Peak Trans

Franz Von Peppercorn

The original post was about using medical techniques to affect puberty etc. This is what is being argued against.

ohnonotgmail

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The original post was about using medical techniques to affect puberty etc. This is what is being argued against.

it is not what i responded to. I responded to a specific line in a post.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is not what i responded to. I responded to a specific line in a post.

I honestly think that the poster in question may have misspoken and instead of meaning kids actually being held down and made become transgender, meant that children are being allowed to make life altering decisions and their parents are forced to comply or risk losing custody.

If the poster changed "forced" to be "reinforced" would that allow you to stop being pedantic and move on with the discussion?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I honestly think that the poster in question may have misspoken and instead of meaning kids actually being held down and made become transgender, meant that children are being allowed to make life altering decisions and their parents are forced to comply or risk losing custody.

If the poster changed "forced" to be "reinforced" would that allow you to stop being pedantic and move on with the discussion?

the poster who wrote that has continued to defend what they wrote so i dont think they misspoke at all.

Will I Am Not

You wouldn’t be happy with a 10-16 year old child getting a tattoo or those flesh tunnel ear lobe procedures. Why? Because it’s something they will have to live with and may regret down the line. Yet some people seem fine with blocking puberty?

c.p.w.g.w

Malayalam wrote: »

Had to look up what TENI meant. I see it is coming to Ireland then. Bill 89 (2017) passed in Ontario, Canada, allows for the removal of children from parents, or foster families, if they are not supported to change gender.



https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/05/new-law-allows-government-to-take-children-away-if-parents-dont-accept-kids-gender-identity


This is what happens when people run to suckle at the teat of the state for every thing - give me my rights! etc - eventually the state becomes the first parent of our children.

Wow what a load of bollox

ohnonotgmail

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Wow what a load of bollox

you are far too polite.

Calhoun

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

we still have people on this thread describing trans people as having a mental illness. and getting away with it as well. so its not just a question of "not agreeing"

I wouldn't say mental illness but some posters have said trans people just want a live and let live attitude to things and how they are a small minority. However if this was the case fine but they want to enact laws that impact on wider society and they are not so free thinking or live and let live when it comes down to it.

Prime example was hardly into the thread and a poster calls another a pedophile for wanting to talk about the issue.

c.p.w.g.w

Calhoun wrote: »

I wouldn't say mental illness but some posters have said trans people just want a live and let live attitude to things and how they are a small minority. However if this was the case fine but they want to enact laws that impact on wider society and they are not so free thinking or live and let live when it comes down to it.

Prime example was hardly into the thread and a poster calls another a pedophile for wanting to talk about the issue.

Thankfully the mods acted and banned the poster for 3 months for their carry on

markodaly

Cabaal wrote: »

That doesn't matter,

it fits some people's agenda to claim children are being forced even if they have no evidence to support the claim.

You were saying??

In another case it was reported that a family was taking legal action against a local authority for backing their 14-year-old daughter’s adoption of a boy’s name as a step towards changing her gender. The mother of the girl said she believed her daughter was too young to make her own decision. “The rights of parents in the UK are being eroded,” she claimed,

He proposes following the model inspired by clinics in the Netherlands, in which children identifying as transgender are routinely given hormone-blocking drugs after the onset of puberty, and then move on to high doses of hormones to change their sex, and then later perhaps consider surgery. The most controversial part of this protocol is the age at which children are given the cross-sex hormones, the effects of which can be irreversible and may lead to a loss of fertility. The NHS guidelines currently state that no children be given this hormone treatment until they are around 16. Spack sees the age as arbitrary, and often cruel. “Why wait?” he asks.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/13/transgender-children-the-parents-and-doctors-on-the-frontline

There is a smell of a clut from some of these people. Who is their Tom Cruise?

An_Toirpin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Calhoun wrote: »

Yes indeed would be completely against type for a group who threaten  feminists with rape and want to enact laws to remove children from parents to force their agenda on people.

You only have to look at the fairly militant backlash on the recent Scarlet Johansan stuff to show right on thinking they are. Or the digs on boards ect because folk don't agree with them .

we still have people on this thread describing trans people as having a mental illness. and getting away with it as well.  so its not just a question of "not agreeing"

Defintions about what is an illness are so subjective that it seems a strange thing to debate about. Whether or not people considered it a mental illness is has no bearing if they thought it was a reasonable way to live.

