When two worldviews collide.

[oikonomia]

Don't feel that compulsion. Not in the slightest. Never did.

Who is the gentleman in your avatar?
Is that someone you admire?

 

[oikonomia]

It looked like you just did.

I never said it never happens to me.

 

[Bradskii]

I never said it never happens to me.

I don't think anyone suggested it didn't.

The thing is, I am curious. And I have a tendency to poke around for evidence when somone proposes something without any. Even if it's only suggested by asking a specific question. So I thought I'd check to see who people consider to be the most influential person in their life.

If there had been some links that indicated the Jesus was high on anyone's list then I would have indicated it. There weren't. At least not in the first couple of pages of links I looked at. But hey, if it had been a leading question such as ''Is Jesus one of the most important influences in your life?' then He'd be mentioned a lot. But those aren't the type of questions that get the accurate answers.

And again, why do we need carrots and sticks to persuade us to choose Jesus over Ghengis Kahn?

 

[oikonomia]

The thing is, I am curious. And I have a tendency to poke around for evidence when somone proposes something without any. Even if it's only suggested by asking a specific question. So I thought I'd check to see who people consider to be the most influential person in their life.

I see.
Well, I can't possibly imagine anyone more influential on my life above Jesus Christ.

I have considered mother, father, siblings, teachers living or deceased. Why I even considered the Devil himself.
I can't think of anyone who has had more influence on me above that of Jesus.

He is alive, you know ?

If there had been some links that indicated the Jesus was high on anyone's list then I would have indicated it. There weren't. At least not in the first couple of pages of links I looked at. But hey, if it had been a leading question such as ''Is Jesus one of the most important influences in your life?' then He'd be mentioned a lot. But those aren't the type of questions that get the accurate answers.

I have found that many keep thier thoughts about what the words of Jesus mean to them kind of close to the vest.
Not all do. But I get a tone of "That's really personal" or something like that.

And again, why do we need carrots and sticks to persuade us to choose Jesus over Ghengis Kahn?

Speaking for myself then, Ghengis Kahn I find interesting as a mighty military leader.
Say, I regard him in the class of such as Alexander, Nepolean, etc.

But Jesus as God become a man. And such a man as can live in me, blend with me, dispense His life and nature into me for eternity.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Who is the gentleman in your avatar?
Is that someone you admire?

It's my 'Uncle Billy'. My spirit animal to combat the neo-Confederates.

 

[Confused-by-christianity]

"Subjective" is basically when whatever is being described is influenced by our based on feelings, opinions, tastes, etc. "Objective" is when whatever is being described is not based on those things, but instead based on something (generally something independently observable/confirmable) that does not change according to feelings, opinions, tastes, etc. A basic example of something subjective would be the taste of food -- for some people, 'fancy' French food is the greatest cuisine in the world, while for others it's disgusting and overhyped. There is no objective criteria by which a particular cuisine can be shown to be 'better' or 'worse' than another. An example of something objective would be the Pythagorean Theorem, which is used to describe the relationship between the three sides of a right triangle. The theorem works the same regardless of where you are in the world, how you feel about triangles, whether or not you care for math as a subject, etc.

Is it fair to say that everything in our worldview that isn't proven (maths is the only thing that offers proof) is subjective??

Everything else we think we know must pass through feelings, senses, our best intellectual review - making it "subjective" ???

It seems to me people think subjective refers to review by feelings and objective refers to review by senses and intellect??? Which to me is as open to error as feelings.

Sure, but maybe it would help to remember that everyone's understanding is incomplete -- "for now we see through a glass, darkly",

Yes - thats exactly how I see it.
In fact, I think you cannot fairly judge this universe reality until you're outside of it (spirit).

Maybe? Now you're describing how it feels for you (your subjective experience! ), so sure...if that's how you conceive of things, then who is anyone to tell you otherwise?

Feelings - Yes, I feel like a man. Subjective.
Senses - do not tell me anything here except I am observing myself as male. Objective.
Intellect - I understand roughly what terms are used to describe male and female. I am male by the scientific perspective.

