When two worldviews collide.

[Ana the Ist]

If that were hypothetically possible, (and this is not a simple condition which is likely to be so easily managed, as, say, single-gene diseases like cystic fibrosis) I think it would be caught up in a larger ethical debate about the place of disability in society. I'm not sure I have answers to that, at this stage.

Transgender People With Gender Dysphoria Could Have 'Rare' Gene Variants

Scientists studied the DNA of 30 transgender people.

www.newsweek.com

So up until now....you were permissive of any treatment. After all, you probably believe that children's lives are at stake. Now that I tell you there's a possibility of avoiding the problem entirely.....you say, I don't know?

This no longer looks like a good faith discussion.

 

[ralliann]

WPATH...they created the vast bulk of studies this garbage rests on. You're familiar with a scientific review then? A meta-study? The sort of things done to review all the work to see if it's high quality, low quality, or somewhere in between.



Yeah sure....I'm not as good at the math as I used to be, but I can still read a methodology and spot the problems....

Sample size is absurdly small. Follow up is short or non existing. Study period is extremely short. These are far too common in the studies this care model relies on. We are talking about permanent alterations to a child. It doesn't take much common sense to see you'd want very high quality evidence before such intervention.



So was oxycontin.




Really? I don't even understand what the pronouns thing is about. I don't use someone's pronouns in their presence. You typically use them whenever they aren't around.



That I should be required to affirm someone else's faith based beliefs is beyond a minor request. It's blatantly tyrannical. I don't do it for Christians and I'm certainly not doing it for trans people.

I remember years ago having to get stitches for an accident at work. Of course I was told about the numbness wearing. Then he was going to prescribe oxycontin. It was when the awareness of heroin addiction was becoming known. Go figure, that is why the drug, and the addiction had reached epidemic proportions. I told him no, I did not want it. OH, I was surprised, he got MAD. He was so nasty and judgmental (offended I suppose how dare I to judge a doctor), I said go ahead write the prescription, I would fill it if I felt I needed it. He warned me, the drug needs to be working in your system before the pain takes hold. Which is true. But He was mad and indignant about it.
I went home, it began to throb later that evening, I took some Tylenol, went to bed woke up in the morning JUST FINE.
Excellent point on Oxtcontin. Incidently, my friend that took me to the hospital, I found out was hooked on it since the eighties. She is now deceased.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Here's the conclusion from that study: Short-term outcomes of pubertal suppression in a selected cohort of 12 to 15 year old young people with persistent gender dysphoria in the UK

We undertook an uncontrolled prospective observational study of GnRHa as monotherapy in 44 12–15 year olds with persistent and severe GD.
Overall patient experience of changes on GnRHa treatment was positive. We identified no changes in psychological function. Changes in BMD were consistent with suppression of growth.

So it wasn't an illustration of what generally happens. It was a specific study of a specific group. And it was shown that the procedures were, wait for it, entirely beneficial. You wanted to post a link that says that puberty blockers were almost 100% beneficial? No, you didn't. You thought it was a negative. Again, you delved no further than a headline. Want to see the psychological criteria for selection for that group?

Eligibility criteria were chosen to match those used for a Netherlands cohort, namely that the young person:

A. is aged 12–15 years

B. Psychological criteria

1. has been seen by the GIDS for at least 6 months and attended at least 4 interviews for assessment and therapeutic exploration of their gender identity development.
2. psychological stability sufficient to withstand the stresses of medical treatment for GID.
3. fulfils the following criteria relating to GID:
   
   1. Throughout childhood (defined as over 5 years) the adolescent has demonstrated an intense pattern of cross-gendered behaviours and cross-gender identity.
   2. The adolescent has gender dysphoria that is significantly increased with the onset of puberty. Following assessment the clinician(s) working with the young person deem that there is a high likelihood of the young person experiencing severe psychological distress consequent on experiencing full pubertal development before pubertal suppression is implemented.
4. The young person and their parents/guardians are actively requesting pubertal suppression.
5. is able to give informed consent.

So thanks for that. It shows exactly what happens with people with needs as have been described.

And it's the same story every time. You post some link, you say it shows that you are right but either it is from some desperately inadequate source, outright charlatans or it's to a study that says the exact opposite of what you think you are saying.

This is becoming farcical.

And hey, you want to quote any paper that you think supports what you say, then give us a link. Otherwise some people mignt think you're trying to hide something.

This isn't required in the US.

1. has been seen by the GIDS for at least 6 months and attended at least 4 interviews for assessment and therapeutic exploration of their gender identity development.
2. psychological stability sufficient to withstand the stresses of medical treatment for GID.
3. fulfils the following criteria

You can literally walk in, say you're trans, get pills 20 minutes later.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I remember years ago having to get stitches for an accident at work. Of course I was told about the numbness wearing. Then he was going to prescribe oxycontin. It was when the awareness of heroin addiction was becoming known. Go figure, that is why the drug, and the addiction had reached epidemic proportions. I told him no, I did not want it. OH, I was surprised, he got MAD. He was so nasty and judgmental (offended I suppose how dare I to judge a doctor), I said go ahead write the prescription, I would fill it if I felt I needed it. He warned me, the drug needs to be working in your system before the pain takes hold. Which is true. But He was mad and indignant about it.
I went home, it began to throb later that evening, I took some Tylenol, went to bed woke up in the morning JUST FINE.
Excellent point on Oxtcontin. Incidently, my friend that took me to the hospital, I found out was hooked on it since the eighties. She is now deceased.

