Calls for Graham Linehan to be removed from Prime Debate on transgender issues!

sabat

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I definitely recommend you have one.

Not really a good response when I so easily invalidated your belief that psychiatrists should be blindly deferred to when they start performing experimental life-altering surgery.

ohnonotgmail

sabat wrote: »

Not really a good response when I so easily invalidated your belief that psychiatrists should be blindly deferred to when they start performing experimental life-altering surgery.

I think you've watched One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest one too many times.

AndrewJRenko

TCM wrote: »

Not going to bother reading previous posts. What I will say is that we live in a democracy and he is entitled to express his opinion even if others disagree with his views.

He was still going to be able to express his opinion, regardless of whether he was on Prime Time or not.

sabat

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think you've watched One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest one too many times.

Two insults instead of an actual response? That means I'm right. Thanks.

ohnonotgmail

sabat wrote: »

Two insults instead of an actual response? That means I'm right. Thanks.

No it just means you haven't said anything worth responding to.

seamus

Calhoun wrote: »

Even with the psychiatrist evaluation though I am not in favor of kids going using hormone blockers or going through surgery.

What does it matter to you? What business is it of yours?

What makes you think you have the right or authority to make this decision for someone else?

They make the decision, they get assessed by qualified professionals so that we as a society know we are doing our best to ensure that it's an honest and informed choice, and not something rash that will be an issue later on.

And if they still choose to do it, then why prevent them? What is people's obsession with thinking they have the right to make personal choices for others?

ohnonotgmail

seamus wrote: »

What does it matter to you? What business is it of yours?

What makes you think you have the right or authority to make this decision for someone else?

They make the decision, they get assessed by qualified professionals so that we as a society know we are doing our best to ensure that it's an honest and informed choice, and not something rash that will be an issue later on.

And if they still choose to do it, then why prevent them? What is people's obsession with thinking they have the right to make personal choices for others?

It's the IDontLikeTheLookOfThat school of thinking.

Gravelly

seamus wrote: »

And if they still choose to do it, then why prevent them? What is people's obsession with thinking they have the right to make personal choices for others?

So we should allow people with anorexia to starve themselves? No intervention for drug addicts or problem gamblers?

What about people with body integrity dysphoria - should we enable them to amputate limbs?

mazcon

Women in their twenties and thirties are routinely refused sterilisation because they're too young and might change their minds but we are to accept that children as young as twelve can make decisions about their future fertility and sexual function?

AndrewJRenko

NIMAN wrote: »

It's a very serious issue and it has to be nipped in the bud now. We can't let 12 yr old children make decisions that might often ruin their lives as adults.

And 'nip it in the bud', you mean 'force them to live through their difficult teenage years as the gender that they've known is wrong for them since they were 4 or 5?

Is it any wonder that they have mental health issues when you're response is to pretend there is no problem?

SoupMonster

sabat wrote: »

One word. Lobotomy.

Bulimia
https://www.thecut.com/article/how-bulimia-became-a-medical-diagnosis.html

Multiple Personality Disorder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRBZ0Kjisl4

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

the gender that they've known is wrong for them since they were 4 or 5?

A 4 or 5 year old doesn't know anything about gender, and couldn't tell you if they're wearing the wrong size shoes.

mazcon

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And 'nip it in the bud', you mean 'force them to live through their difficult teenage years as the gender that they've known is wrong for them since they were 4 or 5?

Is it any wonder that they have mental health issues when you're response is to pretend there is no problem?

With an estimated 80% of these children resolving their dysphoria by going through puberty how on earth can you safely diagnose which ones will persist and which desist? Should the 80% be sacrificed for the 20%?

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

the gender that they've known is wrong for them since they were 4 or 5?

A 4 or 5 year old doesn't know anything about gender, and couldn't tell you if they're wearing the wrong size shoes.

You might want to try listening to some people who've actually been through this

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/ireland-s-transgender-children-1.2171777

AndrewJRenko

mazcon wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And 'nip it in the bud', you mean 'force them to live through their difficult teenage years as the gender that they've known is wrong for them since they were 4 or 5?

Is it any wonder that they have mental health issues when you're response is to pretend there is no problem?

With an estimated 80% of these children resolving their dysphoria by going through puberty how on earth can you safely diagnose which ones will persist and which desist? Should the 80% be sacrificed for the 20%?

Those numbers are fairly suspect, but on the general issue, do you think that maybe you should listen to medical and psychological experts on how to deal with people as individuals, so nobody has to get sacrificed for anybody.

