-stuff is something completely mainstream but if you actually go out to the real world you very rarely encounter these people. It is a very marginal group of people bigged up by the media.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

People need to realise that there is a difference in the sense that if you follow the media you could be fooled to believe that all this woke and trans-stuff is something completely mainstream but if you actually go out to the real world you very rarely encounter these people. It is a very marginal group of people bigged up by the media.

And yet politically dangerous.

Which is why the federal conservatives told their MPs to not comment. If this was such a groundswell of support for this stuff, you think they'd be all over it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/politics/article-conservatives-tell-mps-not-to-comment-on-alberta-transgender-policies/

 

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. At best we can admit that they're just playing politics, which seems to be what you're saying. At worst we can say it's virtue signaling.

what i said was if YOU think they're playing politics ignore them.  Best way to deal with that.  It ruins showboating if noone watches the show.

Quote

That's exactly what happened. If you read the Globe and mail article, there are some points explaining why.

It isn't.  But those who disagree with it will pretend it is, and especialy those on the left. I've called you out before for the lefty game of downplaying anything that others bring up they don't want to deal with.  What? This? Why are we even taking about it?! It's nothing! Never happened! What?!

Yeah. Well that kind of nonsense is what leads to these laws and i don't know that this is over yet.

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

1. It isn't.  

1. I guess you didn't read the Globe article?

"In her announcement on social media Wednesday, Ms. Smith said Alberta will not permit top and bottom gender-reassignment surgeries for people younger than 18 years old.  

In reality, no bottom surgeries are performed on minors anywhere in Canada."

Let's do like the Conservatives and move on.  I'm heartened that Poilievre, has he gets closer to power, is shying away from this rabble/rebel rousing stuff.