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

Cestmoi 111

LLMMLL wrote: »

I think it's great for transgender activism. It is getting across its own cause.

I've no idea what your BLM analogy is about. Nobody is campaigning to have black people's legal rights restricted.

Likewise nobody is campaigning to restrict the rights of transgender people. People are, thankfully, campaigning to protect the rights of women and girls wrt single-sex spaces and sports.

LLMMLL

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

Likewise nobody is campaigning to restrict the rights of transgender people. People are, thankfully, campaigning to protect the rights of women and girls wrt single-sex spaces and sports.

No you are restricting the legal rights of transgender people. The actual rights. The supposed sex based rights you talk about exist in your mind, not reality. For example, trans people in Ireland can currently be housed in a prison that matches their gender identity. This is a LEGAL right.

You may disagree with this. You may debate. But it's extremely disingenuous to claim you are not trying to restrict this right.

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

No you are restricting the legal rights of transgender people. The actual rights. The supposed sex based rights you talk about exist in your mind, not reality. For example, trans people in Ireland can currently be housed in a prison that matches their gender identity. This is a LEGAL right.

You may disagree with this. You may debate. But it's extremely disingenuous to claim you are not trying to restrict this right.

The thing I don't get with this argument is that you seem to be saying that gender based rights are or should be, a real thing, while sex based rights aren't really, but you also seem to hold the view that gender is mostly socially constructed.

Isn't that a contradiction?

LLMMLL

volchitsa wrote: »

The thing I don't get with this argument is that you seem to be saying that gender based rights are or should be, a real thing, while sex based rights aren't really, but you also seem to hold the view that gender is mostly socially constructed.

Isn't that a contradiction?

My post said that trans people have a legal right to be housed in a prison according to their gender identity. This is an ACTUAL legal right.

So it's nonsense to claim that those who follow the TERF ideology are not trying to restrict trans people's rights.

I never mentioned "should" or "could" or any other prescriptive statements.

I simply pointed out what "is".

So no there is no contradiction in my post.

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

My post said that trans people have a legal right to be housed in a prison according to their gender identity. This is an ACTUAL legal right.

So it's nonsense to claim that those who follow the TERF ideology are not trying to restrict trans people's rights.

I never mentioned "should" or "could" or any other prescriptive statements.

I simply pointed out what "is".

So no there is no contradiction in my post.

That's not where I suggested there might be a contradiction, not in your posts, but in the thinking that underpins your opinion. I said 'should' because that's what I'm asking: whether you see any contradiction in someone supporting genderbased rights over sexbased rights while also believing that gender is mostly a social construction.

It's the choice of gender over sex that intrigues me. What is it that makes you think that gender is sufficiently important to be the basis for these rights and that sex is not?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

AllForIt wrote: »

Bit ironic of someone who advocates diversity to state that everyone of a certain persuasion should think the same way. And that is precisely what he is saying.



There is no connection whatsoever. You can make a loose connection re rights but that's it.



Again no connection at all. The specific issues that are discussed on this thread, like sport, prison, toilets, etc, are specific issues that having noting whatsoever to do with the gay experience. Again, the only similarity is 'rights', a loose connection. Though he does say 'not dissimilar ' so he does know what game he is playing.

In fairness to McKellen, he probably doesn’t want to receive grief either. It’s like when female celebs get asked in interviews if they’re a feminist and god help them if they say no, as Shailene Woodley discovered:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/msna556081

LLMMLL

volchitsa wrote: »

That's not where I suggested there might be a contradiction, not in your posts, but in the thinking that underpins your opinion. I said 'should' because that's what I'm asking: whether you see any contradiction in someone supporting genderbased rights over sexbased rights while also believing that gender is mostly a social construction.

It's the choice of gender over sex that intrigues me. What is it that makes you think that gender is sufficiently important to be the basis for these rights and that sex is not?

You are assuming my thinking on this subject. I don't think there are automatic gender based rights. Or sex based rights. Just individual pieces of legislation which can be open to various interpretations or qualifications. So still no contradiction I'm afraid.

LLMMLL

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

In fairness to McKellen, he probably doesn’t want to receive grief either. It’s like when female celebs get asked in interviews if they’re a feminist and god help them if they say no, as Shailene Woodley discovered:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/msna556081

God help her? Bit hyperbolic. She made some comments about feminism. Some people criticised her interpretation of what feminism entails. Everybody seems to have gotten in with their lives perfectly well.... Am I missing something?

