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

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

In Canada, nobody can have gender reassignment surgery until they reach the age of majority, 18 or 19.

 

One can take hormone blockers at a younger age. One can have their gender identity affirmed from being a toddler. One also can have the garbage sold to them their body parts can be put on them by error. Or assigned, if you prefer vague speak.

The effects of these, aren't fully known and won't be known until that segment of the population ages.

Someone telling you something that fully alters how a body acts and is selling you that there are "no permanent ill effects", is selling you garbage.

What is known however, are the serious side effects that can occur, not limited to bone density and fertility. Again, fully known outcomes and severity are a blank point since how new this trans movement is (not trans people, but woke ideologies like telling people you are somehow assigned a gender even though you're clearly born with a penis or vagina).

Challenge these "thinkers" with their logic, pointing to people who are anorexic and see themselves as fat, or a Caucasian person who feels they were born the wrong color and all of a sudden it just isn't the same.

Tattoos on a child? That's crazy! They can't make such decisions--they need parental guidance.

Changing their gender or altering it? Yeah, that is perfectly normal and fine.

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

1.   We have to have age limits for the same reasons that we have an age restriction for driving.  
2. Making age discretionary will cause excesses.  It already has.   
3. Yes my characterization of the social work profession is accurate, because it’s heavily tainted by politicization and dubious ideology.  
4. It’s part of the same “river to the sea” radicalism that has corrupted higher learning institutions across the West, but social work and public education have been especially influenced to one side of the debate.  You really have to read more widely and get out of your radical leftist bubble, Hardner.

 

1.  They're different things entirely.  Driving isn't based on puberty onset.
2. I don't think that the age thing addresses the problems outlined in the NY Times article though.
3. Since the debate has been rebooted, IMO, by the NY Times article I am going to entertain assertions like this a little more liberally.  But I think the answer would be to enforce the standards that the Dr. in the article talked about.  I still see this as seeming to make sense to an uneducated public.
4. I actually read the article and am entertaining this as a problem.  If you think that the professionals who deal with this are corrupt, making people wait a year doesn't really do much does it ?  Stopping parents and medical people from dealing with obvious cases doesn't do it either.  By going after me, you strike me as someone who wants to indulge in the politics rather than looking at the problem objectively. 

Read my posts again.  If progressive professionals are short-circuiting their professional oaths on this topic, then they're engaging in politics.  If you want to help the kids, you take the politics OUT.  You don't add more.

 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  They're different things entirely.  Driving isn't based on puberty onset.
2. I don't think that the age thing addresses the problems outlined in the NY Times article though.
3. Since the debate has been rebooted, IMO, by the NY Times article I am going to entertain assertions like this a little more liberally.  But I think the answer would be to enforce the standards that the Dr. in the article talked about.  I still see this as seeming to make sense to an uneducated public.
4. I actually read the article and am entertaining this as a problem.  If you think that the professionals who deal with this are corrupt, making people wait a year doesn't really do much does it ?  Stopping parents and medical people from dealing with obvious cases doesn't do it either.  By going after me, you strike me as someone who wants to indulge in the politics rather than looking at the problem objectively. 

Read my posts again.  If progressive professionals are short-circuiting their professional oaths on this topic, then they're engaging in politics.  If you want to help the kids, you take the politics OUT.  You don't add more.

 

Does. Not. Matter.

The fact that puberty happens at a certain time and maturity happens at another time doesnt' change the fact that maturity happens at another time and THAT is when they can make a decision.

Its crappy they have to deal with some shit in between.  But it's less crappy then destroying their ability to reproduce, screwing their body up permanently and THEN saying "oopsie - live with that for the next 60 years" after the fact.

Some kids are born blind. Some kids are born with deformities. Some kids are born autistic or otherwise neurodivergent.  They are ALL going to have difficult childhoods and that sucks - that happens   We should not let the fact that sometimes life sucks lead us to make BAD decisions.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Going to school to get a frequent shit-kicking from the knuckle dragging trogladytes that infest every school is not something anybody does lightly.

I got bullied, too. I took up combat sports, and learned to stick up for myself and my family.

I broke a bully's nose as a child, and started getting a reputation, and with it came respect. People started leaving me alone. You've failed in society, when you rely on safe spaces or your government to protect you. Its a sign you put these people out in the real world, they won't have an ounce of an ability to deal with it.

