A warning from a mother and father in Indiana

[Merrill]

It isn't proven, by any means, at least in part because it is impossible to ethically test in humans. However, animal testing (and even studies done of animals in polluted areas) show that estrogens introduced to a fetal animal can cause the animal to act as if they are the other sex. There are also studies done of transsexual's brains (after death) that find that "sex" portion of their brains are structured opposite the sex of their genitals, even accounting for hormone therapies.



So, no, based on current research, the evidence suggests that transsexualism is a real, physical condition caused either prior to birth or while still a baby. As has been further pointed out to you, studies further show that trying to "force" transsexuals into "their proper gender roles" and denying they have a real issue leads to other psychological issues and, if left untreated, frequently leads to drug and alcohol abuse (as poor attempts to self-medicate the pain) and suicide. I know enough to say that I don't have the answers for how to treat them for their conditions, it is a very tough thing to deal with. What I will say is that what many Christians here frequently suggest (essentially to "suck it up and act right") is not the right answer, as it merely leads to more issues and wasted lives.

Even if what you say is true about environmental factors, estrogens impacting the fetus, etc., it doesn't explain a 20 fold increase in gender dysphoria in the UK, and a similar increase in the US

an exceedingly rare condition, which historically impacts like .001% of the population, does not suddenly explode without outside factors. Those outside factors are social, ideological, etc. (and it isn't because it is more 'socially accepted')

In the very rare, legitimate cases of gender dysphoria (not simply parents influencing their kids), there may very well be genetic, environmental factors at play. But the solution is NOT to subject a kid to hormone treatments, or surgery. We cannot change the sex of anyone, and young kids are not capable of giving consent to irreversible, cosmetic surgery, chemical castrations, whatever.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Even if what you say is true about environmental factors, estrogens impacting the fetus, etc., it doesn't explain a 20 fold increase in gender dysphoria in the UK, and a similar increase in the US

an exceedingly rare condition, which historically impacts like .001% of the population, does not suddenly explode without outside factors. Those outside factors are social, ideological, etc. (and it isn't because it is more 'socially accepted')

How do you know that it's not because it's more socially accepted? Aren't you just handwaving that away because you find it incredulous?

 

[probinson]

You should probably just copy and paste this anytime someone posts peer reviewed work.

So.... you're just going to gloss over the fact that you accused people of not reading your studies when you only posted abstracts and didn't even read the studies yourself? You do know that there's more to research than just the abstracts, right?

 

[Merrill]

So no evidence. Well done. The agenda to disenfranchise the non Christian from society is monstrous.

my argument has nothing to do with Christianity.

we don't need the Bible to tell us psychologically abusing and castrating kids is wrong.

and in your country:

Britain Shuts Down Its Only Gender Identity Clinic for Kids After Furious Debate

Spencer PlattEngland’s national health service will close a controversial gender identity clinic for children after a damning independent review and a slew of allegations made by former staff and patients.The clinic at Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation in London will be shut down by spring 2023...

news.yahoo.com

 

[Merrill]

How do you know that it's not because it's more socially accepted? Aren't you just handwaving that away because you find it incredulous?

because you have zero proof of that --it was a hypothesis you put forth.

should I start calling for "peer-reviewed studies" now?

 

[iluvatar5150]

because you have zero proof of that --it was a hypothesis you put forth.

should I start calling for "peer-reviewed studies" now?

Sounds to me like our positions have about equal support.

 

[BCP1928]

my argument has nothing to do with Christianity.

we don't need the Bible to tell us psychologically abusing and castrating kids is wrong.

and in your country:

Britain Shuts Down Its Only Gender Identity Clinic for Kids After Furious Debate

Spencer PlattEngland’s national health service will close a controversial gender identity clinic for children after a damning independent review and a slew of allegations made by former staff and patients.The clinic at Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation in London will be shut down by spring 2023...

news.yahoo.com

Some people might think that you, in particular, do need the Bible to tell you that accusing Larnivec of supporting a massive campaign to castrate children is wrong.