I don't think the most common objection to trans that you find here on CF is that the people who identify that way are describing their subjective experiences or feelings incorrectly (that wouldn't even make sense,

I said I "feel" like a man - but how do I know what a man feels like or what a woman feels like to say I'm one or the other on the inside, thats a question I think about often enough.

once you know what 'subjective' means),

ha - still not sure if i've got it haha ;-)

Anyway - I better go for now - thanks for replying

 

[Confused-by-christianity]

...Personally for me, the question of anthropology (i.e., what it means to be a person) is paramount, ...

What seperates us from the animals??
I'm going to go with "we make moral decisions".

See if that stands up to a little discussion haha

 

[rjs330]

As for "working on the possibility that if left alone they will desist," isn't that the point of starting with things like counselling, experimenting with external appearance, and social roles (like names and pronouns)? That gives time and space to see whether and how much those things help, and whether more is needed. I note the comments about how many people only proceed so far because they get to a point that feels right for them.

However that's not what is happening. I child goes in claiming to be trans. A relatively short conversation takes place. No real therapy is done and they are put on puberty blockers. And the 90% go onto hormones.

If you leave them alone and no puberty blockers then 90-98% desist. They gone on to be their normal gender. You have just avoided transing kids that weren't trans after all.
Affirming them allows them to continue the transitions. You see once put on blockers they inevitably decide to trans. When not they stop. It's that simple.
They weren't trans after all despite the claims they had.

 

[Robban]

What seperates us from the animals??
I'm going to go with "we make moral decisions".

See if that stands up to a little discussion haha

We were designed to walk and stand upright, which we do not do when very young.

It is about becomijg a "Mentch" humanly, decency.

And yet when we fail in this, "Well I'm only human."


Huh?

 

[rjs330]

That's the nub of it, isn't it? If someone's genuinely transgendered, it's not irresponsible. But if you've decided a priori that that's not possible, then no treatment or care will ever be acceptable to you.

The nub of it is your side is transing kids that aren't. You see if you really are trans then waiting until adulthood to do so does you no harm. However if you trans a kid that is not trans then you have done great harm.

I do think there are people who feel like they are the opposite sex. A delusion disorder. I mean we have all kinds of those types of mental health disorders. However in this case we are misdiagnosing these kids by the boatloads. There is no excuse for that.

 

[rjs330]

In addition, ongoing monitoring or counselling normally occurs alongside the “Real Life Experience” of living in the affirmed gender. This involves forming a trusting relationship with a mental health clinician in order to explore their gender identity.

Hmmm.... All that in ADDITION to real life experience of living in the affirmed gender. So yes they are being fast tracked while taking a look at other health issues. It's precisely what I said and linked to in the one link I posted. All the other comorbities take second place to the gender affirmation.

This process usually covers a broad range of issues in order to consider all the circumstances that will help an individual who is transitioning achieve stability and satisfaction in their lives.."

All these things are done for one purpose. To help the person who is transitioning.

Clients who have a mental health condition such as schizophrenia, depression, Borderline Personality Disorder or Autism Spectrum Disorder are still eligible to receive support from our clinic. Their assessment however may be extended to ensure that adequate supports are in place prior to any gender-related treatments.

Oh yes they look at other things just to make sure that they have supports in place before gender treatments. One that is good then we are good to go for treatment.

The question I have is exactly how many that go into these clinics come out under transgendering treatments and how many are not because they have discovered they are not trans after all?

 

[rjs330]

• Your experiences of gender at various stages of your life,
• Any gender-related distress,
• Your mental health history and current supports,
• Other relevant life experiences.
• The purpose of this is to identify your strengths and what supports are needed as you embark on strategies to reduce your distress.

Yes all geared to transition you to relieve your gender stress. We'll help you transition.

 

[rjs330]

Affirming someone does not mean not allowing them to desist; it means allowing them to explore and work out what is going on for them, and what is helpful to them. All of the literature emphasises that some people may not move forward or choose medical intervention, and that's fine.

But it is wrong to assume that everyone will have their dysphoria desist naturally, also.