Annasopra

Will I Am Not wrote: »

You wouldn’t be happy with a 10-16 year old child getting a tattoo or those flesh tunnel ear lobe procedures. Why? Because it’s something they will have to live with and may regret down the line. Yet some people seem fine with blocking puberty?

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

Malayalam

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Wow what a load of bollox

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you are far too polite.

Instead of sneering at people TRAs should probably try to engage with the public in a more mature way. Most people, as has been seen on this thread, are very happy to have adults facilitated to live their lives as they choose with respect and comfort, so long as they do no harm to others. But the vast majority of people will not have biology denialism and ideological enculturation of children stuffed down their throats. The response to your sneering and the movement's gradual insistence that people use bellyfeel, doublethink and duckspeak about gender issues, especially in education, will be such an unmerciful backlash from the wider population that in the end you will have done the transgender community a huge disservice. And I have read accounts by transgendered people who know this and fear it too.

ohnonotgmail

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Defintions about what is an illness are so subjective that it seems a strange thing to debate about. Whether or not people considered it a mental illness is has no bearing if they thought it was a reasonable way to live.

except being trans is NOT a mental illness.

Malayalam

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

Pubertal blockers at 10, or younger, is not a slightly delayed puberty, especially if it is several years before the child decides. The secondary sexual characteristics are seriously retarded and the science is not settled on whether that has widespread effects throughout the bodies systems. People given hormones for precocious puberty many decades ago are presenting with difficulties now. Eg bone health and vascular problems, among others.

Annasopra

Malayalam wrote: »

Pubertal blockers at 10, or younger, is not a slightly delayed puberty, especially if it is several years before the child decides. The secondary sexual characteristics are seriously retarded and the science is not settled on whether that has widespread effects throughout the bodies systems. People given hormones for precocious puberty many decades ago are presenting with difficulties now. Eg bone health and vascular problems, among others.

They are reversible so as I said I have no problem with them onced they are medically regulated.

silverharp

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

very caviller attitude. I'd bet an internet euro that medicine doesn't understand every life time effect of this......do no harm!

ohnonotgmail

silverharp wrote: »

very caviller attitude. I'd bet an internet euro that medicine doesn't understand every life time effect of this......do no harm!

It is alarming the number of people who post that without realising it is complete b*llox.

Annasopra

silverharp wrote: »

very caviller attitude. I'd bet an internet euro that medicine doesn't understand every life time effect of this......do no harm!

Not at all a cavalier attitude. I accept of course there may be some negative effects. Theres negative effects with lots of medical treatments though.

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible

Ehhh... what the hell? That's an utter bloody nonsense and obviously so.

You take someone born male and give them hormone blockers - basically stop testosterone - and their bodies don't go through the changes that testosterone makes for in adolescent males. Development of muscle and bone, more masculine faces, deeper voice, secondary sexual characteristics and so forth. Now if you also go and prescribe female hormones this is a double whammy and bodily changes occur like growth of breast tissue and so forth. Take someone born female and block those hormones and dose them up with male levels of testosterone and you get the opposite effect, more muscle mass, denser bones, facial hair, larger jaws etc.

This is why they do this for Christ's sake; to block the more obvious signs of male or femaleness so the person can grow as the preferred gender and "pass" more easily as an adult. If this was reversible as you claim then they wouldn't have to do any of that, they could wait until adulthood and simply block/increase hormone profiles then and, voila change someone from one gender to someone with adult male or female characteristics. Oh wait, it doesn't work like that.

If this is an example of what you(and others) think is "science" and some doctors in the field are claiming this then... well, it's very bad "science", it's well dodgy medicine and it's straying into the territory of utter bollocks.

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

That is one of the most incredible and absolutely insane comments I have ever seen on this topic.

