Peak Trans

uck51js9zml2yt

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.

And there's me thinking it was the normal, natural development of a human being....seems I was wrong!!!

ceadaoin.

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.

Child, who would not legally be allowed make the decision to drive, vote, have sex, get a tattoo,
drink, smoke etc , doesn't want to go through puberty. Parents say ok and put said child on an untested drug used to treat cancer in adults and used off label on children which has indications of several long term and life changing effects. That is an example of good parenting? Crazy

Malayalam

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.

It's medically possible to be blinded, rendered deaf, have limbs removed, be paralysed, sterilised, induced into a coma, etc etc - just because it is possible does not make it ethical.

Meh, I just don't know what to say to this kind of thinking anymore. It's very tiring.

BattleCorp

Would you let your children make all their own decisions and never go against their wishes?

BoJack Horseman

Caitlyn is stunning and brave.

Any who disagree are bigots



Buckle up buckaroos!


Mod-banned and disgusting picture redacted.

suicide_circus

Will I Am Not wrote: »

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

I'm forced to take a piss about 8 times per day

BoJack Horseman

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.

Changing a nappy without explicit consent from the child is rape.

Any who disagree are literally Hitler.

BoJack Horseman

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'm forced to take a piss about 8 times per day

Well, stand up for yourself and say 'No!'.

Soiling yourself is stunning and brave.

siblers

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.

I've read some nonsense on here but what you said is top of the pile. Forcing a child to go through puberty? Seriously, you think if a child doesn't want to go through puberty, they shouldn't have to? What happens when they are an adult?

Where is the line?

If the same child refused to go to school, refuses to wipe their ass, refuses to brush their teeth, refuses to work..is that disgusting of the parent not to grand their child the same "privelge"


Allow their child to not go through puberty...what a crock of ****ing ****

Malayalam

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Well, stand up for yourself and say 'No!'.

Soiling yourself is stunning and brave.

Haha don't know why but that last sentence is making me laugh out loud in a silly way...

Yer Da sells Avon

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Child, who would not legally be allowed make the decision to drive, vote, have sex, get a tattoo,
drink, smoke etc , doesn't want to go through puberty. Parents say ok and put said child on an untested drug used to treat cancer in adults and used off label on children which has indications of several long term and life changing effects. That is an example of good parenting? Crazy

Malayalam wrote: »

It's medically possible to be blinded, rendered deaf, have limbs removed, be paralysed, sterilised, induced into a coma, etc etc - just because it is possible does not make it ethical.

Meh, I just don't know what to say to this kind of thinking anymore. It's very tiring.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Changing a nappy without explicit consent from the child is rape.

Any who disagree are literally Hitler.

Did any of you read my post?

Hapax Legomenon

Hapax Legomenon wrote:

Did any of you read my post?

Sadly.

BoJack Horseman

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Did any of you read my post?

I'm on your side buddy.

We are team sanity around here!

- If a child doesn't want to go through puberty they don't have to.
- If a baby doesn't want to grow teeth, they don't have gum removal is stunning and brave.
- If a toddler doesn't want to learn to use the potty, if is bigotry to make them do so.

Yer Da sells Avon

Deleted User wrote: »

Sadly.

Judging by the knee-jerk responses, I don't think that's the case.

Yer Da sells Avon

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

I'm on your side buddy.

I know way too little about the topic to have a 'side'.

Or perhaps you may not have made your point in a clear manner. If so many seem to have misinterpreted you, perhaps it was you that was at fault???

..... No. It must be ours.

Malayalam

I read it.

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Child doesn't want to go through puberty.

So what...child doesn't want to get bigger, child doesn't want to grow teeth, child doesn't want nappy changed, child doesn't want two legs, child doesn't want to speak politely, child doesn't want to eat, child doesn't want to wash dishes...what's your point?


It's medically possible for the child not to go through puberty.


Refer to my post where i said a lot of things are medically possible. It is possible to euthanise a child too and some want it even - what do we do? We act in LOCO PARENTIS !!!!

Parent says "no, you'll go through puberty, whether you like it or not" = parent forcing child to go through puberty against their wishes.


Parent says no, you will go to bed, no, you will go to school, no, you will refrain from killing someone you don't like, no, you will get taller whether you like it or not, no, you will turn into an adult....this is the logical reaction to a child demanding an unreasonable intervention.