Welcome to the real world. Its cold. Nobody cares about you. You need to stand up on your own two and carry your own load. Everyone will be stuck within the own suitcases full of the problems they are balancing on their backs.

Selling to these youth that they are what they feel they are and nobody will challenge them on it, is selling them lies. There is nothing normal about it.

There's a push back for a reason.

4 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, no, it is not a trendy hip thing a person does, nor is it a mental illness. 

It was a mental illness up until a decade ago (Gender Identity Disorder until 2013, to be more precise). Why is that? Because it was discovered otherwise? Or the blistering pressure by activist groups to soften the language to remove social stigma? Is treatment required for most or can most be trans without intervention or treatment? That was rhetorical. Sounds like a mental illness.

I see so many youth talking about bandaging their breasts, tucking their penises, or sold the notion that "women can have bulges !" by social influencers. There is no normalizing a bikini with a massive d*** bulge as normal to most of society. People will just let you be, the issue is one demanding it to be normalized.

But you're right--youth don't listen to what is trendy, or what is marketed to them (that was sarcasm).

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Going to school to get a frequent shit-kicking from the knuckle dragging trogladytes that infest every school is not something anybody does lightly. Tragically, some ignorant parents while add to the beatings. So, no, it is not a trendy hip thing a person does, nor is it a mental illness. 

If this is happening then the whole system has failed that one child, from the school board to the police or parents...This issue effects a lot of children, trans or otherwise. If the schools are not protecting our children then there are other routes you can take to prevent all of this....As for some parents being part of the problem, there are solutions for that as well, with many different people trained in what to do if a child is suspected of child abuse....

I think it is trendy, why is it there are more cases of children not happy with their sex than in any other time in history. This is a mental health problem, how could it not be, if some are considering suicide...this has been one of the narratives of the Trans community...It is dangerous, life threatening even...if parents were required approval of any name changes, or different pronouns used...That is a huge red flag that there is a problem and that problem is a mental health issue.,..

 

 

[Zeitgeist]

27 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  They're different things entirely.  Driving isn't based on puberty onset.
2. I don't think that the age thing addresses the problems outlined in the NY Times article though.
3. Since the debate has been rebooted, IMO, by the NY Times article I am going to entertain assertions like this a little more liberally.  But I think the answer would be to enforce the standards that the Dr. in the article talked about.  I still see this as seeming to make sense to an uneducated public.
4. I actually read the article and am entertaining this as a problem.  If you think that the professionals who deal with this are corrupt, making people wait a year doesn't really do much does it ?  Stopping parents and medical people from dealing with obvious cases doesn't do it either.  By going after me, you strike me as someone who wants to indulge in the politics rather than looking at the problem objectively. 

Read my posts again.  If progressive professionals are short-circuiting their professional oaths on this topic, then they're engaging in politics.  If you want to help the kids, you take the politics OUT.  You don't add more.

 

You make the mistake of assuming that there are unbiased people or that “professionals” can check their biases at the door.  Some do a much better job of questioning their assumptions or some are actually quite neutral in their opinions, but far from everyone.  Guardrails are necessary to prevent excesses.  One only has to read articles about Britain’s Tavistock Clinic or the trans doctor who wrote about the hasty and reckless treatments at a similar US clinic.

Some kids could drive a high performance car at age 12 without getting in a car accident, but I wouldn’t want a driving expert discerning who is mature enough to obtain a driver’s licence below age 16.

Edited February 3, 2024 by Zeitgeist

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I think you mean women competing in women's sports. We are talking about people over the age of majority.

Also, do you not have an issue of men competing in men's sports? Or are you discriminating against men? Probably half of trans people are F2M.

 

Has there been a F2M person wanting to compete in professional sports, that was denied...what would they have to offer in any sport, certainly not physical strength, body mass, endurance...it has been proven over and over that women, can not compete with men in any physical sport...

Now for some reason, common sense does not prevail when MtF want to compete against a weaker sex...why would i not want to compete i can go from being average in the men's leagues to a champion by changing my name and wearing a different swim suit...We did not except that when the russians where doping up their females, so why should we accept this unfair advantage now..

What if they had their own league or sport ? 

[Michael Hardner]

40 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

1. Does. Not. Matter.

1. The medical experts say differently.  And legal domain over your body is decided based on maturity, based on Dr.'s opinion and such from what I have read.

But I'm still more interested in the public sphere here.  How to pull professionals back from succumbing to the politics, how to douse the politics charging the issue which seems to be infused in the Alberta Laws.

