Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

Oh I know already from your opinions on the matter generally that you have quite a tolerance for collateral and irreversible damage, even on the very young it seems from the above. Even if the figure was as low as you suggest, which I do not know, it is still 2000 children. Would you say the same if lobotomy was the procedure in question?
So perhaps the video is not for you.
But regardless of your acceptance of this damage, I will not accept it, especially as an older women who knows how difficult puberty can be for young girls, how alien the societal hyper-sexualisation of the female body can make one feel, but also as a mother of daughters I will not accept this casual damage.
35 - 40% of those girls referred to GIDS in the UK have autism. Dr David Bell attests to this. Most he said have experienced trauma in their young lives and damaged family circumstances. Puberty blockers followed by testosterone permanently destroys their bodies - even if they change their minds later on, they have irreversibly a deep male voice, male pattern baldness, changed facial features, increased body and facial hair, perhaps have had radical double mastectomies and may even have had a hysterectomy to avoid uterine cancer risk increase which is caused by the use of cross sex hormones, or because their reproductive organs have shriveled or become damaged due to a sudden onset menopause. All before they barely get out of their teens.
I therefore do not find Ms Shrier hyperbolic in the least.

Do you have any evidence that those referred to GIDS who have autism have worse outcomes? Are those with autism likely to detransition? Of course it's never stated but constantly implied that those with autism are not genuinely trans. That if we could somehow treat their autism they would realise this.

Is this your position and can you support it?

And this was a clear attempt to muddy the waters. Shrier felt the need for EXTREME exaggeration (I would say even lieing though it's such an obvious and ridiculous exaggeration it probably wouldn't qualify as a lie) to.make her point.

All you are saying is that you support her extreme exaggeration because you have an agenda. And to answer your question: yes I would say the same if it was a lobotomy. 0.05% of a generation is not a whole generation no.matter what the treatment is.

ingalway

Gruffalux wrote: »

Such an excellent interview with Abigail Shrier.
On resisting gender theory ideology especially in schools -- "We can show transgender people compassion without indoctrinating a whole generation in gender confusion."

All those who have pushed this ideology constantly, right back to when they were defending poor abused Desmond Napoles simpering sexually all over the media, should have a listen.

Great interview. She speaks such sense. I find it hard to understand how anyone could disagree with what she has to say about young girls and women.
https://twitter.com/triggerpod/status/1353445719445807104?s=20

suicide_circus

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2775302

Wha...

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2775302

Wha...

Oh my word!

Gruffalux

suicide_circus wrote: »

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2775302

Wha...

I saw that a couple of days ago. 88% of trans women think menstruating would enhance their feeling of femininity. :pac::pac::pac: I don't mean to laugh at others secret wishes but as an Olympic champion since puberty at that sport I welcome my erstwhile competitors. May you clot and flood as only the finest ladies can!

(One of the reasons I like to speak effusively of periods - sorry now - is that I find, from experience, that it can be particularly uncomfortable for especially male radical trans activists to tolerate the gory details of reality. )

Only question is do they know which actual biological sex from whose bodies they are going to get the donated vaginas and uteruses?

suicide_circus

Gruffalux wrote: »

Only question is do they know which actual biological sex from whose bodies they are going to get the donated vaginas and uteruses?

There is literally no way they can know that.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalux wrote: »

I saw that a couple of days ago. 88% of trans women think menstruating would enhance their feeling of femininity. :pac::pac::pac:

Jaysus. The only good thing for me about getting cancer was no longer having to deal with periods. :pac: They were a monumental pain in the arse and made me feel anything but womanly.

SouthWesterly

Gruffalux wrote: »

I saw that a couple of days ago. 88% of trans women think menstruating would enhance their feeling of femininity. :pac::pac::pac: I don't mean to laugh at others secret wishes but as an Olympic champion since puberty at that sport I welcome my erstwhile competitors. May you clot and flood as only the finest ladies can!