Agree or disagree with the parent's decision, whatever, but they are forcing the child to go through puberty.

If the child was left alone by the medical community who are advising hasty and untried medications the child would go through puberty. If interfered with, the child will suffer the consequences of delayed or aborted puberty

P_1

I have to say that some of the posts here are some of the worst I've read on this site, and from some people I would have had a lot of time for on other issues.

I don't know if it's not knowing the issues or if it's blatant transphobia or TERFism but wow, just wow.

I really hope its the former.

Yer Da sells Avon

Deleted User wrote: »

Or perhaps you may not have made your point in a clear manner. If so many seem to have misinterpreted you, perhaps it was you that was at fault???

..... No. It must be ours.

I was very clear (no, really... read it again, slowly this time... and take a few deep breaths before replying). Someone took issue with the word 'forcing'. All I did was clarify that, rightly or wrongly (my own wholly uneducated gut instinct says rightly, FWIW), the parents are forcing the child to go through puberty.

WinnyThePoo

P_1 wrote: »

I have to say that some of the posts here are some of the worst I've read on this site, and from some people I would have had a lot of time for on other issues.

I don't know if it's not knowing the issues or if it's blatant transphobia or TERFism but wow, just wow.

I really hope its the former.

It's a dose of ignorance and fear.

Franz Von Peppercorn

P_1 wrote: »

I have to say that some of the posts here are some of the worst I've read on this site, and from some people I would have had a lot of time for on other issues.

I don't know if it's not knowing the issues or if it's blatant transphobia or TERFism but wow, just wow.

I really hope its the former.

Some of the posts are terrifying alright but not for the reasons you claim.

Yer Da sells Avon

Malayalam wrote: »

I read it.

And you filled in the gaps yourself, essentially arguing against points I haven't made. Well done, you.

BoJack Horseman

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

It's a dose of ignorance and fear.

1000%.

In time people will learn that just because someone has a face like Brian Blessed and are packing 8 inches of glory between their legs doesn't mean that they are any less a woman than our own mother or sister.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I was very clear (no, really... read it again, slowly this time... and take a few deep breaths before replying). Someone took issue with the word 'forcing'. All I did was clarify that, rightly or wrongly (my own wholly uneducated gut instinct says rightly, FWIW), the parents are forcing the child to go through puberty.

That’s insane. Literally.

Children naturally go though puberty. The action to prevent the puberty is the issue.

In no other circumstances do we accept that children can make these kind of decisions. They can’t drive, smoke, drink, vote or sign legal documents. They can’t have sex. They can get a tattoo. They can’t watch certain movies depending on age.

Apparently they can decide their gender however and have a right to stop puberty. An irreversible decision.

Hapax Legomenon

Hapax Legomenon wrote:

I was very clear (no, really... read it again, slowly this time... and take a few deep breaths before replying). Someone took issue with the word 'forcing'. All I did was clarify that, rightly or wrongly (my own wholly uneducated gut instinct says rightly, FWIW), the parents are forcing the child to go through puberty.

No its not. Just because the parent has an option to stop something happening, doesn't mean they are forcing them.

If my child wanted to run across the road on her own, I wouldn't say I forced them not to. I prevented them until they were able to do it themselves.

Completely different.

Annasopra

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

That’s insane. Literally.

Children naturally go though puberty. The action to prevent the puberty is the issue.

In no other circumstances do we accept that children can make these kind of decisions. They can’t drive, smoke, drink, vote or sign legal documents. They can’t have sex. They can get a tattoo. They can’t watch certain movies depending on age.

Apparently they can decide their gender however and have a right to stop puberty. An irreversible decision.

Its not an irreversible decision.

P_1

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

It's a dose of ignorance and fear.

Indeed, the lyrics of the second verse of this song spring immediately to mind.

Malayalam

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its not an irreversible decision.

Oh for the love of God, will you actually stop repeating that without first doing a bit of research. Maybe the child's mickey will eventually catch up on itself, or the vagina and uterus will reach normal expected size and function but there is serious concern regarding brain and cognitive developmental lags that cannot be reversed, bone density problems that cannot be reversed, and long term cancer, diabetes and cardio-vascular issues that are presenting decades after the use of pubertal blcokers

Franz Von Peppercorn

Malayalam wrote: »

Oh for the love of God, will you actually stop repeating that without first doing a bit of research. Maybe the child's mickey will eventually catch up on itself, or the vagina and uterus will reach normal expected size and function but there is serious concern regarding brain and cognitive developmental lags that cannot be reversed, bone density problems that cannot be reversed, and long term cancer, biabetes and cardio-vascular issues that are presenting decades after the use of pubertal blcokers

We’re a decade away from a lawsuit by an adult who has had this procedure who will claim that he wasn’t really transsexual to begin with but just an experimental teenager, but that the decision to delay puberty was taken without his proper legal consent i.e. he wasn’t an adult.

