American Kids In Crisis: Daily Caller’s ‘Do No Harm’ To Expose Fallout Of The Transgender Movement

[Larniavc]

Well it has affected me so now you know someone who has been involved.

In what way has it affected you?

 

[rjs330]

I explained my position. Instead of addressing the points I made, you simply repeated the same argument.

You continue to conflate objective criteria with subjective criteria, and claim I'm doing the same. I've clearly stated why and how I'm not doing that.

If someone else wants to address this, and can show me how I'm doing what you claim I'm doing, I'll listen. Heck, if you can show me how I'm invalidating someone's identity after I've clearly showed how I haven't, I'll listen. Here's a hint: don't just continue to claim I'm doing it, because that's false.

But so long as you continue the dishonesty you have been, I'll take you as seriously as your arguments require.

-- A2SG, and continue to reevaluate my impressions of you.....

Yup you explained your position all right. And it's pretty clear that you are struggling with understanding in what you did.

And I have shown you how you've done it, but you won't listen to it. That's on you. No one can change your mind for you. But it's pretty obvious.

You are the one who is struggling with subject and objective here.

What someone personal identity is subjective of what they want or feel. Which is fine. Identity however you want. We agree with that.

For the rest of the world in order to support your identity there must be objective reality to it. And you proved that with your responses.

In order for someone to identify as your child or a surgeon they can do it on a subject level. However for the rest of the world to call them your child and be treated as your child there must be objective reality to it. In order for someone to be called Dr. and have the position and be able to do what a doctor does there must be objective reality to it otherwise they are not a surgeon regardless of what they identify as.

In the context of this entire thread the transgender folks want to accepted and treated as the identity they claim. They want to be called whatever they claim and v able to do and act and perform and claim all the legal rights of their claimed identity. If they are not allowed to do so their identity is being invalidated.

Just like you invalidated the identity of the child who's identity they wish to close is to be your child and have and the rights of being your child. But you said no because their subjective identity is not based on objective reality. That is invalidating their identity. And being mean to boot. Some would call it bullying.

Same goes for the person who identifies as a surgeon. If you don't call him Dr. and say he is a surgeon then you are invalidating his identity. If you introduce him to people and do not refer to him as a doctor you are invalidating his identity. If you don't allow him to do what he wants to do and perform the acts and go to the places he wants to go and do as a doctor, you are invalidating his identity. Some would say you are bullying him and marginalizing him by not allowing it.

That's how it works. And you know what, I agree with you. I can't know what's going on in someone's head that causes them to sincerely believe they have a certain identity. I also agree with you that just because they have a certain identity they do not automatically get the rights of that identity if their identity does not match objective reality.
That's what you said when you brought up objective facts to show they do not get the rights of that identity just because they have it. And that is invalidating their identity.

Because in order to validate it you must do as they ask and treat them as if they are what they identify as and give them all the rights of that identity. That IS how it works in the world of the transgender person. And you've proven that identity can be invalidated with objective reality.

 

[rjs330]

In what way has it affected you?

I've already addressed that

 

[Pommer]

Who's not being a decent human being? Being a decent human being has nothing to do with allowing someone with a malady of this sort walk all over you and society, threaten your job and force women to give up their spaces.

Being a decent human being has nothing to do with allowing people to destroy children's bodies for something we are just learning to treat effectively.

Being a decent human being would not subject that upon kids.

Are there any people (children or adults) who are transgender who would greatly benefit from changing (either through chemical means or by surgery) their bodies to match their gender identity?

 

[Pommer]

Who's not being a decent human being? Being a decent human being has nothing to do with allowing someone with a malady of this sort walk all over you and society, threaten your job and force women to give up their spaces.

Transgender people have a lot of power in your mind; if they could realize this maybe they would be somewhat less suicidal?

Being a decent human being has nothing to do with allowing people to destroy children's bodies for something we are just learning to treat effectively.

Destroy?

Being a decent human being would not subject that upon kids.

“Change nothing EVER” seems to miss the point.

 

[rjs330]

Are there any people (children or adults) who are transgender who would greatly benefit from changing (either through chemical means or by surgery) their bodies to match their gender identity?

The thing is we don't really know. Especially regarding kids. And we also don't know if psychological treatment would have been more effective. It's completely foolish to deal something permanent to someone when we don't know if something else that's not permanent would have been the better treatment, because we didn't even try it.