(One of the reasons I like to speak effusively of periods - sorry now - is that I find, from experience, that it can be particularly uncomfortable for especially male radical trans activists to tolerate the gory details of reality. )

Only question is do they know which actual biological sex from whose bodies they are going to get the donated vaginas and uteruses?

Most likely from pigs as heart valve replacement in humans is currently with pig tissue due to the similarity of the tissues with less rejection by the human body

jam_mac_jam

Where are they going to put them? There isn't a space in the lower abdomen just waiting for it all to be connected.

AbusesToilets

Gruffalux wrote: »

I wish Tulsi was President of America. She is so fab.

She's a real life Selena Meyer.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Where are they going to put them? There isn't a space in the lower abdomen just waiting for it all to be connected.

Yeah and what about the accompanying endocrine system? I know that transplant recipients can be of either sex because the attached machinery is already in place but when it comes to sex-specific organs, the machinery that attaches to the organ or that interacts with it won’t be there either. The benefits to be gained from researching all of that seem to not be good enough to go to all that effort in a world where there are still many incurable diseases. And where would the uteri come from? Who would donate them? I don’t even want to think about that.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalux wrote: »

Oh I know already from your opinions on the matter generally that you have quite a tolerance for collateral and irreversible damage, even on the very young it seems from the above. Even if the figure was as low as you suggest, which I do not know, it is still 2000 children. Would you say the same if lobotomy was the procedure in question?
So perhaps the video is not for you.

Indeed. Would anyone say that the Tuskegee syphilis study was grand because “only” 600 men were involved? No, people are still horrified by it.

Gruffalux

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Most likely from pigs as heart valve replacement in humans is currently with pig tissue due to the similarity of the tissues with less rejection by the human body

Ew. Pig vaginas! Im eating me dinner!! :O

jam_mac_jam

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Indeed. Would anyone say that the Tuskegee syphilis study was grand because “only” 600 men were involved? No, people are still horrified by it.

I think if your only point is that it doesn't matter because the numbers are so small it doesn't matter it shows that you don't really have a point.

And I keep hearing that. About sport, about detransition, about prisons.

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

And where would the uteri come from? Who would donate them? I don’t even want to think about that.

But maybe TRAs could donate their penises when penis transplant comes on stream for trans men.

There's a real Mr Potato Head vibe off this transhumanist malarkey.

Gatling

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I think if your only point is that it doesn't matter because the numbers are so small it doesn't matter

Yet laws were changed to suit a handful of individuals despite being told tens of thousands and one group quoted between 10/20 % of school children were trans and schools had to offer 3rd gender toilets and changing rooms for them,

So few yes so overly representated

LLMMLL

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I think if your only point is that it doesn't matter because the numbers are so small it doesn't matter it shows that you don't really have a point.

And I keep hearing that. About sport, about detransition, about prisons.

Except that’s a pretty extreme twisting of what I actually said.

Firstly, you are starting from the belief that the prescription of puberty blockers is some kind of scandalous medical malpractice. You seem to believe I agree with you (I don’t) and am therefore saying that scandalous medical malpractice is ok as long as it’s small numbers. I don’t believe that and am not saying that.

My argument about small numbers is that Shrier is making false claims. She is claiming an entire generation is becoming gender confused. She is plainly lieing through her teeth.

So just to be clear for those can’t seem to follow very basic arguments:

1. I don’t believe puberty blockers are medical malpractice.

2. In cases of actual medical malpractice I don’t believe small numbers mean they’re unimportant.

3. Shrier is basically lieing to get her fan base riled up. Clearly she succeeded.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I think if your only point is that it doesn't matter because the numbers are so small it doesn't matter it shows that you don't really have a point.

And I keep hearing that. About sport, about detransition, about prisons.

And, as somebody in a rare cohort myself, it’s of no consolation to me that there are only a few of us. My rare situation is that I developed breast cancer in my 20s. Less than 20 women under 30 are diagnosed with BC in Ireland every year (I was actually just into my 30s when diagnosed because it was delayed) and it’s like a kick in the teeth whenever I hear people in authority say anything about young women not needing to be screened for BC, even when they display symptoms.

