SC Senate Passes Bill Banning Affirmative Care For Minors

[KCfromNC]

That’s how I view the transgender issue. Being mentally I’ll is not an attack. It is what it is.

And here I thought that post 865 made it clear that refusing to accept non-science-based self identification was "Showing contempt" to that person.

Funny how the rules change depending on which talking point is being sold.

 

[rjs330]

Yes, I realize that some people have been raised very fastidious about such things and should not be discomfited unreasonably. But yeah, how much we see of each other naked is purely cultural and occasional departure from custom is, as you say, no big deal.

Yes it is a big deal. It's one thing if it's an accident. Or if it's on purpose. Here's an example. We had a guy around here who would go out in public in a pink leotard. The leotard wad extremely tight and he wore nothing underneath it. It also was pretty see through. Women were very upset at seeing this dude with his junk showing and called the police on him. He ended up getting in trouble for it. These women were psychologically harmed by it. He was doing it on purpose. If you accidentally walk in on someone in an undressed situation of the opposite sex you are embarrassed and will apologize. We aren't a nudist culture nor are we a primitive tribe. Men and women are separate and we respect our differences and culture. It IS a big deal if it is done on purpose. In the trans case it is. A man on purpose exposes his genitalia to women who don't have any desire to see that. And I doubt very much the women you know are okay with that. Would they just walk into a men's locker room and strip down? I doubt that. If it's no big deal why not?

 

[Pommer]

Which group is continually being called mentally ill, delusional, lying about biology, and so forth?

Heck, in this very thread using the exact same argument about LGBT people against religious believers was viewed as "contemptuous".

If only this feeling were backed by any sort of reason to believe it reflects reality.

Wasn’t this some schtick from Andrew Dice Clay 30 years ago, [long list of invectives], “but not in a bad way!”

 

[BCP1928]

Yes it is a big deal. It's one thing if it's an accident. Or if it's on purpose. Here's an example. We had a guy around here who would go out in public in a pink leotard. The leotard wad extremely tight and he wore nothing underneath it. It also was pretty see through. Women were very upset at seeing this dude with his junk showing and called the police on him. He ended up getting in trouble for it. These women were psychologically harmed by it. He was doing it on purpose. If you accidentally walk in on someone in an undressed situation of the opposite sex you are embarrassed and will apologize. We aren't a nudist culture nor are we a primitive tribe. Men and women are separate and we respect our differences and culture. It IS a big deal if it is done on purpose. In the trans case it is. A man on purpose exposes his genitalia to women who don't have any desire to see that. And I doubt very much the women you know are okay with that. Would they just walk into a men's locker room and strip down? I doubt that. If it's no big deal why not?

Of course, and you've hit the nail on the head. The guy in the leotard was an exhibitionist. The trans case was an exhibitionist as well. But the trans woman who goes into a ladies room and discretely does her business is not.

But why are we raising our women so that they are psychologically damaged by the sight of a man's genitals?

 

[RileyG]

And here I thought that post 865 made it clear that refusing to accept non-science-based self identification was "Showing contempt" to that person.

Funny how the rules change depending on which talking point is being sold.

A man is a male and a woman is a female. You are either one or the other. You cannot self identify as something you aren’t.

I’m not showing contempt for anyone.

 

[RileyG]

If only I'd get one in return.

Remember, the questions were​

But back to the subject at hand, does a person self-identifying as something create a burden on others to go along with those feelings? And is the answer different if the something is religion vs. gender identity?​

​

I can't help but feel those were sidestepped because they kinda undermine the whole train of thought.

Who cares what someone gender identity is? I’ve already made it clear that a man is a male and a woman is a female. Self identifying as one doesn’t make it a reality.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's clearly a mental illness. So many do not want it to be called that. We've seen it on this thread.

And that's in spite of the fact that they clearly believe it's a mental illness as well.

Statements about suffering and cruelty and the need for treatment all indicate this is a mental illness in even the minds of those who advocate letting the inmates run the asylum.

It's the only illness that I know of that requires everyone around you to act in certain ways or say certain things that affirm your illness in order for you to have better mental health. In essence everyone else is responsible for you mental health, not you.