Blocking the body of a child from developing to allow them to "explore their identity" is dangerous, negligent and disgusting.

lukesmom

I dont know if it needs to be shoved in their faces as it seems to be now. My son is 5 and thinks its funny to see a man dressed as a woman. He falls around the place laughing. My daughter who is a little bit older thinks it a little weird but is more accepting of it.

lukesmom

lukesmom wrote: »

I dont know if it needs to be shoved in their faces as it seems to be now. My son is 5 and thinks its funny to see a man dressed as a woman. He falls around the place laughing. My daughter who is a little bit older thinks it a little weird but is more accepting of it.

Your son is obviously transphobic. You should be taking him to rehabilitative treatment to force him to be accepting.
:rolleyes:

lukesmom

Hes on the list but sure you know what its like probably be waiting years 

c.p.w.g.w

Malayalam wrote: »

Instead of sneering at people TRAs should probably try to engage with the public in a more mature way. Most people, as has been seen on this thread, are very happy to have adults facilitated to live their lives as they choose with respect and comfort, so long as they do no harm to others. But the vast majority of people will not have biology denialism and ideological enculturation of children stuffed down their throats. The response to your sneering and the movement's gradual insistence that people use bellyfeel, doublethink and duckspeak about gender issues, especially in education, will be such an unmerciful backlash from the wider population that in the end you will have done the transgender community a huge disservice. And I have read accounts by transgendered people who know this and fear it too.

Obviously you didn't read what I was responding too. It referred to legislation that made it child abuse not to go along with a 12 year olds decision they no longer are their biological sex, in adults work away, but children can't be allowed make life changing decisions...Well because they are children

Malayalam

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Obviously you didn't read what I was responding too. It referred to legislation that made it child abuse not to go along with a 12 year olds decision they no longer are their biological sex, in adults work away, but children can't be allowed make life changing decisions...Well because they are children

Oh right, I think it quoted a different post. My apologies.

c.p.w.g.w

Malayalam wrote: »

Oh right, I think it quoted a different post. My apologies.

It was in the link.

P_1

Eh are we forgetting that the GRA amendment is referring to 16 year olds and not 12 year olds or has that little fact been drowned out among the sounds of pitchforks being raised?

Ultimately the decision is and bloody well should be down to the individual

_Whimsical_

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They are reversible so as I said I have no problem with them onced they are medically regulated.

Even if they were physically reversible in so far as you can stop taking them and let the bodies natural testosterone/oestrogen production kick in, their use still seems very ill-advised to me.

If a young teens body, mind and consequently social experience are left suspended in physical childhood without the body and mind changes puberty brings, how can they decide that living in an adult body of the sex they were born in is not for them?

Puberty isn't an easy time for anyone but it starts an appreciation of things your body can do that you couldn't have dreamt of, pleasure it can bring you, the attention it inspires in others, the excitement of being attracted to someone and someone attracted to you,the changes in your social experience that creates.
What child can comprehend any of that and decide to block puberty?? What teenager who hasn't experienced any of it because they've been on the medication by 16 can reject the future their body holds for them?

How can we let children who don't know what their lives or bodies will be make such drastic decisions that will set them on course for surgeries, a life of never quite fitting it, a life of finding it very difficult to find an accepting partner? It's just crazy.
How will we face these kids in 20 years time who are saying "how did you let me do this as a child? you didn't let me cross the road myself, you didn't let me spend my own money that I had in piggy bank without your say so, but you let me decide to drastically alter the course of my life that's led me into an essential no mans land ?"

Ri_Nollaig

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

Wow, now who is throwing out nonsense? :rolleyes:

And just to confirm, like with the vast majority who are posting on this thread. I have no issues with an adult making their own decisions that only affect them. That is their business and more luck to them.

But blocking puberty!! and then to claim "is reversible"!!!!

Neyite

Wibbs wrote: »

Ehhh... what the hell? That's an utter bloody nonsense and obviously so.

You take someone born male and give them hormone blockers - basically stop testosterone - and their bodies don't go through the changes that testosterone makes for in adolescent males. Development of muscle and bone, more masculine faces, deeper voice, secondary sexual characteristics and so forth. Now if you also go and prescribe female hormones this is a double whammy and bodily changes occur like growth of breast tissue and so forth. Take someone born female and block those hormones and dose them up with male levels of testosterone and you get the opposite effect, more muscle mass, denser bones, facial hair, larger jaws etc.