Yeah it turned out they got bonuses for writing those prescriptions.

 

[ralliann]

Yeah it turned out they got bonuses for writing those prescriptions.

Experts, phd's, MASTER degrees do not mean much to the unethical, not a bit. It just gives the unethical power to do atrocious things sometimes. We are living in heightened unethical times for power grabs. Makes it difficult and frightening for many of us. It simply does not pull as much weight anymore, on us poor blue collar, so, horribly abused in that time.

 

[rjs330]

Here's the conclusion from that study: Short-term outcomes of pubertal suppression in a selected cohort of 12 to 15 year old young people with persistent gender dysphoria in the UK

We undertook an uncontrolled prospective observational study of GnRHa as monotherapy in 44 12–15 year olds with persistent and severe GD.
Overall patient experience of changes on GnRHa treatment was positive. We identified no changes in psychological function. Changes in BMD were consistent with suppression of growth.

So it wasn't an illustration of what generally happens. It was a specific study of a specific group. And it was shown that the procedures were, wait for it, entirely beneficial. You wanted to post a link that says that puberty blockers were almost 100% beneficial? No, you didn't. You thought it was a negative. Again, you delved no further than a headline. Want to see the psychological criteria for selection for that group?

Eligibility criteria were chosen to match those used for a Netherlands cohort, namely that the young person:

A. is aged 12–15 years

B. Psychological criteria

1. has been seen by the GIDS for at least 6 months and attended at least 4 interviews for assessment and therapeutic exploration of their gender identity development.
2. psychological stability sufficient to withstand the stresses of medical treatment for GID.
3. fulfils the following criteria relating to GID:
   
   1. Throughout childhood (defined as over 5 years) the adolescent has demonstrated an intense pattern of cross-gendered behaviours and cross-gender identity.
   2. The adolescent has gender dysphoria that is significantly increased with the onset of puberty. Following assessment the clinician(s) working with the young person deem that there is a high likelihood of the young person experiencing severe psychological distress consequent on experiencing full pubertal development before pubertal suppression is implemented.
4. The young person and their parents/guardians are actively requesting pubertal suppression.
5. is able to give informed consent.

So thanks for that. It shows exactly what happens with people with needs as have been described.

And it's the same story every time. You post some link, you say it shows that you are right but either it is from some desperately inadequate source, outright charlatans or it's to a study that says the exact opposite of what you think you are saying.

This is becoming farcical.

And hey, you want to quote any paper that you think supports what you say, then give us a link. Otherwise some people mignt think you're trying to hide something.

The study proved my point that most kids that are given blockers go on the take the hormones. That's what I was trying to prove. And it dis prove it.

Now the argument you presented is what happens to the kids after they take the hormones. As is stated in the study it's short term. And you should expect positive outcomes short term. It's a psychological issue. You might as well have said the cutters feel better after cutting themselves. Which is true. It's how the alleviate the stress in their brains. So if you are looking for answers to your problems and you are told that this will fix everything then if course you feel better for a while. You should expect nothing different. I know what the study said.

But my point was that when you get a kid on blockers you have put them on the trans train and they go on to take the hormones. Which the study proved. But the study was short term. And short term is not the issue. We are talking long term. You should have also noted that the reporting in the study was self reporting. And not everyone reported back. The ones who did reported positive outcomes. Again short term.

What happens long term? Guess what, studies have shown that longer term indicates no changes or changes for the worse. At least the studies we have do.

B.P. (2016). Gender Dysphoria in Adults. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 12: 217-47. [Link]

[3] D’Angelo, R. (2018). Psychiatry’s ethical involvement in gender-affirming care. Australasian Psychiatry 26 (5): 460-463. [Link]

[4] Bränström, R. & Pachankis, J. E. (2019). Reduction in Mental Health Treatment Utilization Among Transgender Individuals After Gender-Affirming Surgeries: A Total Population Study. American Journal of Psychiatry 177 (8): 727-734. [Link]

[5] American Journal of Psychiatry (2020). Correction to Bränström and Pachankis. Published online: 1 August 2020. [Link]

[6] Dhejne, C., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., Johansson, A. L. V., Långström, N., & Landén, M. (2011). ‘Long-term follow-up of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery: Cohort study in Sweden’. PLoS ONE, 6(2). [Link]

[7] Asscheman, H., Giltay, E. J., Megens, J. A. J., de Ronde, W., van Trotsenburg, M. A. A. & Gooren, L. J. G. (2011). A long-term follow-up study of mortality in transsexuals receiving treatment with cross-sex hormones. European Journal of Endocrinology 164 (4). [Link]

There are no real long term studies on this and that's the problem. Other studies show that suicidiality does not change after transitioning. They still have high rates of suicide.

Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.

So dysphoria might be relieved but they are still at higher suicidiality. In other words it doesn't help long term. The reason for this is simple. They have mental health issues. And with trans regret rising as time goes on we are finding it's not as helpful as was first thought. And that's why kids should be left alone. No puberty blockers no hormone treatments and no surgeries. Let them grow up, mature and desist naturally because that what 80% do. The other 20% can go on a do what they want cause they are adults. But if you gave those 80% the drugs 90% of them would go on to transgenderism when they would have desisted naturally. So leave the kids alone. Give them non-affirming counseling to help them through this stage and they will be fine. Give them drugs etc and later they will be more likely to harm themselves later.