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You might want to try listening to some people who've actually been through this

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/ireland-s-transgender-children-1.2171777

Anyone claiming they "knew they were in the wrong gender" at 4 or 5 is either lying or suffering from false memory. Four year olds simply don't think like that.

seamus

mazcon wrote: »

Women in their twenties and thirties are routinely refused sterilisation because they're too young and might change their minds but we are to accept that children as young as twelve can make decisions about their future fertility and sexual function?

I'm not sure how pointing out one example of state over-reach is supposed to justify another?

There is no justifiable basis for a doctor to refuse to sterilise an adult woman on request.

mazcon

seamus wrote: »

I'm not sure how pointing out one example of state over-reach is supposed to justify another?

There is no justifiable basis for a doctor to refuse to sterilise an adult woman on request.

I would agree that in the case of adult women being refused sterilisation we see state over reach. However, in the case of prepubescent children who can have no concept of the importance fertility or sexual function might have in their lives surely the principle of "first do no harm" must come into play. Puberty resolves dysphoria in the majority of cases, it is also vital for cognitive and social maturation. Stopping it is not a benign act and if the child then goes on to cross sex hormones they miss out entirely on this vitally important development stage. From a purely practical perspective, for a MtF transitioner this will also mean there isn't enough penile tissue to create a neo vagina so the procedure is much more complicated. If there is the slightest chance the child might desist it would appear a watchful waiting approach is preferable.

klaaaz

Gravelly wrote: »

Anyone claiming they "knew they were in the wrong gender" at 4 or 5 is either lying or suffering from false memory. Four year olds simply don't think like that.

A tiny tiny minority do, its well known that people who pursue transition knew from a very young age something was amiss with their gender. That's different from the vast majority of other kids who play dress up and want to be "something else" at that age like their cartoon heroes and then turn out to be perfectly fine with their gender later in life.

Uncharted

Gravelly wrote: »

Anyone claiming they "knew they were in the wrong gender" at 4 or 5 is either lying or suffering from false memory. Four year olds simply don't think like that.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Parental "imput" and outsider "suggestions" more like.

If the parents are new age and woke,and especially "gender fluid" leaning, guess what........wow, hey presto,here results a gender fluid non binary kid.

Shock horror!!!! :rolleyes:


Kids are just kids. Totally malleable and influenced by all around them. And 99.9% are certainly not aware of their own sexual identity at 4 or 5.

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You might want to try listening to some people who've actually been through this

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/ireland-s-transgender-children-1.2171777

Anyone claiming they "knew they were in the wrong gender" at 4 or 5 is either lying or suffering from false memory. Four year olds simply don't think like that.

Have you done much research with four year olds to inform your view?

Is it possible that your direct knowledge of four year olds is not 100% comprehensive?

SoupMonster

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Those numbers are fairly suspect, but on the general issue, do you think that maybe you should listen to medical and psychological experts on how to deal with people as individuals, so nobody has to get sacrificed for anybody.

The population is question here is pre-puberty kids who insistently, consistently and persistently identity as other that their sex, "are trans".

If they are not continuously affirmed, socially transitioned and placed on puberty blockers, 60% to 90% will cease "being trans" and will identify with their natal sex once they go through puberty. The majority of these teens will be homosexual.

If they are continuously affirmed, socially transitioned, and placed on puberty blockers (to buy time in order to make a more mature decision, supposedly), in excess of 90% will go on to cross-sex hormones, and suffer/enjoy the associated physiological and neurological affects of both the blockers (lupron usually) and x-sex hormones.

These numbers are not "suspect", they are the result of meta analysis of all reputable longitudinal studies on this population.

Dyr

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you done much research with four year olds to inform your view?

Is it possible that your direct knowledge of four year olds is not 100% comprehensive?

Perhaps you can pull some research from a respectable gender studies journal to counter his claim?

If you can find one that didn't republish excerpts Mein Kampf with a glowing recommendation

Argument from authority doesn't cut it, and it especially doesn't cut it when the authority is a bunch of clowns.

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you done much research with four year olds to inform your view?

Is it possible that your direct knowledge of four year olds is not 100% comprehensive?

Raised three of them to adulthood.

What have you done?

valoren

What struck me was the increase in numbers. I believe it was something like 6 cases in 2003 to over 2300 or so last year in the UK according to the Professor whose proposed research was quashed?

Could broadband internet from 2003 and within a few years instant internet access on smart phones which even prepubescent kids had explain the exponential increase? By having instant access to a litany of information during a significant developmental stage of their lives it could clearly have an impact.

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you done much research with four year olds to inform your view?

Is it possible that your direct knowledge of four year olds is not 100% comprehensive?