As you said all of this is experimental at this time. You should never experiment with children by permanently altering their bodies like this because you can't take it back.

Adults are still able to do as they wish whether there is evidence of it's efficacy or not. But we actually don't know at this point with them if psychological treatment would have been more effective.

 

[Larniavc]

I've already addressed that

Can you link me to the post number?

 

[Pommer]

The thing is we don't really know. Especially regarding kids. And we also don't know if psychological treatment would have been more effective. It's completely foolish to deal something permanent to someone when we don't know if something else that's not permanent would have been the better treatment, because we didn't even try it.

As you said all of this is experimental at this time. You should never experiment with children by permanently altering their bodies like this because you can't take it back.

Adults are still able to do as they wish whether there is evidence of it's efficacy or not. But we actually don't know at this point with them if psychological treatment would have been more effective.

I say that those (potential) transgender individuals who choose to brave these treatments should be afforded the freedom to do so; might they be making “horrible mistakes”? Maybe.

That’s how “freedom” works, we’re free to make horrible choices for ourselves (or for our dependent children who rely on our best judgement).

 

[rjs330]

Can you link me to the post number?

No

 

[rjs330]

I say that those (potential) transgender individuals who choose to brave these treatments should be afforded the freedom to do so; might they be making “horrible mistakes”? Maybe.

That’s how “freedom” works, we’re free to make horrible choices for ourselves (or for our dependent children who rely on our best judgement).

As adults yes. As kids no. No parent should be allowed to medicalize their child and do permanent harm and bodily mutilation as an experiment on the hem when they really don't even know if they are trans or are beyond any other kind of help. That's just twisted and sick.

Parents have no idea what they are doing in this situation. Anymore than they would no what to do in a severe case of schizophrenia with their kids. They would lean on the doctors and those doctors lean on research. They don't know either. And now we are discovering the pitfalls, other places are cutting back severely and America isn't.

This is precisely why they need to be stopped legislatively. Because it's the only way to stop it.

 

[A2SG]

Yup you explained your position all right. And it's pretty clear that you are struggling with understanding in what you did.

I'm really not. But let's hear what you have to say.

And I have shown you how you've done it, but you won't listen to it.

You haven't.

That's on you. No one can change your mind for you. But it's pretty obvious.

I've had my mind changed many times. I always consider new information and reevaluate my point of view. But in this case, it's clear that your argument isn't gonna work. But, I will let you have your say.

You are the one who is struggling with subject and objective here.

Nope. But feel free to demonstrate how.

What someone personal identity is subjective of what they want or feel. Which is fine. Identity however you want. We agree with that.

Yup. We'll come back to this.

For the rest of the world in order to support your identity there must be objective reality to it. And you proved that with your responses.

And here's where you go off the rails. Identity is subjective, that much we've established. Objective reality may play a part, but it doesn't have to. And as we have both acknowledged, it clearly doesn't in some cases. I know you know this, you've argued the point many times, by claiming that a trans person can't have a female identity if they have male genitalia. Clearly, it can happen, and undisputedly, it does happen.

In order for someone to identify as your child or a surgeon they can do it on a subject level.

They can, sure. Objective reality doesn't have to enter into it. Granted, for most of us, it often does...but sometimes, it doesn't. I know someone who identifies as an artist...she can't draw worth a darn, but she doesn't care. Drawing brings her happiness, so no harm done.

However for the rest of the world to call them your child and be treated as your child there must be objective reality to it.

Yup. Especially if they want to place a legal burden on me. This is the part I can invalidate. Not the identity part.

As I've explained over and over again.

In order for someone to be called Dr. and have the position and be able to do what a doctor does there must be objective reality to it otherwise they are not a surgeon regardless of what they identify as.

As I've said. Over and over again.

In the context of this entire thread the transgender folks want to accepted and treated as the identity they claim. They want to be called whatever they claim and v able to do and act and perform and claim all the legal rights of their claimed identity. If they are not allowed to do so their identity is being invalidated.

I'm sure many feel that way. Just as that kid you imagine wants to be accepted as my kid, and that person who identifies as a surgeon (but lacks training and a medical license) wants to be accepted as a surgeon, and my friend wants to be accepted as an artist. We all have wants.

But there is no obligation on anyone else's part to provide that acceptance. They can, if they want to, but there is no requirement to do so.

Just like you invalidated the identity of the child who's identity they wish to close is to be your child and have and the rights of being your child.