At the pace that is right for them. Over a period of years (let me remind you that the average time of transition is five years, and that the younger they start the longer it takes because more intense interventions aren't offered at such young ages).

It's not as if adults are there pressuring children to go further at every step of the way; quite the opposite.

6 months is the time span that symptoms need to persist to be able to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Not the time it takes for assessment, intervention, treatment, and so on.

You might be happy, really, to note that this provides a minimum time before any diagnosis is even possible, which allows for transient feelings to desist.

All I'm sold on is stopping Christian/conservative culture warriors dictating other people's medical treatment. I'm happy to leave the rest to the experts.

Finland has gone to 5 years not 6 months. Sweden doesn't do it all. UK is also on that band wagon now.

6 months really. You can influence an adolescent to do just about anything for six months. If you know anything about them you know it's true.

Boy you sure are focused on conservative Christians. This despite the fact I haven't quoted a single Christian source or a single bible verse. You know there are a LOT of people out there who are against this who are Christians.

It seems the conservative non-Christan experts are not siding with you anymore. So I guess if you are leaving it to the experts you'll have to decide which ones. Because even now there are experts who are disagreeing with each other.

Genspect is another group of experts who do not agree with WPATH and have an alternate idea.

But it seems to me that you are so sold on your ideology that you can't consider the facts that experts are changing their minds. And other experts in the field are offering alternatives to the transactivist groups.

Did you watch the video yet? You really should. And no it's not a Christian conservative video so you won't have to take shower afterward. None of the videos I posted are. And the trans train documentary out of Sweden isn't either.

Oh and I don't think Ana is a Christian/conservative. Hmmm.... I beginning to think you have picked the wrong boogy man to be afraid of.

 

[Bradskii]

Finland has gone to 5 years not 6 months. Sweden doesn't do it all. UK is also on that band wagon now.

Why do you keep quoting people with whom you disagree?

 

[Paidiske]

However that's not what is happening.

I see it happening in real life (people only proceeding so far), so I'm afraid I just don't agree with you here.

The nub of it is your side is transing kids that aren't.

It's not "my side." Again, the only thing I'm really arguing for here, is for culture warriors to stay out of people's medical decisions.

You see if you really are trans then waiting until adulthood to do so does you no harm.

Well, that's not actually true. For eg. see here: Better mental health found among transgender people who started hormones as teens

Hmmm.... All that in ADDITION to real life experience of living in the affirmed gender.

As they progress, yes. So, for example, let's say a young person chooses a new name and chooses to start dressing more like the opposite sex. Counselling continues during this time to monitor how that is for them, whether and how much it's helping, whether they actually find that it relieves any distress, and so on. For two purposes; because if it has a large benefit, that might be enough, for now; and if it has a small benefit, it will help shape next decisions.

So yes they are being fast tracked while taking a look at other health issues. It's precisely what I said

No, because you're not acknowledging that the initial assessment is in part to work out whether the gender dysphoria is caused by other factors.

All these things are done for one purpose. To help the person who is transitioning.

Well, if not to help them, what on earth should we be doing? What other purpose should there be?

The question I have is exactly how many that go into these clinics come out under transgendering treatments and how many are not because they have discovered they are not trans after all?

That's hard to find good data for, but I did find this: A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder Of a particular sample of boys referred to a gender clinic for gender dysphoria, about 37% didn't meet the threshold for diagnosis at initial assessment. When followed up 20 years after referral, about 12% found their dysphoria persisted. (Apparently prior studies had generally found a persistence rate closer to 17%).

The study authors did note that changing social attitudes, practices and recommendations meant that children today were having a very different experience (for example, were more likely to have parents open to considering a diagnosis in the first place).

Finland has gone to 5 years not 6 months. Sweden doesn't do it all. UK is also on that band wagon now.

I think you're misreading the information there. 6 months is the necessary minimum duration of symptoms for a diagnosis to be possible, not the length of time taken before giving a particular treatment.

You can influence an adolescent to do just about anything for six months. If you know anything about them you know it's true.