 

[rjs330]

Some do and some don't. Where am I getting this from? From knowing actual people, for a start. There are lots of young girls who are put on contraceptives to suppress or delay or smooth menstrual cycles, and so on, who never go on to further medical treatment. Not all of them even do it for gender-identity related reasons.

90% do. That's not some. That's a vast majority.

 

[ralliann]

What is referred to in the professional literature as the best European study on gender dysphoria concluded that about 1 in 30,000 men (0.003%) and 1 in 100,000 women (0.001%) experience this. According to the DSM, the prevalence of gender dysphoria is 0.005–0.014% for adult males and 0.002-0.003% for adult females. Yet, we read that globally 2-3% of people now identify as transgender, while a 2022 Pew study indicated 1.6% of Americans and 5% of young adults now identify as transgender or nonbinary. This is a STAGGERING discrepancy.

It seems clear that there is an actual but very rare medical or psychological condition identifiable as gender dysphoria. How it should be dealt with is beyond my competence. Surely there are many cases where the individual will eventually accept his or her birth gender. Surely there are others where transitioning to the other gender is the best solution.

What we now see, as is evident from the statistics, is an explosive fad. "Pretend gender dysphoria," if you will. Both youth and adults are being encouraged to identify as transgender and celebrated when they do. This is madness. To the extent children too young to make responsible decisions in any other area of life are being encouraged and celebrated, it's pure evil. As I have said before, the pace at which this is occurring, and the number of otherwise sane and intelligent people who are buying into it, cannot be explained by me on any basis other than the influence of supernatural evil.

We see this in other things as well. Fibromyalgia, even in religion, Messianic Judaism.
Unexplained pain, imagined pain FB
The Messianic movement, so many among those groups, all of a sudden many Previously unknown , discovered they were Jewish. Some, were the simplest thing as a distent memory when they were very young recalled a jewish ritual, he had forgotten being done in his house.. We know this sort of thing happens. Of course there were a rare few, that yes, low and behold they were Jewish, the vast majority however just took it on themselves because they just knew some other way, some just felt JEWISH.

 

[Robban]

What is referred to in the professional literature as the best European study on gender dysphoria concluded that about 1 in 30,000 men (0.003%) and 1 in 100,000 women (0.001%) experience this. According to the DSM, the prevalence of gender dysphoria is 0.005–0.014% for adult males and 0.002-0.003% for adult females. Yet, we read that globally 2-3% of people now identify as transgender, while a 2022 Pew study indicated 1.6% of Americans and 5% of young adults now identify as transgender or nonbinary. This is a STAGGERING discrepancy.

It seems clear that there is an actual but very rare medical or psychological condition identifiable as gender dysphoria. How it should be dealt with is beyond my competence. Surely there are many cases where the individual will eventually accept his or her birth gender. Surely there are others where transitioning to the other gender is the best solution.

What we now see, as is evident from the statistics, is an explosive fad. "Pretend gender dysphoria," if you will. Both youth and adults are being encouraged to identify as transgender and celebrated when they do. This is madness. To the extent children too young to make responsible decisions in any other area of life are being encouraged and celebrated, it's pure evil. As I have said before, the pace at which this is occurring, and the number of otherwise sane and intelligent people who are buying into it, cannot be explained by me on any basis other than the influence of supernatural evil.

World popujation has increased with 6 billion in 90 years, wars, plagues, earthquakes has not made a dent in the numbers.

Everything is going so fast on all fronts.

 

[Bradskii]

The study proved my point that most kids that are given blockers go on the take the hormones. That's what I was trying to prove. And it dis prove it.

The study showed exactly tbe opposite of what you've been claiming. That there is some kind of conveyor belt rapidly delivering anyone who thinks they may be trans to the operating theatre. That is clearly not the case. And the link I gave (you didn't) shows exactly what people go through before even puberty blockers are considered. And when they are, what is the success rate? All but 100%. From the paper that you wanted us to read.

So dysphoria might be relieved but they are still at higher suicidiality.

Again, no links. But nobody has argued, is arguing or will argue that trans people don't have a higher suicide rate the the general population. If the amount of compassion and understanding is exemplified by comments and attitudues that we get exhibited in threads like this, then nobody is going to be surprised.

From here: Why have nearly half of transgender Australians attempted suicide?

Shockingly, 33 per cent reported discrimination from employment as a result of being trans, and the unemployment rate of 19 per cent was more than three times the national rate.

...discrimination when accessing healthcare results in nearly a third of transgender people avoiding medically necessary care.

Being subject to physical assault and widespread institutional discrimination because of a person’s trans status is also associated with over 60 per cent higher odds of reporting suicide attempts. Outright verbal and physical assault were reported by 63 per cent and 22 per cent of participants respectively.

We all have a role to play to be open minded, to be respectful and to call out discrimination.

And the place you are guaranteed to see those so many who refuse to be open minded and are specifically discriminatory? Well...I'll let you supply the answer to that.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No; but it's easy for a white person to be oblivious to the impact of their own words. And also to accept feedback, learn and adapt.

Don't stop now....black people have magical racism detection powers. White people? Perpetually oblivious.