Nope. As I've explained over and over again. Their identity remains whatever they want it to be, just like with that non-licensed surgeon and my friend who can't draw. I never invalidated any of their identities.

But you said no because their subjective identity is not based on objective reality.

No. I clearly stated that I only rejected their legal claim. Over and over again.

That is invalidating their identity. And being mean to boot. Some would call it bullying.

It's none of those things.

And I'm certain you know it. That's why you're being dishonest. Or, at the least, disingenuous.

Same goes for the person who identifies as a surgeon. If you don't call him Dr. and say he is a surgeon then you are invalidating his identity.

He may feel that way, but you're not required to do that. Because you are not required to validate anyone else's identity.

If you introduce him to people and do not refer to him as a doctor you are invalidating his identity. If you don't allow him to do what he wants to do and perform the acts and go to the places he wants to go and do as a doctor, you are invalidating his identity. Some would say you are bullying him and marginalizing him by not allowing it.

I've often heard people, in this very thread, claim that a trans person who identifies as a woman ISN'T a woman, and I've yet to see you call them out for bullying or marginalizing. Why is that?

That's how it works.

It really isn't.

And you know what, I agree with you. I can't know what's going on in someone's head that causes them to sincerely believe they have a certain identity. I also agree with you that just because they have a certain identity they do not automatically get the rights of that identity if their identity does not match objective reality.

I know. Which is why I've said your maintaining this argument is disingenuous. And dishonest, because you know I've said that. Over and over again.

That's what you said when you brought up objective facts to show they do not get the rights of that identity just because they have it. And that is invalidating their identity.

Nope. For the very reasons you just mentioned.

Because in order to validate it you must do as they ask and treat them as if they are what they identify as and give them all the rights of that identity.

No, you don't. And I know you don't believe that someone's identity must be validated, because you've argued otherwise over and over again. Thus, the dishonesty.

That IS how it works in the world of the transgender person. And you've proven that identity can be invalidated with objective reality.

No, I haven't. And neither have you.

-- A2SG, might as well get your shots in now, I'm sure this thread won't stay open much longer anyway....

 

[rjs330]

I'm really not. But let's hear what you have to say.


You haven't.


I've had my mind changed many times. I always consider new information and reevaluate my point of view. But in this case, it's clear that your argument isn't gonna work. But, I will let you have your say.


Nope. But feel free to demonstrate how.


Yup. We'll come back to this.


And here's where you go off the rails. Identity is subjective, that much we've established. Objective reality may play a part, but it doesn't have to. And as we have both acknowledged, it clearly doesn't in some cases. I know you know this, you've argued the point many times, by claiming that a trans person can't have a female identity if they have male genitalia. Clearly, it can happen, and undisputedly, it does happen.


They can, sure. Objective reality doesn't have to enter into it. Granted, for most of us, it often does...but sometimes, it doesn't. I know someone who identifies as an artist...she can't draw worth a darn, but she doesn't care. Drawing brings her happiness, so no harm done.


Yup. Especially if they want to place a legal burden on me. This is the part I can invalidate. Not the identity part.

As I've explained over and over again.


As I've said. Over and over again.


I'm sure many feel that way. Just as that kid you imagine wants to be accepted as my kid, and that person who identifies as a surgeon (but lacks training and a medical license) wants to be accepted as a surgeon, and my friend wants to be accepted as an artist. We all have wants.

But there is no obligation on anyone else's part to provide that acceptance. They can, if they want to, but there is no requirement to do so.


Nope. As I've explained over and over again. Their identity remains whatever they want it to be, just like with that non-licensed surgeon and my friend who can't draw. I never invalidated any of their identities.


No. I clearly stated that I only rejected their legal claim. Over and over again.


It's none of those things.

And I'm certain you know it. That's why you're being dishonest. Or, at the least, disingenuous.


He may feel that way, but you're not required to do that. Because you are not required to validate anyone else's identity.


So? I've often heard people, in this very thread, claim that a trans person who identifies as a woman ISN'T a woman, and I've yet to see you call them out for bullying or marginalizing. Why is that?


It really isn't. Not in reality.


I know. Which is why I've said your maintaining this argument is disingenuous. And dishonest, because you know I've said that. Over and over again.


Still no. Their identity is whatever they wish it to be. It can't be validated or invalidated. It's subjective. Beyond that, if someone wants to practice medicine, or claim someone is their father, or whatever else, they need objective facts to do that. A medical license or a positive paternity test. Their right to practice medicine or their demand for parental responsibilities is based on that. Not on their identity. So their identity isn't invalidated in any way.