Raised three of them to adulthood.

What have you done?

Is it possible that other kids may be different to your three?

AndrewJRenko

Bambi wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you done much research with four year olds to inform your view?

Is it possible that your direct knowledge of four year olds is not 100% comprehensive?

Perhaps you can pull some research from a respectable gender studies journal to counter his claim?

If you can find one that didn't republish excerpts Mein Kampf with a glowing recommendation

Argument from authority doesn't cut it, and it especially doesn't cut it when the authority is a bunch of clowns.

It's his claim, so if you want supporting research, he's the one you need to talk to.

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is it possible that other kids may be different to your three?

Any response to my question?

Sir Oxman

https://terfisaslur.com/


This is trans activism

Clarity: It's a collection of online and real-life trans activism.
This may tie in with what is going down online and it's influence on kids.
Notice most of the sections contain no discussion but repeating of dogma and the shutting down of anyone, ANYONE who has an opposite view or one that does not perfectly align with theirs.
Immediately, those are branded nazis, the enemy and "terfs"


these are the people piling on to the likes of Graham Linehan

SoupMonster

Bambi wrote: »

Perhaps you can pull some research from a respectable gender studies journal to counter his claim?

If you can find one that didn't republish excerpts Mein Kampf with a glowing recommendation

Argument from authority doesn't cut it, and it especially doesn't cut it when the authority is a bunch of clowns.

I think I prefer
"Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria and Transphobia through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use"
to
"Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism"

In fairness, Mein Kampf was accepted but not published, whereas rogering straight men to cure transphobia was published. It's also got an historical precedent in victorian era doctors stimulating women to orgasm with sex toys to cure that common mental illness called "hysteria". Those sex-negative Victoria prudes!

suicide_circus

Sir Oxman wrote: »

https://terfisaslur.com/


This is trans activism.

lol GIRL DICK

yeah....no.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Sir Oxman wrote: »

https://terfisaslur.com/


This is trans activism.

Christ, that's creepy as fck.

Some very troubled people in there.

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is it possible that other kids may be different to your three?

Any response to my question?

Does it matter? Do you want to compare family size or what?

There is a whole world of people out there outside of your family circle, some of whom are different. You may not have met them personally, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist.

SoupMonster

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Christ, that's creepy as fck.

Some very troubled people in there.

There are the kind of people active on internet sites like Tumblr. Once any kid asks a question abut "gender" and suggests they would rather not conform to the the sex role stereotypes they imagine are associated with their sex, the creepy, rapey, abusive dudes pounce.

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Does it matter? Do you want to compare family size or what?

There is a whole world of people out there outside of your family circle, some of whom are different. You may not have met them personally, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Just as I expected. You've spent post after post appealing to authority, claiming people without experience shouldn't speak on a topic, and claiming experience trumps all, yet when asked for your own experience in matters you hold forth on, you appear to have none.

AndrewJRenko

SoupMonster wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Those numbers are fairly suspect, but on the general issue, do you think that maybe you should listen to medical and psychological experts on how to deal with people as individuals, so nobody has to get sacrificed for anybody.

The population is question here is pre-puberty kids who insistently, consistently and persistently identity as other that their sex, "are trans".

If they are not continuously affirmed, socially transitioned and placed on puberty blockers, 60% to 90% will cease "being trans" and will identify with their natal sex once they go through puberty. The majority of these teens will be homosexual.

If they are continuously affirmed, socially transitioned, and placed on puberty blockers (to buy time in order to make a more mature decision, supposedly), in excess of 90% will go on to cross-sex hormones, and suffer/enjoy the associated physiological and neurological affects of both the blockers (lupron usually) and x-sex hormones.

These numbers are not "suspect", they are the result of meta analysis of all reputable longitudinal studies on this population.

The number I said was suspect was the 80/20 split. You're now saying that it could be a 60/40 split. So you've confirmed my suspicion - thanks.

The key issue is that there are a percentage of trans children out there. Are we going to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen?

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Does it matter? Do you want to compare family size or what?

There is a whole world of people out there outside of your family circle, some of whom are different. You may not have met them personally, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Just as I expected. You've spent post after post appealing to authority, claiming people without experience shouldn't speak on a topic, and claiming experience trumps all, yet when asked for your own experience in matters you hold forth on, you appear to have none.

I'm happy to confirm that I have absolutely no professional experience on these issues, and very little personal experience.

I'm also happy to confirm that raising three kids doesn't give you exhaustive personal knowledge of every child in Ireland - which is why we should be relying on proper research.

Are you actually denying the existence of trans kids?