Yer Da sells Avon

Deleted User wrote: »

No its not. Just because the parent has an option to stop something happening, doesn't mean they are forcing them.

If my child wanted to run across the road on her own, I wouldn't say I forced them not to. I prevented them until they were able to do it themselves.

Completely different.

It's a far more complex question than most of the knee-jerk posts shat onto AH would have you believe. The question isn't whether or not they're forcing their child to go through puberty (because that one's answered - hint: they are), but whether or not it's right to force that child to go through puberty.

Calhoun

If only it was a dose of ignorance and fear on its own, as seen with Canada its a slippery slope from 16 year old then move on to having your children removed from you at 12.

Then you have all the other behavior from the community, this article comes to mind showing how bad that community can be (shared already but way back) https://medium.com/@transvoicesforrepeal/trans-voices-for-repeal-call-on-the-together-for-yes-campaign-to-formally-apologise-to-trans-people-84931f0fa85d

Possibly a fake but at the same time you have a number of trans activist actively liking it. A more current example of how this community acts is the recent backlash against Scarlet Johanson who was to play a trans male in a role. Apparently only trans people can play trans roles.

Where all this leads to is a community that wants equality but only for them and will look to change laws to make sure it happens.

Malayalam

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

It's a far more complex question than most of the knee-jerk posts shat onto AH would have you believe. The question isn't whether or not they're forcing their child to go through puberty (because that one's answered - hint: they are), but whether or not it's right to force that child to go through puberty.

Are you an anti-natalist too, by any chance? Do you wonder if parents have forced their children to be born, and whether or not it's ''right'' to have forced them thusly?

c.p.w.g.w

Calhoun wrote: »

If only it was a dose of ignorance and fear on its own, as seen with Canada its a slippery slope from 16 year old then move on to having your children removed from you at 12.

Then you have all the other behavior from the community, this article comes to mind showing how bad that community can be (shared already but way back) https://medium.com/@transvoicesforrepeal/trans-voices-for-repeal-call-on-the-together-for-yes-campaign-to-formally-apologise-to-trans-people-84931f0fa85d

Possibly a fake but at the same time you have a number of trans activist actively liking it. A more current example of how this community acts is the recent backlash against Scarlet Johanson who was to play a trans male in a role. Apparently only trans people can play trans roles.

Where all this leads to is a community that wants equality but only for them and will look to change laws to make sure it happens.

So in a couple of years only English people can play James bond...Only Black American's can play black characters in civil war era American based movies. Trans actors can only play trans characters

P_1

Calhoun wrote: »

If only it was a dose of ignorance and fear on its own, as seen with Canada its a slippery slope from 16 year old then move on to having your children removed from you at 12.

Then you have all the other behavior from the community, this article comes to mind showing how bad that community can be (shared already but way back) https://medium.com/@transvoicesforrepeal/trans-voices-for-repeal-call-on-the-together-for-yes-campaign-to-formally-apologise-to-trans-people-84931f0fa85d

Possibly a fake but at the same time you have a number of trans activist actively liking it. A more current example of how this community acts is the recent backlash against Scarlet Johanson who was to play a trans male in a role. Apparently only trans people can play trans roles.

Where all this leads to is a community that wants equality but only for them and will look to change laws to make sure it happens.

Think about the logical fallacy of your argument for a second.

Are all feminists SWERFs and TERFs?
Are all men rapists?
Did the sky fall in when we had equal marriage or repealed the 8th?

Every movement has its more extreme elements and often they are the loudest.

Hapax Legomenon

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I was very clear (no, really... read it again, slowly this time... and take a few deep breaths before replying). Someone took issue with the word 'forcing'. All I did was clarify that, rightly or wrongly (my own wholly uneducated gut instinct says rightly, FWIW), the parents are forcing the child to go through puberty.

It's nature that's forcing them to through puberty chief.
We all do it.
Like getting our grown up teeth.