[Michael Hardner]

23 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. You make the mistake of assuming that there are unbiased people or that “professionals” can check their biases at the door.  
2.  Guardrails are necessary to prevent excesses.  One only has to read articles about Britain’s Tavistock Clinic or the trans doctor who wrote about the hasty and reckless treatments at a similar US clinic.
3. Some kids could drive a high performance car at age 12 without getting in a car accident, but I wouldn’t want a driving expert discerning who is mature enough to obtain a driver’s licence below age 16.

1. 2. No, you haven't read my posts.  I say just the opposite.  You don't need to convince me.
3. Exactly.  They picked the age at which you are physically able to drive.  Puberty happens before 16 in most.

[herbie]

Eggh! Egghh! Some people regret getting tattoos or piercings ! That means it would be good to criminalize getting those until you're 21.

Akk! Akk! Get off my lawn

[Michael Hardner]

21 minutes ago, herbie said:

Eggh! Egghh! Some people regret getting tattoos or piercings ! That means it would be good to criminalize getting those until you're 21.

Akk! Akk! Get off my lawn

Breast surgery for cosmetic reasons, too.  Doesn't seem to come up much.

[herbie]

Yes, I know someone who underwent breast reduction at 18. Ugly scars, ugly! She could never enter wet Tshirt contests in her 20s.

But now she can stand up straight in her 60s without pain meds.

Using people who change their minds about something doesn't make for a case to stop others deciding.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I for one would like to see the left throw out their political perspective on this and come back to the discussion.

It's little more than a fad and a great big distraction. I can't stand the way extremes on both sides of this culture war react to one another and I can't stand the way politicians on both sides exploit that.

There are far far more important issues being neglected and above all else, I really can't stand the way politicians exploit this issue to avoid them. 

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's little more than a fad and a great big distraction. I can't stand the way extremes on both sides of this culture war react to one another and I can't stand the way politicians on both sides exploit that.

There are far far more important issues being neglected and above all else, I really can't stand the way politicians exploit this issue to avoid them. 

Well for sure, this above all but there's a side boost here on this topic, if it can iterate the public discussion for the better.

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Eggh! Egghh! Some people regret getting tattoos or piercings ! That means it would be good to criminalize getting those until you're 21.

Akk! Akk! Get off my lawn

To get a tatoo you have to be at least 18 yo and have a valid government photo ID. 
Don't like that? Too bad. Google it yourself.

You're welcome.

 

[OftenWrong]

23 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I can't stand the way extremes on both sides of this culture war react to one another and I can't stand the way politicians on both sides exploit that.

For sure. All they need to do though, is leave the kids out of it. They should be allowed to make such important decisions only when they've reached the 'age of reason'. Having raised three I'm aware of how naive and vulnerable they are.

I see nothing extreme about that.

Edited February 3, 2024 by OftenWrong

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. The medical experts say differently. 

It's already been noted that this has been politicized even among them and no - it's absolutely false to say that there's consensus there. Many including canadian experts have said outright that there's severe danger in letting the children choose before they're ready regardless of when puberty hits.

but lets see the medical research you're refering to and we'll see what they're actually saying.

Quote

And legal domain over your body is decided based on maturity, based on Dr.'s opinion and such from what I have read.

Nonsense.  We don't determine when someone is old enough to drink, drive, vote, serve in the military etc based on what a doctor says.

 

Quote

But I'm still more interested in the public sphere here.  How to pull professionals back from succumbing to the politics, how to douse the politics charging the issue which seems to be infused in the Alberta Laws.

You can't. Too late.  But you can turn it back to the parents and make sure they know what's going on.  Simple fact is nobody out there will be more motivated than the parents to set aside the politics and care about the child.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, herbie said:

Yes, I know someone who underwent breast reduction at 18.

I think you are missing the issue people are having with this.

You're describing a woman of legal age, choosing to alter her body. 

Okay, and? Where's the issue?

Now, if your post had the age being under 12, and also mentioned her starting birth control due to pregnancies in earlier years, maybe it would have raised a few eyebrows.

2 hours ago, herbie said:

Using people who change their minds about something doesn't make for a case to stop others deciding.

Using children who made life altering decisions at ages where they change their favorite color every other year, does.

Make that child over 18, and this no longer is a problem.

Stop teaching kids that gender is "assigned", and this no longer is a problem.

Stop confusing kids by pushing gay and trans ideology onto them, at ages where everything they see, is taken literally. IE under 12.