What other broad generalizations do you believe. Anything about asians?

Well, yes, I assume that people who describe their experiences to me are, largely, being honest. And I have also seen the studies and brain scans and so on which demonstrate that there appears to be some biological basis to that experience. So, one might interpret those things differently, but objectively there seems to be "something" to the whole thing.

In my limited experience, they're often abuse and trauma survivors.

I mean that it can be quite difficult and onerous (even where it is practically possible) to have their gender recognised legally, particularly if they have not chosen surgery or have only had limited surgery.

There's a source outlining some of the legal and administrative stuff here: Change of sex

Ok...so, you don't have to fill out any forms here....you don't need to have surgery. You simply claim to be something and you are that.

A just society in which everyone is able to be safe, thrive, and strive to fulfil their potential.

Well already on points one and two the left has failed miserably.

I'd ban the commercial production and distribution of tobacco products, for a start. You want to grow a little in your garden, and even share with your neighbours, fine. But the days of companies making billions out of a highly addictive substance which only creates massive health burdens for our society should be gone.

Ok.

Well, its proponents on this thread have been pretty fuzzy about it, but it seems to be the enshrinement of a particular moment circa 1950, where "Christian values" reigned and we didn't have to deal with messy issues of sex, gender, human rights, and so on. (At least, that's the idealised, somewhat romanticised view of how it was).

In our entire history we only have a few decades of years to say we weren't at war. Perhaps the nostalgia is for a time of relative peace.

Depends on the workplace. My suspicion that the "traditionalists" don't actually care about women's equality is based on what I've observed of the way such people actually behave.

It would certainly be good to see the left become focussed, organised and strategic about achieving their goals. I've observed in the last decade or so that (broadly speaking) "the left" seems to have assumed that their self-evidently good and right attitudes would prevail, and that they didn't need to work to build the society they wanted. Then they've watched with dismay as people with different views and more discipline have been more effective. I'm still waiting for that realisation to crystallise enough to galvanise real action, though.

Real action? It's unfortunate but the other side also feels they've got good and right views.

 

[stevevw]

It suggests that we learn over time.

Like the words of the hymn say:
We limit not the truth of God
to our poor reach of mind,
to notions of our day and sect,
crude, partial and confined:
no, let a new and better hope
within our hearts be stirred:
the Lord has yet more light and truth
to break forth from his word.

Thats a beautiful poem. For me its saying that we limit Gods Truth by our own ideas due to human beliefs and concepts of truth. But we should let Gods Truth thats already within our hearts be stirred by applying Gods Word to new situations in society. Gods Truth is there in our hearts we just need to listen.

That's one view; I wouldn't say it's a universal Christian approach.

Why not Gods Truth is Gods Truth so is universal and it always stays the same yesterday, today and tommorrow. We just deny it and so we will always come back to that Truth and Gods Truth should remain the same even as society changes.

No, that is not what has been held throughout our history. For a very long time, people (including Christians) believed that women were defective, poorly developed males. You see that in Aristotle, picked up and echoed by later thinkers. Even today you will find, on this very site, people arguing that men, specifically, are made in God's image and women are not.

Actually the Christian worldview challenged Aristoles view of women and the Romans for that matter. In fact early Christian views such as about womens status revolutionized early western culture which still influences us today. Though at times the Church and secular society has gone away from this Truth we always come back to it because it works.

The value of women that permeates the New Testament isn’t found in the Greco-Roman culture or the cultures of other societies. As Christianity spread throughout the world, its redemptive effects elevated women and set them free in many ways. The Christian ethic declared equal worth and value for both men and women. The biblical view of husbands and wives as equal partners caused a sea change in marriage as well. The greater marital freedom that Christianity gave women eventually gained wide appeal. As a result of Jesus Christ and His teachings, women in much of the world today, especially in the West, enjoy more privileges and rights than at any other time in history.
Christianity: The Best Thing That Ever Happened to Women | Bible.org

This is what I mean when I say that your argument about "traditional truths" doesn't stand up to an examination of what people actually thought and wrote, through our history.

The your not being open and fair about our history because there are clear examples of how Christian values and Truths change society in important ways that have lasted in Western culture. Look at the US Declaration which eventually went on to free slaves and create democracy. Look at human worth established early in our history based on being made in Gods image which has formed the basis of national Declarations and Human Rights. These are thoughts and writings which can be found through our history.

While I agree with you that when we lose sight of the truth that every human person is made in God's image, we get into trouble. But this is not about biology, or sexed bodies. I'd suggest we need to take a step back and ask more thoughtfully what it means to be made "in the image of God."

Of course biology comes into it. Its called Gods Good creation. He could have made us some alien creature that was not made biologically like humans but He mae us male and female in human form able to procreate, reason and have realtionship with God.

So is being able to make one's own decisions about one's medical treatment.

Yes and no one is denying adults the freedom to do so. But when it comes to children and adolescents thats a different story. But even for adults we should at least ensure those medical treatments are evidenced based so that they can make informed decisions about the risks and harm involved. When it comes to Trans Affirmative treatment we should question its validity for being an option in the first place for anyone.

Again, no... our history is not that shining.

I'm getting the impression you don't l;ike the West or at least see it negatively more than positively. The fact that we haven't always lived up to these long held Truths doesn't negate them. We shouldn't wash those Truths away by looking at the negative and making that the truth. Look at the current Marxism in society especially universities who want to tear down the icons of the West because of one particular lens of our history while wiping out many of their great achievements at the same time.