In fact, being part of a rare small group is an incredibly isolating experience and to handwaved away heightens those feelings. These detransitioners must not be ignored.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

The specious comparison of the demonisation of gay people 30 years ago to the concerns around the erosion of female spaces has reared its head again since Russell T Davies’ new show ‘It’s A Sin’ debuted.

Here is why I consider the comparison specious. From everything I’ve read about the stigmatisation of gay men a generation ago and further, people were arguing that they were more likely to commit sexual or violent crimes than other men.

Now, people are questioning why we should just accept that males who identify as transgender women or non-binary are less violent than other males. I don’t believe that transgender women are more violent than other males. But I’ve seen nothing to convince me that they are less so and so I don’t see why women are just supposed to adopt magical thinking and let down some of the barriers that we deemed necessary to protect ourselves.

jam_mac_jam

LLMMLL wrote: »

Except that’s a pretty extreme twisting of what I actually said.

Firstly, you are starting from the belief that the prescription of puberty blockers is some kind of scandalous medical malpractice. You seem to believe I agree with you (I don’t) and am therefore saying that scandalous medical malpractice is ok as long as it’s small numbers. I don’t believe that and am not saying

I never said anything about medical malpractice or puberty blockers being malpractice. Don't assume my opinions or put words into my mouth.

LLMMLL

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I never said anything about medical malpractice or puberty blockers being malpractice. Don't assume my opinions or put words into my mouth.

If you agree that prescribing puberty blockers is not a medical scandal then I’m very happy to hear that.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I never said anything about medical malpractice or puberty blockers being malpractice. Don't assume my opinions or put words into my mouth.

You definitely didn’t!

I’m more hardline on this. I consider the prescribing of puberty blockers to be deeply unethical. I firmly believe that it will something people are shocked about in the most too distant future. I’m not even that keen on their prescription for precocious puberty. But how anyone can support the off-label use (which means that they have not been proven safe for that use) of such potent medication is beyond me. This is different from children, say, entering cancer drug trials. Their only other option there is death. The risk-benefit analysis is tipped towards trying the treatment. It makes sense.

With puberty blockers, there’s the suicide risk that even the Tavistock admitted was low and which can be tackled in other ways.

jam_mac_jam

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you agree that prescribing puberty blockers is not a medical scandal then I’m very happy to hear that.

No I don't think prescribing puberty blockers are a scandal. But there could be errors in some small amount of cases where people make a mistake and regret it. It's a huge decision for an adult or a child.

But I think it needs to studied in more depth. To be honest I am not knowledgeable in medicine or psychology to come down one way or the other. If a child is going through huge pain because of dysphoria then it's not a scandal to help them.

From what I have read the issue of young girls specifically is more an issue in the US where medicine is privatised and you can choose to have surgery rather then the UK where you are waiting years and have to go through counselling and there is a centralized procedure.

I think you have to be careful with young people when you are messing with fertility and side effects.

Gatling

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

You definitely didn’t!

I’m more hardline on this. I consider the prescribing of puberty blockers to be deeply unethical.[ /quote]

It's Child abuse nothing more ,how many have we seen on here play the oh I disagree with it but it it's what the children want sure why not ,
The only science behind it is pure quackery again Pushed on Children and families my a small cohort of men and tra's for whatever reason .

There was a care recently in the UK where one of these groups were trying to influence education settings one claiming to be working with the UK government to help schools with their trans policies ,but had no such accreditation to do so .

A Cabinet Minister has rebuked trans rights advocates for falsely claiming they had Government approval for guidance that tells schools to open up girls’ toilets to male-born children.

Equalities Minister Liz Truss ordered EqualiTeach to stop using the logo of the Government Equalities Office (GEO) on its controversial guidelines. The EqualiTeach document – Free To Be – tells school teachers and staff they must allow pupils who identify as trans to use the toilet of their choice.