This is why they do this for Christ's sake; to block the more obvious signs of male or femaleness so the person can grow as the preferred gender and "pass" more easily as an adult. If this was reversible as you claim then they wouldn't have to do any of that, they could wait until adulthood and simply block/increase hormone profiles then and, voila change someone from one gender to someone with adult male or female characteristics. Oh wait, it doesn't work like that.

If this is an example of what you(and others) think is "science" and some doctors in the field are claiming this then... well, it's very bad "science", it's well dodgy medicine and it's straying into the territory of utter bollocks.

Add to that, the frontal lobe development kicks in as an integral part of the process of puberty. If puberty is blocked, then this critical brain development that needs to happen in the teen years is also blocked.

Joey may be somewhat right that there can be an apparently visible reversal when puberty blockers are removed but there are two considerations that are important:
Puberty blockers were not originally designed for that purpose. Lupron is one of the commonly prescribed puberty blocking drugs. It's a cancer-treating drug and the FDA in the US has not approved of it's use for gender change.

Secondly, we don't know what long term medical effects of taking a drug like this for years from pre-teen to adult years might have on a person. So while they physically may look like they've restarted puberty and all is hunky dory, there is no reassurance that the drug had no irreversible or adverse effects elsewhere within the body.

That's worrying.

_Dara_

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

What trials have been done to ascertain this? Here’s the problem: you can’t ethically test this. No human should be offered up as a guinea pig to test this theory. I seriously doubt that you can reverse the blocking of puberty without doing damage. There’s a short window for development of secondary sex characteristics and it should be uninterrupted.

P_1

P_1 wrote:

Ultimately the decision is and bloody well should be down to the individual

Yeah... adults.

At 16, you can't drink, smoke, have sex, join the army etc and their body's are still naturally developing.

I wonder would you be happy for young teens to be able to make any other life changing decisions against the wish of their parents

Malayalam

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Even if they were physically reversible in so far as you can stop taking them and let the bodies natural testosterone/oestrogen production kick in, their use still seems very ill-advised to me.

If a young teens body, mind and consequently social experience are left suspended in physical childhood without the body and mind changes puberty brings, how can they decide that living in an adult body of the sex they were born in is not for them?

Puberty isn't an easy time for anyone but it starts an appreciation of things your body can do that you couldn't have dreamt of, pleasure it can bring you, the attention it inspires in others, the excitement of being attracted to someone and someone attracted to you,the changes in your social experience that creates.
What child can comprehend any of that and decide to block puberty?? What teenager who hasn't experienced any of it because they've been on the medication by 16 can reject the future their body holds for them?

How can we let children who don't know what their lives or bodies will be make such drastic decisions that will set them on course for surgeries, a life of never quite fitting it, a life of finding it very difficult to find an excepting partner? It's just crazy.

The inhibition of sexual function and pleasure is one of the big question marks with pubertal blockers. For a start there is a significant body of people countering that these children are homosexual and are being led away from that expression. And then the experience of puberty changes people so enormously as you said, and might be a huge factor in trans children desisting. But also there are discussions on how atrophied vaginas and penises in trans children (because that is the physical result of these chemicals - pelvic pain from atrophied uterus, dry and itchy vaginas from lack of oestregen, bacterial infections, child-sized penis in adulthood, etc.) taking hormones are having an impact on their ability to experience pleasure and sexual function in their teenage lives at all - and what affect that has cognitively and emotionally on the developing young person.
I just do not know how they can even be considered as a treatment for gender dysphoria in childhood.

P_1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah... adults.

At 16, you can't drink, smoke, have sex, join the army etc and their body's are still naturally developing.

I wonder would you be happy for young teens to be able to make any other life changing decisions against the wish of their parents

16 is not a young teen. Why don't you tell that to my friend who is still suicidal as a result of their transphobic sheet of a mother who refused to allow her start her transition and promptly kicked her out at 17

P_1

P_1 wrote:

16 is not a young teen. Why don't you tell that to my friend who is still suicidal as a result of their transphobic sheet of a mother who refused to allow her start her transition and promptly kicked her out at 17

Because I don't know her. And I have no idea whether they wanted to kill themselves because they were trans or because their mother was horrible. Your anecdote proves absolutely nothing.