Sure, male and female bodies are a reality. Also a reality are the people who - to put it crudely - have brains that don't match their body, due to their particular development. Can a person change sex, biologically? No. But can they be given the grace to make medical decisions, and navigate society, in ways which make life most tolerable for them? Yes. Should this pose any particular problem to anybody else? Aside from certain very particular situations, not really.

The key as you said is "can they be given the grace to make medical decisions, and navigate society, in ways which make life most tolerable for them?". We can give them the grace to make medical decisions but we must also make sure the choices they have will make life more tolerable for them.

At best we just don't know about Trans Affirmative treatment being the solution and at worst as evidence is beginning to show its not the best option. A big part of that is that we cannot artifically change sex and doing so may actually contribute and compound the very problem they are trying to obercome. So if we truely want to give them the grace lets ensure we give the best care and not mkae things worse.

Astonishingly, for the vast majority of interactions I have with other human beings, what reproductive organs they have simply do not matter at all.

Of course "what reproductive organs" we have matter everyday. Ask female sports people, ask womens Rights groups or mens mental health organisations. Men and women have unique and different issues which basically come down to their reproductive differences.

Fantastic. So transgendered people are also made in God's image. Let's honour them for the rational, creative, relational* people they are created to be, just like their Creator.
*Rationality, creativity and relationality all being characteristics of God which we, being made in God's image, share.

No one is denying Trans people these characteristics. The current debate in society isn't about Rights, its about imposing an ideological view on how we should see Trans and society and reality for that matter.

To honour people we need to honour the Truth, whats real and rational and not what is unreal and irrational such as Trans ideology. That is the opposite to a free and open society that can be creative as it takes a Totalitarian view and restricts everything down to a single worldview and then enforces it on everyone.

Modern society is making people physically and mentally sick with similar ideas about how we should be ordered to achieve wellbeing such as Identity Politics, Individual Freedom and Autonomy at all costs, beliefs about relationships and sex, expectations about success and material wealth and unreal expectations about what will make us happy and well. What is happening isn't helping people to be creative and have good relations its hindering this.

I will leave it there and reply to the rest seperately.

 

[Paidiske]

I think we agree that true transgender people are mentally ill.

I wouldn't say that. If there is a true brain-body incongruence, recognising that isn't mental illness.

When you look at the desistance rate, the regret and the sudden increase there is absolutely no excuse for transing any child. None. And the fact that you have no spoken against it speaks volumes about how powerful this ideology is. It's evil and you've fallen for it.

Transitioning is a complex, multi-faceted process. I have no real problem with, say, letting a child choose a new name, or wear clothes they're comfortable in. The bar is - with good reason - higher for medical intervention, and the more serious the intervention, the higher the bar. That seems appropriate. It's not evil to give people necessary medical treatment.

However kids are a completely different thing. You know as well as I do kids are not mature enough and their brains thinking processes haven't fully developed yet, but we say they are mature enough and old enough to make life altering decisions like this? How preposterous. You of all people should be standing against this.

Why should I - of all people - be so arrogant as to think I know better than a young person, their parents, and their entire medical team?

This comes back around to some of my very early posts in this thread, where I suggested that the church needed to relinquish power and control as a way of relating to others.

And I noticed that you called my cutting example gross.

Yes, because it compares needed medical treatment with self-harm, which is a very different issue.

Which is nothing compared to allowing kids to mutilate themselves by having their breasts chopped off. It's evil personified. You of all people should be in front of the line resisting this.

Get a grip. Women have breast reduction surgery for cosmetic or personal reasons all the time, and nobody carries on about "evil personified." Sex transition surgery on minors is very rare, and only when very strongly indicated. It's mostly fat tissue that's removed from the chest. This isn't "mutilation," it's intended as much needed medical treatment.

Yet you say nothing about what being done to kids as transgenders. Which is the same exact thing.

No, it isn't.

WPATH...they created the vast bulk of studies this garbage rests on.

That wasn't my source; I think you're confusing me with another poster. The source we were discussing, that I provided, was a review in the Journal of Neuroendocrinology.

That I should be required to affirm someone else's faith based beliefs is beyond a minor request. It's blatantly tyrannical.

If you find it "blatantly tyrannical" to call someone by their chosen name, or the like, I think we have very different definitions of tyranny.

So up until now....you were permissive of any treatment. After all, you probably believe that children's lives are at stake. Now that I tell you there's a possibility of avoiding the problem entirely.....you say, I don't know?

This no longer looks like a good faith discussion.

First, a caveat that I recognise that comparing transgendered identity to disability is offensive for a lot of people, it's difficult to avoid at this point, and I truly don't mean it in an offensive way.

That said, you may or may not be aware that there are massive debates raging in various parts of the disability community, about whether disability ought to be eradicated even if we can, about whether a eugenicist approach is ethical; and so on. This gets particularly pointed around the Deaf community, around neurodiversity, and so on.

I put this question of possibly preventing transgendered development by gene manipulation in that light, and I am aware that there is a complex, difficult, discussion to be had about the ethics of such treatment, and at this point, I am not prepared to say I have all the answers to that. I don't know that it should be my decision to make.