BattleCorp

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

So in a couple of years only English people can play James bond...Only Black American's can play black characters in civil war era American based movies. Trans actors can only play trans characters

Believe it or not but they have advertised for an openly lesbian actress to play Batwoman because she is a lesbian.

Discrimination or wot!

Yer Da sells Avon

Malayalam wrote: »

Are you an anti-natalist too, by any chance? Do you wonder if parents have forced their children to be born, and whether or not it's ''right'' to have forced them thusly?

Am I an anti-natalist 'too'? In addition to what? Not being 100% sure whether it's absolutely ethical to force a child to go through puberty against their will? You seem to be arguing against a view that I haven't expressed.

ceadaoin.

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Am I an anti-natalist 'too'? In addition to what? Not being 100% sure whether it's absolutely ethical to force a child to go through puberty against their will? You seem to be arguing against a view that I haven't expressed.

The alternative is to put a child on a medication not intended for or tested on children. A medication that has documented long lasting health effects when used on children and adults. That certainly isn't ethical if that's what your primary concern is.

When a child is put on puberty blockers they are set on the road of a lifetime of pharmaceutical interventions. If they decide to continue with hormone therapy they will be placed on "cross sex hormones". Their bodies will never develop normally. They will never reach their full height. They will be infertile for life. They will potentially have brittle bones at a very young age. Effect on brain development is unknown. They will have under developed genitals making future surgery to create a "neo vagina" extremely difficult for trans women. How the **** is that ethical?

And people are claiming that parents who are reluctant to do this to their child are abusive and neglectful? It's honestly mind boggling to me how anyone could think this.

I predict a whole load of lawsuits in the future from infertile, ill adults who were not capable of making an informed decision about this as a child but who were allowed to anyway. Remember, all evidence suggests that 60-90% of trans children and teenagers do not consider themselves trans as adults..that's a huge majority who may be put on medication unnecessarily these days

Let a child indentify as they want, wear what they want and when they are old enough to make an informed decision about hormones or surgery, let them.

BattleCorp

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Am I an anti-natalist 'too'? In addition to what? Not being 100% sure whether it's absolutely ethical to force a child to go through puberty against their will? You seem to be arguing against a view that I haven't expressed.

Would you allow your child to starve to death and not get them medical attention if they had severe anorexia?

metaoblivia

I think adults have the right to modify their bodies as they see fit, even if it's something I don't personally understand. And I have no problem seeings trans men and woman as just men and women.

But delaying puberty doesn't sit well with me. And I understand that it can put trans children in a really sticky situation. It's easy for a child to be gender fluid before puberty. It becomes harder once the hormones come rushing in. I get that. But at the same time, I can't help but think that part of that is because we don't live in a society that truly embraces gender fluidity. And is the answer to that really delaying a normal, biological process? Or is the answer continuing to push for a society where women and girls can have short hair, wear pants and men and boys can have long hair, wear sparkly dresses and no one really gives a shit? And I'm not saying that cross dressing is the same thing as being trans, just that, if we were more accepting of gender fluidity, would it make it easier on trans people who aren't old enough/don't have the resources to fully transition?

I'm also not comfortable with the idea that children who are unhappy with their bodies sometimes have adults around them who encourage that. I know this is a fine line, but I wish we could focus more on body positivity with all kids. Something along the lines of, "Your body may not be perfect, and when you become an adult, you will have the ability to change it. But right now, let's try to focus more on all of the awesome things it can do."

hatrickpatrick

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its not an irreversible decision.

It is to an extent actually. Not going through puberty at more or less the same time as one's childhood friends and peers would, I imagine, make the whole thing a hell of a lot harder psychologically than it already is. So delaying puberty by several years doesn't necessarily mean missing out on puberty, but it does mean missing out on any of the support and solidarity one gets from having a group of friends going through the same sh!t.

Also, there are issues related to physiological development of secondary sex characteristics which are most likely irreversible if puberty doesn't happen when it's naturally supposed to.

Delaying puberty, and even worse actually administering puberty-altering hormonal medication, has irreversible and long term effects in the event that it isn't what a person really wants. It's a far more serious issue than "sure just stop taking the drugs if you change your mind, be grand".

_Kaiser_

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.

I know it's a few pages back (and Wibbs and others have already responded in greater detail), but I've been catching up on this thread this evening and couldn't let this one pass.