LLMMLL

The lovely Michelle Obama showing support for trans youths

[URL] https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/05/entertainment/michelle-obama-zaya-wade-conversation-trnd/index.html[/URL]

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

In fairness to McKellen, he probably doesn’t want to receive grief either. It’s like when female celebs get asked in interviews if they’re a feminist and god help them if they say no, as Shailene Woodley discovered:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/msna556081

Interesting article! I have a tribe. Never knew it.

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

The lovely Michelle Obama showing support for trans youths

[URL] https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/05/entertainment/michelle-obama-zaya-wade-conversation-trnd/index.html[/URL]

Zaya Wade is 13. There is no reason in the world why she cannot be a masculine girl or a feminine boy, express fully as masculine/feminine as possible, with clothes and deportment and internal feelings and so on all the way until she is a healthy mature young person of at least 18, but preferably 25 when the frontal lobes have most fully developed. That is no problem at all.

The really big issue though is that a lot of girls and boys like Zaya take puberty blockers because that is the affirmation approach. This literally halts the development of their brain and body, stops their hormones, changes their whole future. There are lots of studies that show adverse health effects. Even if it was just bone density alone it would be a trauma in the future for such children.

For any children who are administered the affirmation protocol once their puberty has been eliminated they would be put on cross sex hormones at about 16. For a girl this will throw body into early menopause. For a boy there will be a halt to pubescent development.

A transitioning girl child will likely have her breast tissue removed. Breasts are not just swollen things attached onto a body - they play a role in the health of the female body in terms of hormones. Mastectomy is the most common gender identity surgery.
Any transitioning girl child would likely have her womb removed very early on also because there is a cancer risk from taking cross sex hormones. When females have their wombs removed there is a significant risk of prolapse of the other lower abdominal organs like the bladder and the colon.
Prolapse is a serious situation that leads to a lifetime of discomfort and significantly impacts.
The transitioning girl child's or young teens vagina would become thin and dry and much more liable to infections, abrasions, wounds, even fistula where other organs prolapse.
The girl child or young teen would develop irreversible male pattern baldness and her voice will always be deeper even if she changes her mind later.
The girl child/ teen would likely be infertile.
The girl child is likely to suffer sexual dysfunction and loss of pleasure sensations.
If the child goes for a phalloplasty they will have huge scarring and a neo-penis that does not function like a males penis. They will need an implant for erection. They will not be able to urinate standing up.
They will have higher cardio vascular and cancer risk for the rest of her life. These are just the facts of the situation. It is a lifetime ahead of such a child of medical dependency and serious health issues.

Boy children who are given puberty blockers and cross sex hormones experience irreversible effects to their body also.

I cannot accept that this is preferable for a child than counselling to help them live until adulthood with their gender feelings.

I think the fragrant Michelle would be better to look more seriously at the reality of trans children's likely medical path and for example at recent remarks by Thomas Steensma, who helped develop and implement the so-called Dutch Model which is the foundation of affirmation therapy...


Dr Thomas Steensma, Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria at Amsterdam UMC -

In Britain, the lack of scientific support has meanwhile led to a ban on sex reassignment hormones on young people. It doesn't have to come to that in the Netherlands, says Thomas Steensma of the Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria at Amsterdam UMC. "But more research is really needed, and very much needed."

Because where does the large flow of children come from who have suddenly registered for transgender care since 2013? And what is the quality of life like for this group long after the sex change? There is no answer to those questions. And that must happen, think Steensma and his colleagues from Nijmegen.

“We don't know whether studies we have done in the past can still be applied to this time. Many more children are registering, and also a different type, ”says Steensma. Suddenly there are many more girls who apply who feel like a boy. While the ratio was the same in 2013, now three times as many children who were born as girls register, compared to children who were born as boys.

We conduct structural research in the Netherlands. But the rest of the world is blindly adopting our research.


The explosive rise in requests in transgender care simply requires a new investigation. Around 2010, about 150 to 200 transgender people were seen every year in the Amsterdam UMC. Now there are 775, with a two-year waiting list on top. The research on that small group of people from before 2013 may not apply to the large group that there is now. And here the help of other countries is also needed. “We conduct structural research in the Netherlands. But the rest of the world is blindly adopting our research. While every doctor or psychologist who engages in transgender care should feel the obligation to do a good before and after measurement. ”

Meanwhile, there are huge waiting lists for transgender care. One year ago, the Radboudumc Amalia children's hospital in Nijmegen responded to a call from the ministry to help get rid of the enormous waiting list in Amsterdam. About 175 children have been seen in Nijmegen since the start. 30 percent of them received puberty inhibitors after a series of interviews. This medication prevents puberty from starting and may be given from the moment the child shows signs of puberty. From 11 years old at the earliest.