Want to come and influence mine to clean her room? 'Cause I'm failing dismally to get her to do that for so much as six minutes...

Boy you sure are focused on conservative Christians. This despite the fact I haven't quoted a single Christian source or a single bible verse. You know there are a LOT of people out there who are against this who are Christians.

The whole premise of this thread is that there's a disjunction of worldview between Christians/traditionalists/conservatives, and atheists/liberals/progressives. I actually find that premise problematic, but that's the thing the OP wanted to explore in discussion. Transgender issues is just the sample issue we've somehow ended up stuck on. I'd be quite happy to pick another, if you'd like.

So I guess if you are leaving it to the experts you'll have to decide which ones. Because even now there are experts who are disagreeing with each other.

They'll work it out, though. If standards of care need amending, over time they'll be amended, just like for every other medical issue. They don't need me heckling them from the peanut gallery while they do it.

 

[rjs330]

guess what? I don't believe that people here are in any position to assess that research and set clinical protocols. Part of the reason I don't believe that is that I have seen people in this thread routinely apparently fail to read, misread, misunderstand, and misrepresent, very basic information.

That's not what I asked. I asked if we were going to help kids go down the path of permanent physical changes and life altering treatments shouldn't we demand that the gold standard be the standard? If we are basing our decisions on poor and inconclusive research then I would think anyone would say we shouldn't do that because we don't really have the evidence that it's effective and in fact it could be very damaging.

It's one thing is we are talking about the best way to tie a stitch but quite another when we are talking about completely altering someones body and life. We are starting to look at the factor that it's unethical to do so. Not just unethical but medically irresponsible.

And your claim is completely unjustified. All of us are using others work regarding this research. The Swedes, the UK and the Finnish professionals have all said the same thing which WE are referring to. It's not our own personal.evaluation. it's the evaluation of professionals. Why aren't you trusting the professionals all of a sudden?

 

[rjs330]

I see it happening in real life (people only proceeding so far), so I'm afraid I just don't agree with you here.

How do you know. You said you don't work with kids in this issue. It seems your view is quite restricted. I suggest you broaden your horizons. I gave you one video regarding this to view. Perhaps you should watch it and then do more research on it.

 

[Paidiske]

I asked if we were going to help kids go down the path of permanent physical changes and life altering treatments shouldn't we demand that the gold standard be the standard?

I answered what you asked; I said that we are not in any position to assess whether or how standards should be improved.

For what it's worth, in all the reading I've been doing, the need for ongoing research and refinement has been acknowledged; alongside the need to do the best we know how for the people who need care now.

All of us are using others work regarding this research. The Swedes, the UK and the Finnish professionals have all said the same thing which WE are referring to. It's not our own personal.evaluation. it's the evaluation of professionals. Why aren't you trusting the professionals all of a sudden?

I am trusting the professionals. I'm trusting the professionals to work this out, at the level of governance of medical bodies. If there's disagreement over this or that detail (which is normal in many areas of medicine) I'm trusting them to work through that. The improvement of medical treatments is an iterative process and it's inevitable that things will change and be refined. That's fine, and normal.

 

[rjs330]

No you don't. GPs diagnose mental health conditions routinely.

Not for any? How about Bi-polar?

 

[Paidiske]

How do you know. You said you don't work with kids in this issue. It seems your view is quite restricted. I suggest you broaden your horizons.

No, I work with adults; adults who have decided to stop short of full transition. I also know kids (not through my work, but through my personal life) who have not gone through with complete transition. In fact, I don't know anyone who has gone through a full social, medical and surgical transition. But I know many who have made social changes, or who have undergone some medical treatment but not the full range of possible surgery, and so on.

And I can read the stats that say things like full surgical transition being done by only, at the upper limit, about 13% of trans people, and only about 35% undergoing any surgical intervention. (Eg. see here: https://www.endocrinepractice.org/article/S1530-891X(20)35786-4/fulltext )

So your claim that people only going so far, but not completing a full transition is "not what is happening," or that people, once put on puberty blockers, inevitably complete a full process of transition, just doesn't match reality as I see it around me.