And it's obvious to me by the continually escalating list of demands that this sort of pandering at best provides a momentary sort of relief....and why wouldn't it? Whether they admit it or not....much of the way they perceive themselves is dependent upon how others perceive them...and when others superficially agree to use the words they prefer....it superficially appears they perceive the trans person as the trans person wishes.

This fades of course, and new demands for control must be made... the ability to change the way others perceive them always and forever out of reach.

Yup, but some would say it's okay to call them that, because what harm does it do if they want it. Just be polite.

If accusations of bigotry are lobbed at those people who are unwilling to conform to demands regarding speech....then this has absolutely nothing to do politeness. We do not call someone bigot for not using the words "please" or "thank you".

This is about promoting the moral opinions of a "new" political faith. I do not now, nor have I ever, needed lessons on how to behave from the likes of these advocates. They seem far far less concerned about being moral than merely appearing moral to their peers.

Absolutely. Let's just alter historical events and only use the parts we want to. While we're at it we'll tweet it to make it say something it doesn't. And ignore all evidence presented that contradicts. What gets me is they just keep saying the same things over and over again despite being shown the evidence. It's like they've never heard it.

Although this political ideology is primarily a moralizing one....it's most interesting aspect is the absence of any actual clear morals. We aren't being told to lie to trans people because that's some moral rule.....we're being told to lie to trans people because they are victims (the weak, the powerless, the enfeebled) and in the eyes of this political ideology the "victims" are a group of morally transcendent people who have achieved a de⁹gree of enlightenment which places them above the questions, logic, and reasoning of mere mortals like you and I. They "speak truth to power" and "their truth shouldn't be questioned"....as if they are floating around above the rest of us beyond reproach.

This is a great deal of power to have and those within this new faith constantly seek ways and opportunities to become the most important victims of the faith....and in doing so, gain the title of marginalized/oppressed, which gives it's members all sorts of powers like the ability to use violence during protests, loot stores, and demand the firing of anyone who disagrees with you.

To quote Hillary Clinton, these people are deplorable.

 

[rturner76]

I didn't realize science was all based upon America.

No just science that was derived in America. Don't you remember when people had to fly to Europe to get a sex-change. The USA finally caught up.

a range of social, psychological, behavioral, and medical interventions “designed to support and affirm an individual’s gender identity” when it conflicts with the gender they were assigned at birth.

No it not.

Please enlighten me, what are the nonaffriming treatments that aren't based on conversion or denail of their condition?

You're still the only one who mentioned that.

Perhaps it should have been mentioned before.

Once again you are making things up. No one has said that. Man you are just full of ridiculous claims.

Maybe it wasn't you but your partner who I have been going back and forth with. You seem to agree on just about everything else but I probably shouldn't make an assumption. Please enlighten me.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No just science that was derived in America. Don't you remember when people had to fly to Europe to get a sex-change. The USA finally caught up.

And now that Europe is increasingly abandoning gender affirming care... do you think the US should "catch up" to our European counterparts?

Please enlighten me, what are the nonaffriming treatments that aren't based on conversion or denail of their condition?

You're still talking about being transgender as if it's a mental "condition"....an illness to be treated.

Is that what you think it is?

Perhaps it should have been mentioned before.

Is it possible that someone claiming to be transgender is incorrect? Is it possible that they are interpreting their feelings or gender/soul incorrectly in some way and they aren't, in fact, transgender?

Maybe it wasn't you but your partner who I have been going back and forth with.

Hey @rjs330, I didn't know your wife posted here. What's her profile name?

You seem to agree on just about everything else but I probably shouldn't make an assumption. Please enlighten me.

You'll need to open your mind to some possibilities that you haven't considered before.

 

[rturner76]

And now that Europe is increasingly abandoning gender affirming care... do you think the US should "catch up" to our European counterparts?

I don't think American Doctors should do anything but treat their patients and believe then when they tell them what they are thinking and feeling. Not you. Your not a doctor and you don't treat transgender patients so let the doctors decide what they decide between the two of them?

You're still talking about being transgender as if it's a mental "condition"....an illness to be treated.

Is that what you think it is?

Maybe transgender seeking medication and surgery should be handled by a doctor do you think? You seem to look at the opinions of trans-activist that don't think they have a dis-order but I'm sorry, if you are a man and want hormones and your penis removed, you need to see a doctor, and doctors only treat physical and mental illness last I checked. It's disordered thinking because their mind or body they want to change the order.

