11 yr/old drag kid worshiped within LGBTQ community (Mod warning op)

The Rape of Lucretia

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Tehnically true as most person claim they were never the original gender in the first place.

How has it become a topic? Well, living in a free and modern society that has the scientific ability to re-align someone's gender.

What they claim doesnt matter. They are born one gender or the other.
Re-align, suggests a it is a corrective action. The true corrective action for the psychological disorder that is a block to accept ones gender, or a desire to be the other, is surely to 're-align' people's views of their gender to the one it truly is.
Even re-aligning gender as you put it, suggests it is indeed changed. It isnt really. It just various degrees of disguise and pretend. Which is not gender change, and a poor remedy for those needed help.
Free and modern society is great - but at times it seems to be so free that it goes off track beyond reason, and into the realm of nonsense but treats it as one of sense.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

What they claim doesnt matter. They are born one gender or the other.
Re-align, suggests a it is a corrective action. The true corrective action for the psychological disorder that is a block to accept ones gender, or a desire to be the other, is surely to 're-align' people's views of their gender to the one it truly is.
Even re-aligning gender as you put it, suggests it is indeed changed. It isnt really. It just various degrees of disguise and pretend. Which is not gender change, and a poor remedy for those needed help.
Free and modern society is great - but at times it seems to be so free that it goes off track beyond reason, and into the realm of nonsense but treats it as one of sense.

Argument's all over the place here. Of course someone is born a gender, of course re-alignment is corrective, and of course there's no change in the mind of the person.

Then you disappear into some rambling about help and remedies...? They're already gotten it - where's the argument? What's your experience here?

The Rape of Lucretia

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Argument's all over the place here. Of course someone is born a gender, of course re-alignment is corrective, and of course there's no change in the mind of the person.

Then you disappear into some rambling about help and remedies...? They're already gotten it - where's the argument? What's your experience here?

That realignment can only be of the mental perception back in line with the true gender, not 'realignment' of the gender to the false perception.
Suggesting and giving credibility to the idea that the second is a real proposition, harmfully distracts from the first.
In the manner that 'aternative' medicines can cure cancer or whatever.

Jmsg

Jmsg wrote: »

The idea of gender being a spectrum actually has truth to it in a psychological sense. There are masculine women and feminine men as benign traits. But one does need to establish an identity as one's biological sex, anything else is a pathology the supporting of which cannot lead to any good outcomes.

A distinction must be made between homosexuality and transgenderism. The confusion around this issue appears to be stemming from a conflation of the two. The former appears (regardless as to what extent it is genetically or environmentally determined) to become locked in as patterning from a young age and cannot be changed. Transexuals however, are experiencing an identity crisis the nature of which will be bound to change overtime as they get older opening up the possibility of overcoming it through integrating a broader sense of themselves beyond their gender identity. The idea of giving hormonal treatments, surgery etc. to children and adolescence to change their gender is as twisted as could be.

I am pretty sure that I, a female, would have gone “exploring gender” as part of an attention seeking process, had I been born into these current times. I was an only female child, with three boys either side in neighbouring houses, and I was always an Uber Tomboy, refusing to wear skirts or dresses. My ambition was to be a train driver or pilot or surgeon. My parents were friends of first Chief Air Traffic Controller so I used to get into Dublin ATC as a young child and was always fascinated with planes, fire brigades, anything mechanical or structural. When my poor father gave me my first doll I threw it out the window as it was “too sissy”. I felt male in every way, wanted to be friends only with boys. When visiting Santa my mother always had to tell him to give me a boy’s toy. Did I grow up transgender? No way, when I discovered my teenage sexuality I was all woman. If I had grown up in certain modern societies I might have been pumped with testosterone and had my head wrecked, and indeed seeing society giving me the ready nod and to rebel against my parents I might have declared myself transgender for the attention it would get me. Hopefully in that case my nowadays “modern” parents would have done no more than let me dress in masculine fashion.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Argument's all over the place here. Of course someone is born a gender, of course re-alignment is corrective, and of course there's no change in the mind of the person.

Then you disappear into some rambling about help and remedies...? They're already gotten it - where's the argument? What's your experience here?

That realignment can only be of the mental perception back in line with the true gender, not 'realignment' of the gender to the false perception.
Suggesting and giving credibility to the idea that the second is a real proposition, harmfully distracts from the first.
In the manner that 'aternative' medicines can cure cancer or whatever.

I think I'll take the knowledge and experiences of my friends who have and are realigning ahead of the, eh, stuff posted by you

Always amazes me when people who've neverhad experience of something suddenly pass themselves off as an authority of it ahead of people who've pretty much had it be a major part of their entire life.

Funny, eh?