When children have reached the age of 15, they may also take sex reassigning hormones in consultation with doctors and their parents. This gives a girl, for example, beard growth and a boy breasts.

It is still unclear whether these administered hormones affect the fertility of boys and girls. "We just don't know," says Steensma. “Little research has yet been done on the treatment with puberty inhibitors and hormones in young people. That is why it is also seen as experimental. We are one of the few countries in the world that conducts ongoing research into this. In Great Britain, for example, a study has only now been published, for the first time in all these years, on a small group of transgender people. This makes it so difficult, almost all research comes from ourselves. ”

https://www.ad.nl/nijmegen/dringend-meer-onderzoek-nodig-naar-transgenderzorg-aan-jongeren-waar-komt-de-grote-stroom-kinderen-vandaan~aec79d00/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2F

LLMMLL

Thankfully leading figures like Michelle Obama aren't distracted by the fear mongering and continue to send a message of inclusivity and positivity.

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

Thankfully leading figures like Michelle Obama aren't distracted by the fear mongering and continue to send a message of inclusivity and positivity.

It is not fear mongering. It is truth. Zaya should be able to express themselves in whatever gender manner they like for the rest of their life without having to be rendered sterile and infertile and health-challenged in order to meet some Neanderthal version of what being a ''man'' is all about. At the very least they should be allowed to grow safely to adulthood.
The backwardness of this ideology is what surprises me the most - that man or boy means trousers and short hair and big muscles and being a woman or girl means dresses and makeup and a high voice and uber femininity. It is so regressive and dumb. And square.

Gatling

Got nothing to do with the erosion of women's rights to suit s tiny cohort of men

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalux wrote: »

Interesting article! I have a tribe. Never knew it.

I think female celebrities much feel a bit of pressure to confirm they are a feminist when they are inevitably asked that question.

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

It is not fear mongering. It is truth. Zaya should be able to express themselves in whatever gender manner they like for the rest of their life without having to be rendered sterile and infertile and health-challenged in order to meet some Neanderthal version of what being a ''man'' is all about. At the very least they should be allowed to grow safely to adulthood.
The backwardness of this ideology is what surprises me the most - that man or boy means trousers and short hair and big muscles and being a woman or girl means dresses and makeup and a high voice and uber femininity. It is so regressive and dumb. And square.

I agree with a lot of that. Nobody has to take puberty blockers. Zaya is free to express herself however she chooses and I'm glad she gets the chance to do so. Michelle Obama recognises and supports Zaya's choices. It's unfortunate that some will try and turn a nice story about expressing yourself freey into a debate about an individuals child medical status without having any information on that child's medical history though.

Gatling

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I think female celebrities much feel a bit of pressure to confirm they are a feminist when they are inevitably asked that question.

If they say no there attacked , that's where the pressure comes from not every woman wants to stand up in front of the UN and declare themselves a feminist , then go on to attack another woman for standing up for women's rights

One eyed Jack

volchitsa wrote: »

The thing I don't get with this argument is that you seem to be saying that gender based rights are or should be, a real thing, while sex based rights aren't really, but you also seem to hold the view that gender is mostly socially constructed.

Isn't that a contradiction?

Protection from discrimination on the basis of either gender or sex is is a real thing in terms of equality legislation? They are protected characteristics which carry equal weight in law, as opposed to there being this peculiar idea that there is any conflict of rights between these characteristics based solely upon sex or gender? There are a few other protected characteristics recognised in Irish law -

The Equal Status Acts 2000-2018 (‘the Acts’) prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods and services, accommodation and education. They cover the nine grounds of gender, marital status, family status, age, disability, sexual orientation, race, religion, and membership of the Traveller community. In addition, the Acts prohibit discrimination in the provision of accommodation services against people who are in receipt of rent supplement, housing assistance, or social welfare payments.


Equal Status Acts


There are exemptions in Irish Law relating to what constitutes lawful or unlawful discrimination, but the same laws apply to everyone equally, and are not determined solely on the basis of sex or gender -


Exemptions which apply to one, or more, of the nine grounds


I can’t think of any rights which apply to any group specifically on the basis of their sex, that wouldn’t also apply on the basis of their gender identity in relation to protection from discrimination. Perhaps if you could at least list some of these rights which you’re suggesting are relevant to people on the basis of their sex, as in males and females having separate and distinct legal rights which are absolute, and are codified in Irish law, it might constitute evidence which would support an argument that sex-based legal rights exist and are enumerated in Irish law.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

Zaya Wade is 13. There is no reason in the world why she cannot be a masculine girl, express fully as masculine as possible, with clothes and deportment and internal feelings and so on all the way until she is a healthy mature young person of at least 18, but preferably 25 when the frontal lobes have most fully developed.