Is it possible that someone claiming to be transgender is incorrect?

Sure, doctors make mistakes all the time, that's why hospitals carry malpractice insurance. There job isn't to convince people to change their see like you seem to think. It's up to them to treat the patients that ask to be treated and treatment plans need to be agreed upon by a doctor and there patient or either one can send the other one packing. I don't see why it is so important to you that trans-people be denied treatment. That's a personal thing and has nothing to do with medicne.

Hey @rjs330, I didn't know your wife posted here. What's her profile name?

Oh I thought that was you...he he

You'll need to open your mind to some possibilities that you haven't considered before.

You might want to try it too since here, your argument seems to be more about your personal opinion that what goes on between and individual and their doctor. Try just accepting that doctors treat these people and doctor don't treat people for glamour advice. People whether seeking mental or physical treatment see a doctor, not so much a a trans-activist or a liberal politician. What else do med doctors and psychiatrists and psychologist treat besides illness and disorders. T(I think I've stated that a few times now).

 

[rjs330]

That is a serious issue which involves sports officials and experts in sports medicine and is entirely beyond the competence of either of us.

Why does it need sports medicine experts. Either one is a boy or girl. You don't need a sports doctor to figure that out. It does take sport officials to make the change. After all they are the ones that allowed men into women's sports to begin with. So they need to change it back.

 

[rjs330]

No, just a linguistic convention.

Biology is not a linguistic convention.

But some people want to gender exceptional cases differently. I don't see any problem with it. I'm just choosing pronouns to use in the workplace or with a customer. I am not making any profound statement about the fundamental nature of man or woman.

Yes you are making a profound statement. The fact you don't see it is extremely limited. It's nothing more than staring at the tree so you miss the entire forest.
Gender is a faith based concept. And you are free to choose whatever faith you choose. Just like I am. What neither of us should be doing is force our systems of faith on others.

 

[rjs330]

Just checking - the argument is that having an identity based on non-scientific beliefs is mental illness and delusion?

The argument is if you are thinking something that is demonstrably false as a reality, such as you think you are a bird and so jump off a building to fly then you are mentally ill and delusional.

If someone believed, sincerely with all their mind and feeling that their child was a fish so they threw the child into the ocean would you not call them mentally ill and delusional? How would know they are? Would it have anything g to do with reality and biology?

And that it is perfectly fine to tell people that to their face?

Depending on the circumstances yes or know. Would I just blatantly walk up to a stranger walking down the street and call them delusional and mentally ill? No I wouldn't.

There certainly are circumstances where I would.

 

[rjs330]

Hey @rjs330, I didn't know your wife posted here. What's her profile name?

Hey he said your partner not mine. LOL. Wait are you saying she's your partner too?

 

[rjs330]

Of course, and you've hit the nail on the head. The guy in the leotard was an exhibitionist. The trans case was an exhibitionist as well. But the trans woman who goes into a ladies room and discretely does her business is not.

But why are we raising our women so that they are psychologically damaged by the sight of a man's genitals?

Are you ignoring what I've said before again? If women have no clue that that the person in the ladies room is a man, they won't say or experience a thing. And I'm okay with that.

If a man who looks like a man goes into the ladies room it's a different story.

Every man who goes into a woman's space and exposes his genitalia is an exhibitionist.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I don't think American Doctors should do anything but treat their patients and believe then when they tell them what they are thinking and feeling.

Well that's not an answer to the question I asked.

You think that doctors should believe anorexics who claim they are fat?

Do you think they should believe schizophrenics who claim the CIA is transmitting negative thoughts into their minds?

Do you think they should believe people suffering from bipolar disorder who claim god has revealed the location of the lost city of Atlantis to them at the bottom of the Mariana's Trench and they are planning a scuba diving expedition to find it?

Do you think they should believe narcissists who think they're amongst the smartest people to ever live?

Not you.

Well rest easy...I don't treat transgender people.

Your not a doctor and you don't treat transgender patients so let the doctors decide what they decide between the two of them?

Tell you what....I won't interfere as long as....