Timberrrrrrrr

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I think I'll take the knowledge and experiences of my friends who have and are realigning ahead of the, eh, stuff posted by you

Always amazes me when people who've neverhad experience of something suddenly pass themselves off as an authority of it ahead of people who've pretty much had it be a major part of their entire life.

Funny, eh?

Busy bodies always seem to know what's best for others.

The Rape of Lucretia

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I think I'll take the knowledge and experiences of my friends who have and are realigning ahead of the, eh, stuff posted by you

Always amazes me when people who've neverhad experience of something suddenly pass themselves off as an authority of it ahead of people who've pretty much had it be a major part of their entire life.

Funny, eh?

I am not an authority at all, nor claiming to pass myself off as one. Simply one person giving a considered but not professional view. This is boards After Hours after all, not a journal or conference for professional psychologists. If the topic exists here, and interesting to discuss, it is among non-professional observers. If there is a qualification requirement to be able to join, then this is not the place for such a discussion.
Additionally, while experience certainly has its value, it colours, and an external, uncoloured, observation can also have merit.

Jmsg

Even a male taking steroids to artificially inflate his testosterone levels merely in order to change his physical appearance by becoming more muscular should realise this is a bad idea let alone someone taking a similar route to appear like the opposite sex let alone a child. It's well documented people who have plastic surgery are never satisfied. It is an inner insecurity they are trying to fix by changing their outer appearance. This logic fully follows through in transgenders' pursuits.

The Rape of Lucretia

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Always amazes me when people who've neverhad experience of something suddenly pass themselves off as an authority of it ahead of people who've pretty much had it be a major part of their entire life.
Funny, eh?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Busy bodies always seem to know what's best for others.

More than a touch of attack the poster rather than the post about this. And of an attempt to freeze out contributors, or close down a line of discussion. Which suggests a weakness in rebutting the substance of the posts.

Jmsg

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I am not an authority at all, nor claiming to pass myself off as one. Simply one person giving a considered but not professional view. This is boards After Hours after all, not a journal or conference for professional psychologists. If the topic exists here, and interesting to discuss, it is among non-professional observers. If there is a qualification requirement to be able to join, then this is not the place for such a discussion.
Additionally, while experience certainly has its value, it colours, and an external, uncoloured, observation can also have merit.

Thank you. The prevailing notion these days (all across the internet but especially on this site I've found) is that in order to speak about anything that's not banal you need to have a phd in a specialised field and be able to cite your every word with the statistical data of an empirical study. It totally defeats the purpose of why we talk to each other as human beings and makes discussion not about a dialectical synthesis but rather mere points scoring.

Dyr

Jmsg wrote: »

Thank you. The prevailing notion these days (all across the internet but especially on this site I've found) is that in order to speak about anything that's not banal you need to have a phd in a specialised field and be able to cite your every word with the statistical data of an empirical study. It totally defeats the purpose of why we talk to each other as human beings and makes discussion not about a dialectical synthesis but rather mere points scoring.

It's called argumentum ad verecundiam, very popular with the intersectionalist set.

Gender studies professors cook up their cock and bull studies and then you quote them like holy scripture

Jmsg

Bambi wrote: »

It's called argumentum ad verecundiam, very popular with the intersectionalist set.

Gender studies professors cook up their cock and bull studies and then you quote them like holy scripture

Yep in academia today the social sciences are being granted licence to form whatever consensus they want.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

More than a touch of attack the poster rather than the post about this. And of an attempt to freeze out contributors, or close down a line of discussion. Which suggests a weakness in rebutting the substance of the posts.

More an attack on the person's allege credentials.

Also, their were plenty of claims in your first two posts that go beyond opinion. At one point you said that what someone thinks doesn't matter.

I've rebutted your posts - you got trans and realign mixed up, you tried to pass it off as some kind of mental illness (based on what...??) and you then dismiss it as the realm of nonsense.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

But that's just YOUR opinion not theirs and you don't have a right to force it on someone.



Yes, it is wrong. If a person wants to make a choice to improve their health, that is their reality. Just because it's not yours doesn;t mean it;s unhealthy or alternative.

You don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a healthy change and unhealthy one.

What YOU find real and what YOUR opinion is isn't the same for everyone else. This should be kind of obvious.

It's not opinion it'd be scientific fact. This whole gender-dysphoria and sex denialism stuff is just the left wing version of climate change denialism, only that the evidence for sex is more conclusive.

How Soon Is Now

Kinda crazy how many different topics this one thread has had.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

DanDan6592 wrote: »

It's not opinion it'd be scientific fact. This whole gender-dysphoria and sex denialism stuff is just the left wing version of climate change denialism, only that the evidence for sex is more conclusive.