James1888

gmisk wrote: »

James1888 wrote: »

In what way do you mean prepare to suspend reality, the madness in the whole LGBT agenda on minors? Or the scientific fact that your brain isn't fully developed until 25. This sickness is being brought in to primary schools starting in September, it part of the "inclusive ciriculam" of the new sex ed program. Its sickening to think the whole way through that crap rte ****show that was just on and all the questioning they done about why this was happening. 2 mins of research and you have your answer. Brainwashed by idiot so called liberal documentarys on youtube plus poor diets and health Inc mental health no exercise and underdeveloped brains = testosterone and estrogen levels all over the place and causing feminine men and masculine women. Eat some bloody steaks people

Maybe stick to watching info wars...and there stories about frogs turning gay....

Lol what does that nutcase have anything to do with the topic were talking about, and what do you mean with frogs turning gay, that has to be the most stupid thing iv everyheard any1 replying to a comment. Are you sure it's not you that's a closet infowars fan?

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm happy to confirm that I have absolutely no professional experience on these issues, and very little personal experience.

I'm also happy to confirm that raising three kids doesn't give you exhaustive personal knowledge of every child in Ireland - which is why we should be relying on proper research.

Are you actually denying the existence of trans kids?

:D:D

You've some neck with your calls earlier for Linehan to be barred from the discussion because he had no experience, and now claiming that you know better than people who have actually successfully reared children.
Get up the yard you bluffer.

AndrewJRenko

Uncharted wrote: »

Gravelly wrote: »

Anyone claiming they "knew they were in the wrong gender" at 4 or 5 is either lying or suffering from false memory. Four year olds simply don't think like that.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Parental "imput" and outsider "suggestions" more like.

If the parents are new age and woke,and especially "gender fluid" leaning, guess what........wow, hey presto,here results a gender fluid non binary kid.

Shock horror!!!! :rolleyes:

The Wexford mother on Prime Time couldn't be further from your jaded stereotype of 'woke' parents. Would you like to find another way to blame her for her trans child?

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm happy to confirm that I have absolutely no professional experience on these issues, and very little personal experience.

I'm also happy to confirm that raising three kids doesn't give you exhaustive personal knowledge of every child in Ireland - which is why we should be relying on proper research.

Are you actually denying the existence of trans kids?

:D:D

You've some neck with your calls earlier for Linehan to be barred from the discussion because he had no experience, and now claiming that you know better than people who have actually successfully reared children.
Get up the yard you bluffer.

Funnily enough, I haven’t been putting myself forward for Prime Time either, so the comparison to Glinner isn't really relevant.

But it is interesting to note your desperate avoidance of the reality that other people's children may be different to yours. Why do you find it so difficult to face up to that?

mazcon

This article is a good examination of persistence and desistance rates in puberty https://www.thecut.com/2016/07/whats-missing-from-the-conversation-about-transgender-kids.html

Faugheen

Gravelly wrote: »

:D:D

You've some neck with your calls earlier for Linehan to be barred from the discussion because he had no experience, and now claiming that you know better than people who have actually successfully reared children.
Get up the yard you bluffer.

What does Graham Linehan actually know about the subject though?

He's not trans. He has no experience of being trans and he hasn't anything in the way of research or study into trans issues.

He literally just rants because he doesn't like it. What on Earth does that do for anyone only piss off and add to the stigma that trans people have to endure?

If he studied trans issues academically or experienced what trans people go through, and he had something to back up his rants with, then we'd be having a different conversation.

Having him on wasn't about providing 'balance', it was about getting a contrarian view in a bid to cause a bit of controversy even though he literally has nothing in the way of experience in the issues they face.

I don't have any experience with trans people. I don't know any personally, I don't work with any and I've never studied it. Should I be allowed to be given a platform to rant about why people who rant about it are wrong?

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Funnily enough, I haven’t been putting myself forward for Prime Time either, so the comparison to Glinner isn't really relevant.

Says the fella who got called out for making hilariously ridiculous comparisons a few pages ago!

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But it is interesting to note your desperate avoidance of the reality that other people's children may be different to yours. Why do you find it so difficult to face up to that?

You might show me the post to back up this assertion of yours - or is it another one of your bluffs?

Gravelly

Faugheen wrote: »

What does Graham Linehan actually know about the subject though?

He's not trans. He has no experience of being trans and he hasn't anything in the way of research or study into trans issues.

He literally just rants because he doesn't like it. What on Earth does that do for anyone only piss off and add to the stigma that trans people have to endure?