Thats a beautiful poem. For me its saying that we limit Gods Truth by our own ideas due to human beliefs and concepts of truth.

Exactly. So we should be open to new ideas and new concepts. It's worth noting the author of that hymn was a 19th-century English Congregationalist, so his work demonstrates that some of the attitudes I'm arguing for have been part of a more "traditional" take on Christianity than perhaps your arguments have allowed for.

Why not Gods Truth is Gods Truth so is universal and it always stays the same yesterday, today and tommorrow.

Well, that view might be the basis of a fairly apodictic approach to Christian ethics. But there are other schools of ethics, even in Christian thought; virtue ethics, basic human goods ethics, consequentialist ethics, and so on. There's a book by Samuel Wells called Improvisation: The Drama of Christian Ethics which looks at how our ethical responses might be less like reading from a script, and more like developing a godly character which then expresses itself in new and varied situations. It's a concept worth thinking about.

Actually the Christian worldview challenged Aristoles view of women and the Romans for that matter.

Perhaps, and it certainly helped provide a foundation for feminist thought. However, my point was simply that Christian views about things like being made in God's image, and what it means to be male and female, have not been unchanged through our history. This is demonstrable by a fairly quick glance at our history, and the diversity of views held even today.

The your not being open and fair about our history

Really? I'm not being open and fair to point out that Christians throughout history have not all valued women as made in the image of God?

Here's a quote from Augustine of Hippo:
" . . woman was given to man, woman who was of small intelligence and who perhaps still lives more in accordance with the promptings of the inferior flesh than by superior reason. Is this why the apostle Paul does not attribute the image of God to her?”
De Genesi ad literam Book 11.42

Or the same Augustine:
". . . the woman together with her own husband is the image of God, so that that whole substance may be one image; but when she is referred separately to her quality of help-meet, which regards the woman herself alone, then she is not the image of God; but as regards the man alone, he is the image of God as fully and completely as when the woman too is joined with him in one.”
On the Trinity, 12.7.10

Here's Aquinas:
“As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence. Such as that of a south wind, which is moist, as the Philosopher observes” (On the Generation of Animals 4.2).

Of course biology comes into it.

Being "in the image of God" is not a matter of biology. God is not a biological being.

I'm getting the impression you don't l;ike the West or at least see it negatively more than positively.

There are good things about Western culture, but there are lots of problems too.

The fact that we haven't always lived up to these long held Truths doesn't negate them.

It does kind of undermine your claim, though, that we had a wonderful, well-ordered society based on these unchanging "truths" until five minutes ago, and then it all went to hell in a handbasket.

Look at the current Marxism in society especially universities who want to tear down the icons of the West because of one particular lens of our history while wiping out many of their great achievements at the same time.

I should create a bingo card for these threads.

We can give them the grace to make medical decisions but we must also make sure the choices they have will make life more tolerable for them.

"We" must? Who's "we"? And why is that something "we" have to control?

Of course "what reproductive organs" we have matter everyday.

Really? Outside my marriage, to whom do my reproductive organs matter? Nobody else sees them (occasional medical checks aside), and they don't impinge on my work, my friendships, my hobbies. Likewise, outside my household, I don't see anyone else's reproductive organs, and which organs people have, doesn't impinge on my ability to work with them, engage socially with them, or even (shock horror) worship with them.

The range of contexts in which this actually matters is very small. It helps to keep that in perspective.

Men and women have unique and different issues which basically come down to their reproductive differences.

Some of them do; most of them, in my experience, come down to inhabiting a society which treats men and women very differently.

No one is denying Trans people these characteristics.

The point, though, is that biology, sex and gender are not what it means to be in the image of God. The "image of God" is not about a sex binary.

To honour people we need to honour the Truth, whats real and rational and not what is unreal and irrational such as Trans ideology.

And by "trans ideology" you mean what, exactly?

That is the opposite to a free and open society that can be creative as it takes a Totalitarian view and restricts everything down to a single worldview and then enforces it on everyone.

I don't know whether you see the glaring irony of arguing against someone else's single worldview, while wanting to insist that everyone honour your take on "Truth."

Modern society is making people physically and mentally sick with similar ideas about how we should be ordered to achieve wellbeing such as Identity Politics, Individual Freedom and Autonomy at all costs, beliefs about relationships and sex, expectations about success and material wealth and unreal expectations about what will make us happy and well.

There's some truth to this. I'd start by critiquing the way the industrial revolution has shaped our ideas about work, for a start. I don't think scapegoating some of society's most vulnerable people is really going to help tackle much of this in any constructive way, though. Nor - to come back around to my first post in this thread - is a bunch of Christians trying to exert power and control over the rest of society.

 

[stevevw]

The study showed exactly tbe opposite of what you've been claiming. That there is some kind of conveyor belt rapidly delivering anyone who thinks they may be trans to the operating theatre. That is clearly not the case. And the link I gave (you didn't) shows exactly what people go through before even puberty blockers are considered. And when they are, what is the success rate? All but 100%. From the paper that you wanted us to read.

This seems logically unreal. If we are to believe Trans ideology the Affirming Care Model must be adopted as a matter of life and death at increasingly younger ages because the earlier the better in negating the experience as the opposite sex and to stop puberty developing opposite sex traits which only compound the anguish.