... and you can link to said scientific study that backs up said fact, yes?

p1akuw47h5r3it

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

... and you can link to said scientific study that backs up said fact, yes?

So you don't believe that sex is a scientific fact. You are ambiguous when it comes to males and females existing?

p1akuw47h5r3it

"Genetic Evidence Equating SRY and the Testis-Determining Factor" By Goodfellow et al discusses the SRY gene and how it "creates" males.

So..... Reality is subjective now? Everyone's reality should be respected and catered for?

p1akuw47h5r3it

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So..... Reality is subjective now? Everyone's reality should be respected and catered for?

If this is the case the only reality that should matter should be that of scientific reality.

Blake Calm Mosquito

Blake Calm Mosquito wrote:

If this is the case the only reality that should matter should be that of scientific reality.

I dunno man. Apparently it's perfectly acceptable to choose your own reality.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

... and you can link to said scientific study that backs up said fact, yes?

Are you genuinely asking for scientific proof that if you are born with a penis you are male and if you are born with a vagina you are female?

You need to see a scientific study to believe that this is correct?

Really?

p1akuw47h5r3it

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you genuinely asking for scientific proof that if you are born with a penis you are male and if you are born with a vagina you are female?

You need to see a scientific study to believe that this is correct?

Really?

Ye but in their reality....

Blake Calm Mosquito

Blake Calm Mosquito wrote:

Ye but in their reality....

It honestly upsets me that I'm apparently a bigot because of reality. What a f*cking world.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

DanDan6592 wrote: »

So you don't believe that sex is a scientific fact. You are ambiguous when it comes to males and females existing?

You appear to have come into the argument late. The existence of male and female is not what I was describing as the original poster's "opinion; it was whether or not gender is defined purely by the physical characteristics at birth.

The Rape of Lucretia

Deleted User wrote: »

It honestly upsets me that I'm apparently a bigot because of reality. What a f*cking world.

You're not really. Bigot is just the weak accusation to try to silence the unpleasant truth, and avoid having to put their fingers in their ears to not hear you, for those losing the argument that transgender is really a thing.
A bit like 'blasphemy' was a an accusatory tool (or crime even!, like some would like transgender 'bigotry' to be) to try to silence those suggesting religion is bunkum.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

You're not really. Bigot is just the weak accusation to try to silence the unpleasant truth, and avoid having to put their fingers in their ears to not hear you, for those losing the argument that transgender is really a thing.
A bit like 'blasphemy' was a an accusatory tool (or crime even!, like some would like transgender 'bigotry' to be) to try to silence those suggesting religion is bunkum.

IN fairness, the only person who called him a bigot was himself!!

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm such a bigot.

Can't believe that on this thread I'm called a reality denier because in MY reality a boy is a boy and a girl is a girl. How dare I assume your reality. Because reality is subjective now.

I've also been called homophobic because I used a groups preferred description as I was not aware that as a non-gay, I am precluded from using certain words.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

DanDan6592 wrote: »

If this is the case the only reality that should matter should be that of scientific reality.

I agree.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/4/e20182162

In a GACM, the following messages are conveyed:

- transgender identities and diverse gender expressions do not constitute a mental disorder;

- variations in gender identity and expression are normal aspects of human diversity, and binary definitions of gender do not always reflect emerging gender identities;

- gender identity evolves as an interplay of biology, development, socialization, and culture; and

- if a mental health issue exists, it most often stems from stigma and negative experiences rather than being intrinsic to the child.27,33

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-10-science-sex-gender.html

Anatomy at birth may prompt a check in the "male" or "female" box on the birth certificate—but to doctors and scientists, sex and gender aren't always the same thing.

Dante7

Pter wrote: »

Mod

Dante7, if there is something you want to discuss on this topic that isn't covered here, start a new thread. Other posters have directly told you what you are trying to steer towards isn't what is being discussed, so stop trying to drag the thread somewhere else. Your discussion can be had, but not here. Start a new thread and let people continue the discussion they are having.

You're alright, thanks. I am not prepared to create a new thread if that thread title could be arbitrarily changed by a mod to more suit their beliefs.

Btw, this thread has long since drifted from the original topic. I'm not sure why my post has been targetted for moving of topic.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You appear to have come into the argument late. The existence of male and female is not what I was describing as the original poster's "opinion; it was whether or not gender is defined purely by the physical characteristics at birth.

From what I read it seemed you were debating the existence of sex.

Regardless, I'll still never get my head around this seemingly new disconnect between gender and sex. It seems only recently they have become non-interchangeable terms. Gender is sex, or can you explain to me the difference?

I'll have a look at the article you quoted tomorrow. I'm highly skeptical of the majority of the social "sciences", going as far to believe the term is a misnomer.