There’s one reason - they have agency, y’know that concept you recognised earlier as fundamental to recognising people’s rights and enabling them to express themselves? Generally speaking in Western society children’s agency is being recognised as an independent consideration in law. It’s exactly why Zaya Wade is recognised as having the agency to identify themselves as a young lady -


Wade told Roberts that Zaya has been his family's "leader" when it comes to educating them on the transgender community.

"Zaya knew two things: she knew straight and she knew gay. But Zaya started doing more research. She was the one who sat down with us as a family and said, 'Hey, I don't think I'm gay.' And she went down the list and said, 'This is how I identify myself. This is my gender identity. I identify myself as a young lady,'" he said.


Dwyane Wade says trans daughter Zaya knew gender identity since she was 3 years old


I really don’t care much for celebrity virtue signalling, but y’know, positive role models ‘n’ stuff.

In Britain, the lack of scientific support has meanwhile led to a ban on sex reassignment hormones on young people.

That’s how the article you quoted starts off, but something must have been lost in translation for the Dutch equivalent of the Daily Mail to be reporting that a lack of scientific support has meanwhile led to a ban on sex reassignment hormones on young people in Britain. That didn’t, and hasn’t happened. The rest of the article is Dr Thomas Steensma calling for more research into the area of gender dysphoria and transgender medicine. Seems a rather obvious point to make which anyone would agree with - of course more research is needed, and if it were my field of employment, I’d be making calls for more research which would invariably mean more funding to cover the cost of doing said research.

Steensma did of course develop the affirmative care model, which is not quite what you’ve chosen to portray it, and because of more research being done, the affirmative care model is still being researched, and is considered to be a more effective medical model based upon medical evidence, than the competing social model which is based upon informed consent (which recognises the patients agency) -


Affirmative Practice With Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Youth: Expanding the Model

Informed Consent in the Medical Care of Transgender and Gender-Nonconforming Patients


(and still there is this “masculine girl” nonsense which has no basis in biology, and is based entirely upon cultural ideas of behaviours and attitudes commonly associated with either boys or girls)

Cestmoi 111

Ok wait, just shows how utterly confusing all this nomenclature is...seems Z is a biological boy, so no womb, etc. That’s why I won’t use the term ‘transwoman’ for a bio male; it’s unclear and makes you have to pause and try to think the opposite of your actual thoughts upon hearing the word woman.

Gruffalux

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

Ok wait, just shows how utterly confusing all this nomenclature is...seems z is a biological boy, so no womb, etc. That’s why I won’t use the term ‘transwoman’ for a bio male; it’s unclear and makes you have to pause and try to think the opposite of your actual thoughts upon hearing the word woman.

It is no better for a boy child. Blockers leave the child with a pre pubescent small penis, shortened stature, their peers grow up and they remain suspended in time. Same health risks in terms of bone density and cancers. Plus the surgical procedures are very extreme lifelong for them too.
All this cooing in America about "transkids" and glitteringness and at the same time you have markets growing for underwear and swimwear that tucks and flattens young boy childs genitalia, silicone packers shaped like tiny penises to put in girl childs underwear, and binders that deform the girls ribs so they squash their pubescent breasts. All to tide them over very young childhood until they can start the experimental chemicals. I think there is a lot of deeply weird sh1t going on with kids, to be honest. I wish their parents and the public figures who gush about it all would leave those kids alone.

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

Zaya Wade is 13.

Gruffalux wrote: »

Then once her puberty has been eliminated she would be put on cross sex hormones at about 16. This will throw Zaya's body into early menopause.

Gruffalux wrote: »

She will likely have her breast tissue removed.

Gruffalux wrote: »

She would likely have her womb removed very early on

Gruffalux wrote: »

Her vagina would become thin and dry

Gruffalux wrote: »

She will be infertile.

I woke up deeply disturbed this morning that someone would post this about a specific 13 year old child.

This trans child simply took part in a nice conversation with Michelle Obama and in return has her breasts and vagina discussed like this? How on Earth does anyone think it's appropriate to discuss a specific 13 year olds sexual organs on a public thread?