So kids are socially transitioned early and research shows that once on this transitional path most stay on it with Hormone therapy. Some and increasingly so go on to surgery. So its not just about the "converor belt to surgery" but the conveyor belt to social transition and Hormone therapy as well which is clearly the case from the high increase in those being diagnosed Trans and going down the transitional path.

I mean they now promote social transitioning at school for 4 and 5 year olds. If there is only one option for GD which Affirms Trans then of course more and more people are going to transition as its the recommended approach. Every person in the childs life at school are promoting the ideology. This is witnessed by 2000 to 4000% increases in GD. If society is selling breast binding tops for little girls and penis tucking pants for boys then this is actually cultivating transition.

The chances are that we will end up with more kids going on to Hormones and surgery is increased by flooding society with the iea that little boys and girls can become the opposite sex to solve their identity and boy dysmorphism problems.

Again, no links. But nobody has argued, is arguing or will argue that trans people don't have a higher suicide rate the the general population. If the amount of compassion and understanding is exemplified by comments and attitudues that we get exhibited in threads like this, then nobody is going to be surprised.

From here: Why have nearly half of transgender Australians attempted suicide?

Shockingly, 33 per cent reported discrimination from employment as a result of being trans, and the unemployment rate of 19 per cent was more than three times the national rate.

...discrimination when accessing healthcare results in nearly a third of transgender people avoiding medically necessary care.

Being subject to physical assault and widespread institutional discrimination because of a person’s trans status is also associated with over 60 per cent higher odds of reporting suicide attempts. Outright verbal and physical assault were reported by 63 per cent and 22 per cent of participants respectively.

We all have a role to play to be open minded, to be respectful and to call out discrimination.

And the place you are guaranteed to see those so many who refuse to be open minded and are specifically discriminatory? Well...I'll let you supply the answer to that.

No one is denying that Trans people suffer high suicide rates and descrmination. But once again its a clarity and misrepresentation issue employed by Trans activists who twist the Truth like using emotional blackmail on parents that they are better off with a living Trans female than losing their son to suicide and often use this type of tactic to enforce the Affirmative care model which has been shown to have no evdience and may even contribute to suicide.

I think its hard to tell what causes suicide in people with GD because the research is poor. Some show improvement in mental health after Transition on the short term perhaps a honeymoon period while long term studies show no improvement and even an increase in suicidality even in Scandinavian countries who have the most anti -descrimination societies in the world.

Long-term follow-up of individuals undergoing sex reassignment surgery: Psychiatric morbidity and mortality

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08039488.2015.1081405?journalCode=ipsc20

Another study in Sweden shows Trans people have 20 times higher suicide rates post surgery.
Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden

Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden

Context The treatment for transsexualism is sex reassignment, including hormonal treatment and surgery aimed at making the person's body as congruent with the opposite sex as possible. There is a dearth of long term, follow-up studies after sex reassignment. Objective To estimate mortality...

journals.plos.org

I question the claim about descrimination in Health Care access. The Affirmation Model has been so successful that its actually Transitioning non Trans people. Its had massive campaigns and aggressive pushing onto schools and the Health system too much so. I wonder if some of that percieved descrimination isn't the fact that some therapist are actually providing evidience based care which denies the Affirmation Trans model.

I agree poor treatment of Trans people or any person who is different is wrong and should be stopped. But that should not be achieved with misrepresentations which make it harder to help these people. I think everyone wants help for people suffering GD its just a disagreement about how that can be achieved thats the problem.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The study showed exactly tbe opposite of what you've been claiming. That there is some kind of conveyor belt rapidly delivering anyone who thinks they may be trans to the operating theatre. That is clearly not the case. And the link I gave (you didn't) shows exactly what people go through before even puberty blockers are considered. And when they are, what is the success rate? All but 100%. From the paper that you wanted us to read.

Again, no links. But nobody has argued, is arguing or will argue that trans people don't have a higher suicide rate the the general population. If the amount of compassion and understanding is exemplified by comments and attitudues that we get exhibited in threads like this, then nobody is going to be surprised.

From here: Why have nearly half of transgender Australians attempted suicide?

Shockingly, 33 per cent reported discrimination from employment as a result of being trans, and the unemployment rate of 19 per cent was more than three times the national rate.

...discrimination when accessing healthcare results in nearly a third of transgender people avoiding medically necessary care.

Being subject to physical assault and widespread institutional discrimination because of a person’s trans status is also associated with over 60 per cent higher odds of reporting suicide attempts. Outright verbal and physical assault were reported by 63 per cent and 22 per cent of participants respectively.

We all have a role to play to be open minded, to be respectful and to call out discrimination.

And the place you are guaranteed to see those so many who refuse to be open minded and are specifically discriminatory? Well...I'll let you supply the answer to that.

Wow....Australia is awful for trans people.

Still, those are stats on attempted suicide. Those people lived. What's the actual suicide rate?

 

[rjs330]

The study showed exactly tbe opposite of what you've been claiming. That there is some kind of conveyor belt rapidly delivering anyone who thinks they may be trans to the operating theatre. That is clearly not the case. And the link I gave (you didn't) shows exactly what people go through before even puberty blockers are considered. And when they are, what is the success rate? All but 100%. From the paper that you wanted us to read.

Again, no links. But nobody has argued, is arguing or will argue that trans people don't have a higher suicide rate the the general population. If the amount of compassion and understanding is exemplified by comments and attitudues that we get exhibited in threads like this, then nobody is going to be surprised.