1. I'm not asked to be part of the treatment. I'm not asked to change my speech, or put women or children at risk.

2. They don't involve anyone unable to consent. These doctors are treating children who cannot consent....and must live with the consequences of the choices of their doctors and parents.

Maybe transgender seeking medication and surgery should be handled by a doctor do you think?

If they're over 18....yeah, absolutely.

You seem to look at the opinions of trans-activist that don't think they have a dis-order

I've been saying they're mentally ill from the start....it's the doctors who say they aren't.

It's unclear what you think. You seem afraid to say transgender people are mentally ill.

Fortunately one of us still believes in expressing himself honestly.

but I'm sorry, if you are a man and want hormones and your penis removed, you need to see a doctor, and doctors only treat physical and mental illness last I checked.

Which does being transgender fall under? Mental illness or physical?

It's disordered thinking because their mind or body they want to change the order.

Mental illness then?

Sure, doctors make mistakes all the time, that's why hospitals carry malpractice insurance.

Well some silly goose recently made this statement....

I don't think American Doctors should do anything but treat their patients and believe then when they tell them what they are thinking and feeling.

Why would a doctor automatically believe that someone is transgender if it's possible that the transgender person is wrong?

Oh I thought that was you...he he

Hilarious.

You might want to try it too since here,

I'm not the one sitting here saying that doctors should always believe whatever transgender people say.

That's you.

 

[rjs330]

don't think American Doctors should do anything but treat their patients and believe then when they tell them what they are thinking and feeling. Not you. Your not a doctor and you don't treat transgender patients so let the doctors decide what they decide between the two of them?

Doctors absolutely should believe their patients when the patient says something they are thinking and feeling. If I walked into my doctors office and said "Doc I think and feel like I have prostate cancer" he should believe that I feel and think that. Should he treat me for prostate cancer? Should he tell me that I have prostate cancer and affirm that I do? If not why not?

Would doctor that did that be okay in your book? After all it's between the doctor and the patient right?

Are their any limits to what goes on between a doc and his/her patient?

If your child went to see the doctor and told the doctor that they feel.and believe they are a dog should the doctor believe them that they feel and think that way? Yes they should. Should the doctor then give them rabies shots and distemper shots and whatever other medicines dogs get? Maybe the doctor should send them to a vet? After all it's between the doctor and the patient. None of anyone's business right? Whatever the doc decides right? Hey and if you the parwnt agrees everyone should.just stay out of it. Right?

I think I've said this before. If an adult really wants to receive transgender medicalization, I certainly won't stand in their way. Be my guest.

But what they do afterwards I might have something to say about that depending on what they want.

Children however are another matter entirely. Doctors can listen to the kid. But honestly not believe them when they say they think they are trans. Because half the time kids don't have a clue what they really think or what they are really talking about. They may be tossing the word trans out but when they are actually treated with psychological treatment from those who are not Affirmative Care professionals it is discovered they are not trans at all and didn't have any idea what was going on in their minds. A doctor might believe that's what the kid thinks about what's going on, but that's not really the issue at all. So a kid should not be medicalized. They should not receive Affirmative Care because it's far too dangerous for them. As Europe has discovered. A doctor should treat that actual cause and not the cause the kid thinks they might have. And as we have PROVEN to you that's not what is going on.

 

[KCfromNC]

A man is a male and a woman is a female. You are either one or the other. You cannot self identify as something you aren’t.

I’m not showing contempt for anyone.

Really? Because that's what I got accused of when I asked if we needed to validate certain types of self identification that couldn't be backed up by objective facts.

 

[KCfromNC]

Who cares what someone gender identity is? I’ve already made it clear that a man is a male and a woman is a female. Self identifying as one doesn’t make it a reality.

It's always instructive when my simple questions about a previous talking point require the talking point to be abandoned in favor of jumping to a different one.

 

[KCfromNC]

The argument is if you are thinking something that is demonstrably false as a reality, such as you think you are a bird and so jump off a building to fly then you are mentally ill and delusional.

Weird how me simply asking a much less accusatory question led to an accusation of showing contempt to the groups in question. Seems like this sort of judgement is very fluid.

Depending on the circumstances yes or know. Would I just blatantly walk up to a stranger walking down the street and call them delusional and mentally ill? No I wouldn't.


There certainly are circumstances where I would.

Such as?