After women’s rights campaigners raised the issue, Miss Truss demanded EqualiTeach amend the document. She said: ‘This was not approved by the Government. The GEO logo should not be on it and I asked for it to be removed.’ Since becoming Minister with responsibility for equalities law, Miss Truss has been increasingly willing to challenge trans rights advocates whose arguments have influenced many public sector bodies.

EqualiTeach accused Miss Truss of failing to support trans children and claimed officials working for the Minister had approved the original document.

One eyed Jack

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The specious comparison of the demonisation of gay people 30 years ago to the concerns around the erosion of female spaces has reared its head again since Russell T Davies’ new show ‘It’s A Sin’ debuted.

Here is why I consider the comparison specious. From everything I’ve read about the stigmatisation of gay men a generation ago and further, people were arguing that they were more likely to commit sexual or violent crimes than other men.

Now, people are questioning why we should just accept that males who identify as transgender women or non-binary are less violent than other males. I don’t believe that transgender women are more violent than other males. But I’ve seen nothing to convince me that they are less so and so I don’t see why women are just supposed to adopt magical thinking and let down some of the barriers that we deemed necessary to protect ourselves.

Because the comparison in relation to gay men and heterosexual men was based upon prejudice then, and the comparison in relation to men who identify themselves as women, and other men, is based upon prejudice now. Both ‘arguments’ are predicated upon conflating behaviour with biology, which is complete nonsense, easily demonstrated by the fact that the vast majority of men in any case, are not violent, and pose no threat whatsoever to either women or children.

It would similarly be called out for the bullshìt that it is were anyone to suggest that black men are more violent towards women and children than white men, and a glance at statistics relating to criminal behaviour would support that argument and would carry weight as long as nobody was going to ask the question is it because they are black?

All those nonsense claims try to do is perpetuate discrimination against groups in society by conflating biological traits with behaviour using flawed logic which feeds people’s prejudices. No magical thinking is required, just the use of reason to see why such arguments are flawed.

OMM 0000

On RTE.ie today:

https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2021/0126/1192218-elliot-page-files-for-divorce-from-emma-portner/

Please read the article.

Why are we as a society doing this?

This person is obviously a woman. She is not a man. Being a lesbian doesn't make you a man.

What the **** is going on?

Mic 1972

OMM 0000 wrote: »

On RTE.ie today:

https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2021/0126/1192218-elliot-page-files-for-divorce-from-emma-portner/

Please read the article.

Why are we as a society doing this?

This person is obviously a woman. She is not a man. Being a lesbian doesn't make you a man.

What the **** is going on?

It's absolutely nonsense.

Omackeral

Mic 1972 wrote: »

It's absolutely nonsense.

Are we to infer from this that Page’s wife was in a lesbian relationship when marrying then Ellen but then straight when the divorce happened? How can someone changing their name make someone else’s orientation change?!

One eyed Jack

Westlife fan who launched ‘vicious and unprovoked’ attack on woman when ‘blackout’ drunk at concert avoids jail


A woman who launched a “frightening, vicious and unprovoked” attack on a fellow attendee of a Westlife concert 18 months ago has avoided a jail term.

Jackie Walsh (26) split the victim’s ear lobe during the attack after her earring got caught up when Walsh was pulling fistfuls of the woman’s hair. The victim said during the assault she could feel blood pouring down her face and could see clumps of her hair all over her shorts.


My sister-in-law was lucky she wasn’t sitting in that woman’s boyfriends seat!

Baggly

OMM 0000 wrote: »

On RTE.ie today:

https://www.rte.ie/entertainment/2021/0126/1192218-elliot-page-files-for-divorce-from-emma-portner/

Please read the article.

Why are we as a society doing this?

This person is obviously a woman. She is not a man. Being a lesbian doesn't make you a man.

What the **** is going on?

Mic 1972 wrote: »

It's absolutely nonsense.

Mod

Do yourselves a favour and read back over this thread before posting again.