From here: Why have nearly half of transgender Australians attempted suicide?

Shockingly, 33 per cent reported discrimination from employment as a result of being trans, and the unemployment rate of 19 per cent was more than three times the national rate.

...discrimination when accessing healthcare results in nearly a third of transgender people avoiding medically necessary care.

Being subject to physical assault and widespread institutional discrimination because of a person’s trans status is also associated with over 60 per cent higher odds of reporting suicide attempts. Outright verbal and physical assault were reported by 63 per cent and 22 per cent of participants respectively.

We all have a role to play to be open minded, to be respectful and to call out discrimination.

And the place you are guaranteed to see those so many who refuse to be open minded and are specifically discriminatory? Well...I'll let you supply the answer to that.

Wrong. The studies proved my point. I will repeat myself for the last time. Upwards of 90% of kids that take puberty blockers for this go in to take cross sex hormones. You can't deny it. It's all there. I didn't say they all go on to get surgeries. Those are expensive and often people can't afford them without insurance paying.

Again the success rate is based on short term reporting. Long term is non-existent.

So again I ask if 80% of kids desist on their own without drugs, then why are we giving drugs to kids when if you do 90% go on to the next step which is the hormones? You haven't answered that.

The clinics give the kids the drugs as affirmation when they come in and say they are trans. Nearly 100% of them. If you had 10 kids go in and you did not give them the puberty blockers 8 of them would desist. But if you give all of them blockers then 9 of them would go on to the hormones. You have just put 8 kids on the trans train that wouldn't be if you didn't. THIS is what .talking about. The other point is less than 1% are actually trans. So out of the 10, statistically speaking none of them are really trans. So you have just put nearly all of them in the trans train when left alone they wouldn't be by the time they reached adulthood.

How you can defend this is beyond me.

I know what the link said. You know I told you I read all the stuff. So I was well aware of the short term effects. They didn't surprise me a bit. I would expect it. So should you. But again it's not a long term study and the people were self reporting. The point I have been trying to get across is simply the fact that 90% of kids that go on blockers continue to hormones and transitioning. It's interesting you didn't deny that.

And I don't think I need to defend myself on bullying etc. I've been more than clear on my positions on that.

And NO in the US the kids do NOT have to go through much of anything to be put on blockers and hormones. You can get it done in 40 minutes or less.

And you also know good and well that the UK and Sweden along with other countries have backed away from the affirmative care model. So why are you defending it?

 

[rjs330]

Some do and some don't. Where am I getting this from? From knowing actual people, for a start. There are lots of young girls who are put on contraceptives to suppress or delay or smooth menstrual cycles, and so on, who never go on to further medical treatment. Not all of them even do it for gender-identity related reasons.

No, you really haven't. You've cherry picked and misinterpreted some data (once again, thanks to @Bradskii for pointing some of that out).

Mostly, I do trust them, at least those more local to me. I know people who've been patients in them. I know a fair bit about their protocols. And I know that they don't match what you're putting forward, in the slightest.

Am I claiming every single clinic everywhere gets it right in every single case? No. But again, the idea that clinicians are mutilating kids on a whim is just flat-out wrong.

This may be one benefit of a government-run health system, rather than an American-style for-profit system.

And what does it mean to "affirm"? It means allowing the kids to explore their gender identity. It means allowing them to experiment with things like names, pronouns, dress, social roles. It means exploring the possibilities for treatment. Rather than refusing any of these things on the grounds that the kids are "delusional."

Eg: see here: What is gender-affirming care? Your questions answered

Note in particular: "The interventions fall along a continuum as well, from counseling to changes in social expression to medications (such as hormone therapy). For children in particular, the timing of the interventions is based on several factors, including cognitive and physical development as well as parental consent. Surgery, including to reduce a person’s Adam’s Apple, or to align their chest or genitalia with their gender identity, is rarely provided to people under 18."

What it does not mean, is rushing young kids into the operating theatre without adequate assessment.

Not in the US.
Here's a link to a discussion you really should listen to. Take the time. It's from a conference regarding gender and the transitioning of teens with some very qualified people. It's worth listening too. And by the way they also have an interview with the whistle blower. I challenge you to listen to their information.

 

[rjs330]

This isn't required in the US.

1. has been seen by the GIDS for at least 6 months and attended at least 4 interviews for assessment and therapeutic exploration of their gender identity development.
2. psychological stability sufficient to withstand the stresses of medical treatment for GID.
3. fulfils the following criteria

You can literally walk in, say you're trans, get pills 20 minutes later.

I've been saying this the entire thread. They aren't going to listen to you either.

 

[Paidiske]

So again I ask if 80% of kids desist on their own without drugs, then why are we giving drugs to kids when if you do 90% go on to the next step which is the hormones?

What if - here's a thought - it's 90% of the 20% whose gender dysphoria persists, who go on to the next step?

You are not comparing identical cohorts. The cohort whose dysphoria desists, are not the same cohort who go on to hormonal treatment.

The clinics give the kids the drugs as affirmation when they come in and say they are trans. Nearly 100% of them.

Nope. As already demonstrated, that's not what affirming care means.

Have a look here:

 

[Paidiske]

I've been saying this the entire thread. They aren't going to listen to you either.

Because it's clearly contradicted by actual treatment protocols and standards.