 

[Merrill]

Some people might think that you, in particular, do need the Bible to tell you that accusing Larnivec of supporting a massive campaign to castrate children is wrong.

more entryism

 

[BCP1928]

more entryism

How about if I change it to "Some people might think the Bible tells them that accusing Larnivec of supporting a massive campaign to castrate children is wrong." Is that better?

 

[DJWhalen]

Thanks for the warning.

 

[rambot]

So.... you're just going to gloss over the fact that you accused people of not reading your studies when you only posted abstracts and didn't even read the studies yourself? You do know that there's more to research than just the abstracts, right?

1) I didn't read the studies. I read the abstracts. I apologize if that was unclear.
2) Why should I try to hunt down full research studies when they don't get engaged with? Let's start with the abstract and you tell me if there's a problem.
3) Honestly, a layperson's critique of statistical analysis is, kind of, the definition of dunning Kruger to me so I'm not really interested in that. I don't even feel comfortable with it and I at least have a uni level class under my belt at least.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I have not baited anyone

you literally came into the conversation by saying

No, I came into the conversation making a crack about how Fox news was untrustworthy.

sex-change procedures on kids was OK because it was just like any other surgery to correct a "disorder"

I didn't say it was ok. What I did was ask you why it's not okay when we have surgeries to correct lots of other things.

which is an outrageous claim

Why is it an outrageous claim?

that is baiting, because you know full well others on the site are going to jump all over that. You will get people angry, and then go complain to the mods

It's not baiting. It's sincere questions used to explore and challenge your position. If you and/or others can't answer simple questions about your argument without getting hot and bothered, then maybe a pluralistic discussion board isn't for you. Maybe you would prefer more of a coddling echo chamber, like over at /r/conservative.

this is entryism

lol, no. Asking you about your position is treating you like an intelligent adult who formulate and articulate a coherent idea. It's the exact opposite of entryism - it's embracing your participation and assuming that you're capable of keeping up. This is no more a case of "entryism" than throwing a curveball to a designated hitter.

 

[rambot]

I'm not commenting on these specific studies in this post (because I didn't read them yet) but rather on your comment that simply because this is published in a peer reviewed journal that somehow makes the research more authoritative and/or not prone to bias. In fact, this is nothing more than the logical fallacy of appealing to authority.

I'll only address this topic in this one post cause I don't want to go off. I may engage further if there was another thread.

Peer review to me isn't an appeal to authority.
What you see as "appealing to authority" I see as "there are MORE experts who agree with this data is viable and suggests something....so you should view this DATA as more compelling".

Then consider this recent study on "The Nonsense Math Effect" in studies. You can read it for yourself at the link below, but the gist of it is two different research papers were submitted to 200 people well-versed in reviewing studies and asked to judge the quality of the research based on the abstract. In 100 of those (randomly selected), a nonsensical mathematical model was added. Specifically it said this:

A mathematical model

is developed to describe sequential effects.​

As you might expect, those with a degree in mathematics saw this for the nonsense that it was. But more interestingly is that those reviewers with degrees in medicine, humanities and social sciences and other fields rated the abstracts with the nonsensical math as being higher quality research just because it had a complex looking mathematical model included. It didn't matter that it was nosense. Its very presence caused the reviewers to rate the quality of the research higher.

View attachment 343064

The nonsense math effect | Judgment and Decision Making | Cambridge Core

The nonsense math effect - Volume 7 Issue 6

www.cambridge.org

Just because something has been "peer-reviewed" does not validate its methods and/or results, nor does it indicate that the results are not beyond question.

Honestly, at this point, I would take almost any scientific research they present; so long as at LEAST the appearance of bias not present. Because what I see now are things like "Well logically....", or just things that are not correct.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT



This thread is closed for review. As a reminder, the Statement of Purpose includes this and I am making one part bold:
​

Homosexuality, Same-Sex Marriage, Bisexuality and Transgenderism/Transexualism: Discussion of these topics must comply with the sitewide rule barring the promotion of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality, and transgenderism/transexualism. Discussion and debate should only be directed toward political, legal, historical and civil rights issues, and should not be directed toward the morality of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality or transgenderism/transexualism.​

​

The 'child' in the OP is 18 years old which is a legal adult. ​

​