Identity does not have to be supported by objective facts.


No, you don't. And I know you don't believe that someone's identity must be validated, because you've argued otherwise over and over again. Thus, the dishonesty.


No, I haven't. And neither have you.

-- A2SG, might as well get your shots in now, I'm sure this thread won't stay open much longer anyway....

I didn't think you'd really understand what you did regarding the child and the doctor. You invalidated their identity with objective reality. You don't want to believe it, so be it. No sense in arguing it anymore.

It's quite fascinating how you can invalidate someone's identity while at the same time denying that your did. You did exactly what we do involving the trans identity and then claim you didn't.

It's quite interesting that someone can perform such mental gymnastics. Anyway good luck with your endeavors.

 

[A2SG]

I didn't think you'd really understand what you did regarding the child and the doctor.

I understand it perfectly. And so do you. But you keep arguing as if you don't.

You invalidated their identity with objective reality.

Nope. I've explained exactly why over and over again.

You don't want to believe it, so be it.

I don't believe it, because I know what I'm saying.

No sense in arguing it anymore.

That's been apparent for a while now.

It's quite fascinating how you can invalidate someone's identity while at the same time denying that your did.

Because I haven't. No matter how many times you disingenuously claim I have. And no matter how many times I clearly demonstrate that I haven't.

You did exactly what we do involving the trans identity and then claim you didn't.

Nope. And I've explained how I'm not. Several times over. You've even acknowledged it. Then went right on and ignored it.

It's quite interesting that someone can perform such mental gymnastics. Anyway good luck with your endeavors.

Yeah, a regular Nadia Comaneci, ain't ya?

-- A2SG, but you just can't stick the landing.....

 

[Larniavc]

No

Quel surprise.

 

[Pommer]

As adults yes. As kids no. No parent should be allowed to medicalize their child and do permanent harm and bodily mutilation as an experiment on the hem when they really don't even know if they are trans or are beyond any other kind of help. That's just twisted and sick.

Parents have no idea what they are doing in this situation. Anymore than they would no what to do in a severe case of schizophrenia with their kids. They would lean on the doctors and those doctors lean on research. They don't know either. And now we are discovering the pitfalls, other places are cutting back severely and America isn't.

This is precisely why they need to be stopped legislatively. Because it's the only way to stop it.

So your prescription for these children is “suffer kids, we cannot do anything for you. Tough it out.”
Charming.

 

[KCfromNC]

According to you identity has to be accepted.

Which post are you referring to here? Something I actually wrote, or another post which will be unable to be found but is certainly very very real, trust us.

 

[RileyG]

Why would you, though?
Why would you “identify as black” unless you had something go completely wrong in your brain and you actually thought that you were black, (or Asian)?
Does that actually happen?
Is it possible for that to happen?

Something has gone horribly wrong in the brains of transgender people, at present, we can’t “fix their brains ”, but we are “advanced enough” to be able to fix the body to match the brain and each person can be (hopefully) a more happy and fulfilled human being?

Tell us again why that is “bad”.

Nope. You're just harming and lying to them. Not being helpful at all.

 

[rjs330]

So your prescription for these children is “suffer kids, we cannot do anything for you. Tough it out.”
Charming.

You know you've said this more than once and I've debunked it everytime. What is it that is getting missed? I say that we ought to... (Add what we should be doing instead of affirming care)
And you hear "suffer kids we cannot do anything for you tough it out."

No one has EVER said such a thing. And I have personally debunked that type of statement you make. So what are we missing that we cannot communicate properly?

 

[rjs330]

Which post are you referring to here? Something I actually wrote, or another post which will be unable to be found but is certainly very very real, trust us.

Perhaps this will clear things up. Should people be treated according to their identity?
In other words should men be allowed to use women's locker rooms because they identify as a woman?

Should people be required to us the pronouns people identify as?

Should men be allowed to compete against women in women's sports?

Answer those questions and that should clarify everything.

 

[rjs330]

Nope. You're just harming and lying to them. Not being helpful at all.

You are also harming yourself if you go against your own personal beliefs on the subject. You are being asked to lie. We really should have a live and let live situation here. If someone calls themselves a woman and they are a man then fine. If someone doesn't want to call you a woman when you are a man then that's fine too.