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

I woke up deeply disturbed this morning that someone would post this about a specific 13 year old child.

This trans child simply took part in a nice conversation with Michelle Obama and in return has her breasts and vagina discussed like this? How on Earth does anyone think it's appropriate to discuss a specific 13 year olds sexual organs on a public thread?

That is an exceptionally lame effort LLMMLL..
You are the TRA in this thread. You are the activist who nobly supports the affirmation approach for children. Having the reality of the affirmation approach outlined in terms of its devastating physical impact on a small child or young person's primary and secondary sexual characteristics should not make you feel aghast and clutching your pearls. You should know what you support. The real nitty gritty of it. Do you think it is all about the feels? Transkids are affected directly in the genitals by the medicalisation of their discomfort. Do you think it just makes their little eyes shine brighter?

Honestly now your supposed shock is beyond cynical. You should give yourself a shake.

Gruffalux

Excellent thread from a gay man's perspective on how the polite fiction that was civilised is being ratcheted up to demand performative allegiance.

https://twitter.com/DanialWebb/status/1368464885667991552?s=19

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

I woke up deeply disturbed this morning that someone would post this about a specific 13 year old child.

This trans child simply took part in a nice conversation with Michelle Obama and in return has her breasts and vagina discussed like this? How on Earth does anyone think it's appropriate to discuss a specific 13 year olds sexual organs on a public thread?

Turns out they didn't, since Zaya is biologically male, so you can stop feeling disturbed now.

As for whether it's fundamentally appropriate or not, I take your point about gratuitous descriptions of surgery but I think you're overdoing it here. You can find descriptions and diagrams of all sorts of surgery on the internet. Would it be disturbing if I were to describe the details of an appendectomy or a face lift?

If we were discussing possible breast augmentation for a young teenager, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to discuss the reality of what that would mean for her.

I'd imagine a lot of people don't really know the details of how a sex change operation works, and, importantly, its downsides and limits. So it is educational rather than gratuitous.

Cestmoi 111

Gruffalux wrote: »

That is an exceptionally lame effort LLMMLL..
You are the TRA in this thread. You are the activist who nobly supports the affirmation approach for children. Having the reality of the affirmation approach outlined in terms of its devastating physical impact on a small child or young person's primary and secondary sexual characteristics should not make you feel aghast and clutching your pearls. You should know what you support. The real nitty gritty of it. Do you think it is all about the feels? Transkids are affected directly in the genitals by the medicalisation of their discomfort. Do you think it just makes their little eyes shine brighter?

Honestly now your supposed shock is beyond cynical. You should give yourself a shake.

It was more than lame, it’s quite nasty. The use of “disturbed” is insinuating something.

LLMMLL did the word “daughter” in that article confuse you? It was very misleading. But Z is a boy. So no breasts or vaginas were harmed in the making of any posts.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

No Gatling you are completely incorrect. You have just misunderstood what I've posted in the thread. I've explicitly said many times before that self declaration is not a deciding factor.

That's what you believe I believe. It's not what I believe. You are aware of the difference right?

What is the deciding factor then?

Gruffalux

If I personally was involved in some political movement that promoted serious medical interference in children's bodies - say I was a medieval Chinese lord promoting foot binding of girl children or a tribal medicine woman who thought all girls at puberty should have their breasts ironed or their clitorises cut off - I think it is only fair that others should be able to campaign against my movement by describing the factual physical results in real time of what I promote and support.

Cestmoi 111

GreeBo wrote: »

What is the deciding factor then?

Looking forward to LLMMLLs answer to that, but in the meantime:
I was curious about that too so had a look back at some of LLMMLLs posts. There is one where they say that xy chromosomes plus identifying as a woman means you’re a woman. But now they say that declaring oneself a woman doesn’t make you a woman.
As if there weren’t already enough mental gymnastics required for all this, now people apparently need to figure out whether a man is identifying as a woman, or merely declaring he is identifying as a woman. And the difference in those two things, is apparently the difference between a man and a woman.
SMH.

Gruffalux

volchitsa wrote: »

I'd imagine a lot of people don't really know the details of how a sex change operation works, and, importantly, its downsides and limits. So it is educational rather than gratuitous.

It is not just surgery that has very strong impacts on the physical body. The puberty blockers themselves, given from 8 to 11 years old, have huge developmental effects on the sexual characteristics of the child. And then the cross sex hormones wreak further havoc. That is before a surgical implement is ever introduced.

I really find it a very serious thing to do to children.