This has to be the most simultaneously arrogant, dangerous and outright idiotic post I've read in this entire thread and indeed Boards.ie as a whole in a long time.

The idea that you can just put puberty on "hold" with no ill-effects (short or long term) is the most bizarre thing I've read in this thread yet, and is a perfect example of the dangers of allowing ideology, virtue-signalling and idealism to trump science and biological and medical facts.

This post right here is the best argument against the whole idea that started this thread that anyone could have made.

Yer Da sells Avon

The knee-jerk responses really are coming in thick and fast tonight, so excuse me if I miss any of the ones that were... um... too... fast.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Would you allow your child to starve to death and not get them medical attention if they had severe anorexia?

I would absolutely want them to be force-fed by whatever means possible. And perhaps, if it came down to it, I would also force my hypothetical child to go through what they insisted was the wrong puberty. Perhaps my decision would ultimately turn out to be 100% correct. Perhaps it would result in them becoming severely depressed and attempting suicide. The point I'm trying (and, it seems, failing hugely, for whatever reason...) to make is that it is not the black & white issue that some here seem to feel it is.

Malayalam

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Am I an anti-natalist 'too'? In addition to what? Not being 100% sure whether it's absolutely ethical to force a child to go through puberty against their will? You seem to be arguing against a view that I haven't expressed.

I was trying to pose a parallel and arguably related dilemma, for illustration purposes.

Your argument has some hint of merit in it, I find - in the sense that to dismiss it out of hand is not entirely simple. Nonetheless I feel there is some inherent flaw or flaws in your argument, and I cannot figure out - or rather express - exactly what they are right now, so I will have to think about it further.
I think, since you seek to found your argument in ethics, it is something to do with the balance of harm. I will try and get back to you when I am not tired.

BattleCorp

While this isn't exactly a peer review journal extract, it does appear that the drug used to block puberty can have dangerous side effects.

https://www.refinery29.com/2017/03/143124/lupron-delay-puberty-drug-health-risks

BattleCorp

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

And perhaps, if it came down to it, I would also force my hypothetical child to go through what they insisted was the wrong puberty.

But here's the thing. You wouldn't be forcing them from going through what they thought was the wrong puberty. You would be 'not stopping' them from going through puberty. There's a big difference.

JRant

P_1 wrote: »

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

Well you better take that up with TENI. They are the ones leading the campaign to have that limit removed. Their spokesperson said the 16 year old limit has no precedence in law and should have no age limit on it.

Yer Da sells Avon

BattleCorp wrote: »

But here's the thing. You wouldn't be forcing them from going through what they thought was the wrong puberty. You would be 'not stopping' them from going through puberty. There's a big difference.

I'd be enforcing my own view upon them - albeit in the hope that my decision would turn out to be the right one and wouldn't result in their suicide.

BattleCorp

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I'd be enforcing my own view upon them - albeit in the hope that my decision would turn out to be the right one and wouldn't result in their suicide.

But that's what parents do all the time with their kids. "Hey, time for bed". "Hey, go to school." "No, you can't get a 666 tattoo on your face".

I've seen kids threaten suicide because their playstation was taken away as punishment. You can't let kids blackmail you with suicide.

And yes, I do acknowledge that some kids do commit suicide and I'm trying not to come across as uncaring but that doesn't mean that I would bow to their every demand. Especially a demand that might turn out to be harmful in the long run.

If an adult wants to transition, by all means go for it. I'm cool with that. But I wouldn't be going tinkering with the biology with someone who is legally a child until their 18th birthday.

Calhoun

P_1 wrote: »

Think about the logical fallacy of your argument for a second.

Are all feminists SWERFs and TERFs?
Are all men rapists?
Did the sky fall in when we had equal marriage or repealed the 8th?

Every movement has its more extreme elements and often they are the loudest.

Had to look up Swerf and Terf (I don't know), are all men rapists? depends on where you go in society today but probably a good chance that parts of our society think like this, same side as the folks who want young children to be able to decide on medical treatsment's.

Did the sky fall in with marriage equality or the 8th? no it didnt but the difference was both of these issues were to do with issues around adults. Why so many people are vocal on this on is because it has a link to children.

Every movement does have its extremist sure but right now for such an apparent small minority the LGBT group has a fairly powerful voice, and as seen in other jurisdictions has enacted laws that could see children removed from parents.