Stop lying to people, telling them gender is unlimited. 

Unfortunately many still have brains and free thought. Once eradicated, society won't have a problem pushing this garbage onto others.

Also, if your point was spot on, those that regretted their move would be supported by the trans community. 

Kind of sounds like social pressure to conform at an age where teens are trying to find their identities. 

What could go wrong? (again...sarcasm)

 

[OftenWrong]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

which seems to be infused in the Alberta Laws.

Actually I cheer for what they are doing, and listen with disdain to the visceral attacks on Daniel Smith coming from the media.

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. It really is showing a level of disregard for the opinions and needs of families, whom I suspect are probably pleased with these changes.

The laws don't take these rights away, they simply define an age limit. And yet they DO allow exeptions for minors as long as the parents, doctor and a psychologist agree the young person should be permitted to go through with it.

What exactlyvdo you think is wrong with that?

Edited February 4, 2024 by OftenWrong

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Haven't seen them talk to one single parent to ask them their views however. It really is showing a level of disregard for the opinions and needs of families, whom I suspect are probably pleased with these changes.

Probably  for the best.  The way the media reports it would be like "so ms sanders of 1825 norberry lane, blue house on the right, who takes this specific route to work starting at 9:15 every day and works at ebco and sons where her office is 3rd on the left,  is quite pleased with the new hate laws apperently. "

[OftenWrong]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Probably  for the best.  The way the media reports it would be like "so ms sanders of 1825 norberry lane, blue house on the right, who takes this specific route to work starting at 9:15 every day and works at ebco and sons where her office is 3rd on the left,  is quite pleased with the new hate laws apperently. "

Yeah probably. With Trudeau howling in fury and cheering them on, in blackface and drag.

 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Yeah probably. With Trudeau howling in fury and cheering them on, in blackface and drag.

 

Well based on how he handled the churches being burned....

" I think we can all understand WHY someone would want to run her off the road, carve a gay flag on her forehead, burn her house down and leave a triple-coiler on her office desk considering what a horrible person she is but i'm really asking you guys to please stop doing that if you can

[herbie]

53 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

I think you are missing the issue people are having with this.

Not at all. The point IS that people, usually still unsure of their own sexuality, are fixated on trannies and wish to spread the fear someone's making people into them and coming for them next, that gender procedures are rampant and commonplace and to prevent others in possibly the only way possible from exercising their choices, using the typical "think of the children" excuse.

And certain Premiers. unable to quietly alter rules so provincial medicare won't pay and wait to see who notices, must loudly blab to appease their redneck voter base.

BTW it's 2024 and a lot of 14-16 yr old girls are on the pill. Their Mom's either support that, don't want to know, or buy the story of how it helps with acne.

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

It's little more than a fad and a great big distraction. I can't stand the way extremes on both sides of this culture war react to one another and I can't stand the way politicians on both sides exploit that.

There are far far more important issues being neglected and above all else, I really can't stand the way politicians exploit this issue to avoid them. 

The Minute, one lobby group from one side or the other approaches the politicians to make laws in their favor the whole issue becomes politicalized...appeasing one side or another is how they get votes...without laws to enforce the whole issue is a moot point...

That being said if you expect one side or another to sit down and talk to each other to come up with some middle ground , well thats a fantasy, unless it is a national crises, or disaster....  the left and right are not going to sit down at all...You still need politicians to enshrine it into law... which needs politicians...

 

[Army Guy]

9 minutes ago, herbie said:

Not at all. The point IS that people, usually still unsure of their own sexuality, are fixated on trannies and wish to spread the fear someone's making people into them and coming for them next, that gender procedures are rampant and commonplace and to prevent others in possibly the only way possible from exercising their choices, using the typical "think of the children" excuse.

And certain Premiers. unable to quietly alter rules so provincial medicare won't pay and wait to see who notices, must loudly blab to appease their redneck voter base.

BTW it's 2024 and a lot of 14-16 yr old girls are on the pill. Their Mom's either support that, don't want to know, or buy the story of how it helps with acne.

Of course lets not think of the children...lets take those decisions from the parents , those evil little pricks....

Why should this be a medicare problem, this is a personal choice , and should be a personal expense...

Everyone has been a teenager with raging hormones, and with todays hook up culture why parents are not ensuring their daughters are on one form of birth control or another is mind boggling...and if a parent is not active in their Childs life then shi* is going to happen like introducing a new member of the family...and all the issues that come with that...