If he studied trans issues academically or experienced what trans people go through, and he had something to back up his rants with, then we'd be having a different conversation.

Having him on wasn't about providing 'balance', it was about getting a contrarian view in a bid to cause a bit of controversy even though he literally has nothing in the way of experience in the issues they face.

I don't have any experience with trans people. I don't know any personally, I don't work with any and I've never studied it. Should I be allowed to be given a platform to rant about why people who rant about it are wrong?

As far as I'm aware, Linehan's only knowledge of the subject is that he has been the victim of a campaign of harassment by "trans activists" - but he is as entitled as anyone else to give his opinion on a subject that is a cause of concern to many. I wasn't the one trying to shut down Linehans, the bould Andrew was - with the claim that he shouldn't be allowed to speak on it because he has no experience (a view you seem to share) - that's just a teeny bit hypocritical when the same Andrew was holding forth on what 4 or 5 year olds know or don't know, when it appears he knows as much about them as I do about Northern Hairy-nosed wombats.

Uncharted

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The Wexford mother on Prime Time couldn't be further from your jaded stereotype of 'woke' parents. Would you like to find another way to blame her for her trans child?

Clutch away before you drown. Good lad.

You're embarrassing yourself.

SoupMonster

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The number I said was suspect was the 80/20 split. You're now saying that it could be a 60/40 split. So you've confirmed my suspicion - thanks.

The key issue is that there are a percentage of trans children out there. Are we going to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen?

It could be 90% naturally desist and 10% persist.

If we are going to relax the criteria, require doctors to affirm and criminalise so-called "conversion therapy" we could be looking at transing a population where over 90% would have desisted if left alone.

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

What does Graham Linehan actually know about the subject though?

He's not trans. He has no experience of being trans and he hasn't anything in the way of research or study into trans issues.

He literally just rants because he doesn't like it. What on Earth does that do for anyone only piss off and add to the stigma that trans people have to endure?

If he studied trans issues academically or experienced what trans people go through, and he had something to back up his rants with, then we'd be having a different conversation.

Having him on wasn't about providing 'balance', it was about getting a contrarian view in a bid to cause a bit of controversy even though he literally has nothing in the way of experience in the issues they face.

I don't have any experience with trans people. I don't know any personally, I don't work with any and I've never studied it. Should I be allowed to be given a platform to rant about why people who rant about it are wrong?

As far as I'm aware, Linehan's only knowledge of the subject is that he has been the victim of a campaign of harassment by "trans activists" - but he is as entitled as anyone else to give his opinion on a subject that is a cause of concern to many. I wasn't the one trying to shut down Linehans, the bould Andrew was - with the claim that he shouldn't be allowed to speak on it because he has no experience (a view you seem to share) - that's just a teeny bit hypocritical when the same Andrew was holding forth on what 4 or 5 year olds know or don't know, when it appears he knows as much about them as I do about Northern Hairy-nosed wombats.

You forgot to mention the context - Prime Time. Glinner is more than welcome to expound his views online or on thrash shows like Boylan etc.

Choosing him for Prime Time was a poor decision, solely designed to cause controversy.

beans

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Choosing him for Prime Time was a poor decision, solely designed to cause controversy.

*puts on producer hat*

It was an excellent decision, got Primetime trending on twitter, got how many more eyeballs on the RTE content than would have been... from a programming point of view, it was very clever.

How actually suitable he is to comment is beside the point.

seamus

mazcon wrote: »

I would agree that in the case of adult women being refused sterilisation we see state over reach. However, in the case of prepubescent children who can have no concept of the importance fertility or sexual function might have in their lives surely the principle of "first do no harm" must come into play. Puberty resolves dysphoria in the majority of cases, it is also vital for cognitive and social maturation. Stopping it is not a benign act and if the child then goes on to cross sex hormones they miss out entirely on this vitally important development stage. From a purely practical perspective, for a MtF transitioner this will also mean there isn't enough penile tissue to create a neo vagina so the procedure is much more complicated. If there is the slightest chance the child might desist it would appear a watchful waiting approach is preferable.

The Dutch protocol deals with this issue and seems to be the most sensible approach for the time being. The 80/20 split is suspect anyway. The most recent data from the Netherlands leaves it about 50/50. It's hard to tell because nearly a third of those in the study dropped out.

Prepubescent children are not prescribed blockers in this country. But that doesn't mean they aren't permitted to live as the gender they identify with. And that's not going to do any harm.

So honestly I can't see the hysteria about this at all. If it turns out one day that they can accurately identify which prepubescent children with GD will go on to become adolescents with GD, then I would have no issue with treatment starting earlier.