And 16 is a young teen.

Dyr

P_1 wrote: »

16 is not a young teen. Why don't you tell that to my friend who is still suicidal as a result of their transphobic sheet of a mother who refused to allow her start her transition and promptly kicked her out at 17

Are you sure she's not suicidal as a result of being mental?



Mod: Banned

P_1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because I don't know her. And I have no idea whether they wanted to kill themselves because they were trans or because their mother was horrible. Your anecdote proves absolutely nothing.

And 16 is a young teen.

13 is a young teen. 16 is not

P_1

Bambi wrote: »

Are you sure she's not suicidal as a result of being mental?

Seriously poor form. Disappointed in you

P_1

P_1 wrote:

13 is a young teen. 16 is not

13 is indeed a young teen. As is 16. Most 16 year olds are incapable of making adult decisions. I'd class them as young teens. But sure definitions are evidently pliable as long as it fits your narrative.

Will I Am Not

P_1 wrote: »

16 is not a young teen. Why don't you tell that to my friend who is still suicidal as a result of their transphobic sheet of a mother who refused to allow her start her transition and promptly kicked her out at 17

My wife’s cousin is in a psychiatric ward because her mother is a c*nt too.

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Blocking puberty is reversible so yes I am perfectly fine with it. It gives the person a chance to explore their own identity. If they decide at a later stage they are not trans then fair enough. They can just go through dlightly delayed puberty.

Ah sure, you can just press pause on normal development and then carry on just like that if you change your mind.

No, that's not true, and it's a dangerous lie being pushed by trans activists. The truth is they don't know and there is plenty of evidence of long term health effects. It's a recipe for disaster to prescribe this drug to kids on a large scale. But hey, starting kids on it will more than likely result in a person needing pharmaceutical intervention for the rest of their lives so the pharma companies are happy at least

https://www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/


https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/new-report-describes-dangers-of-giving-lupron-to-kids-020317.html

suicide_circus

but sure if gender is fluid, why go through the difficulties, dangers and expense of giving children drugs? they might fluid right back to the previous gender any minute.

Atoms for Peace

I member watching the Louis theory documentary on kids in the States being fed a cocktail of drugs to keep them "normal" in the eyes of their parents. Seems to me to be something similar going with regards to this topic.

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

That is one of the most incredible and absolutely insane comments I have ever seen on this topic.

Blocking the body of a child from developing to allow them to "explore their identity" is dangerous, negligent and disgusting.

To be honest I think that forcing them to go through puberty against their express wishes, forcing them to identify as something they claim they don't and seriously harming their mental health in the process of all that is dangerous, negligent and disgusting.

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote:

To be honest I think that forcing them to go through puberty against their express wishes, forcing them to identify as something they claim they don't and seriously harming their mental health in the process of all that is dangerous, negligent and disgusting.

Then I hope you never become a parent or are ever allowed bring up a child.

You don't force a child to go through puberty. Its a natural bodily function that everyone goes through. It is not, nor should be a choice.

Attitudes like yours are what cause people to say that trans people or their "allies " shouldn't be allowed adopt or have children. Thankfully I know not all trans people are so abhorrent in their views to children so don't share that view.

Disgusting.

Mod-Banned

Will I Am Not

Forcing a child to go through puberty? F*cking wow!!!

Yer Da sells Avon

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Forcing a child to go through puberty? F*cking wow!!!

Child doesn't want to go through puberty. It's medically possible for the child not to go through puberty. Parent says "no, you'll go through puberty, whether you like it or not" = parent forcing child to go through puberty against their wishes. Agree or disagree with the parent's decision, whatever, but they are forcing the child to go through puberty.

Hapax Legomenon

Hapax Legomenon wrote:

Child doesn't want to go through puberty. It's medically possible for the child not to go through puberty. Parent says "no, you'll go through puberty, whether you like it or not" = parent forcing child to go through puberty against their wishes. Agree or disagree with the parent's decision, whatever, but they are forcing the child to go through puberty.

If a child doesn't want to go to school... Should we force them?

Yer Da sells Avon

Deleted User wrote: »

If a child doesn't want to go to school... Should we force them?

Not before finding out what the problem is.