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

jam_mac_jam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Plenty of people were and still are advocating conversion therapy, albeit by more subversive means as calling it “watchful waiting”, as though they’re hoping that the child will grow out of it, like many parents who would rather their children weren’t gay, etc. Pretending that the “cautious” approach addresses anything is nonsense, it’s literally avoiding the elephant in the room. Children, unlike plants, don’t have the capacity to wait around while the adults are humming and hawing and watchfully waiting. They require guidance throughout their development, and sometimes biology throws adults a curveball they weren’t expecting, like their children not being the perfect package that was meant to fulfil all their expectations. As their parents, it’s the parents responsibility to deal with it, not the child’s responsibility.

There is plenty of harm done btw by the “watchful waiting” approach, what do you imagine the child is supposed to do in the meantime while the adults figure their shìt out? I know where you’re coming from with the idea of having access to services for their mental health, but in this country the mental health system manages to fail spectacularly in regards to children’s mental health. In reality the responsibility for their children is ultimately on parents, and expecting parents to watch and wait while their children go through torture just to satisfy someone else’s ego is something that should never be expected of any parents.

But what if they are one of the children that grow out of it or just turn out to be gay or suffer from gender dyphoria and still decide not to transition. Then you have put your child through serious medical treatments when you didn't have to,

I don't think its a case of people hoping they will grow out of it. It must be a terrible choice for most parents and doctors.

Its so hard to know if they will grow out of it or in the other case by delaying treatment that you are causing your child unnecessary suffering if they are going to transition later. And if it does turn out they transition later then the wait and see approach is going to cause them more suffering.

The girl who brought the case said that she wasn't challenged enough, there has to be a balance between no challenge to the child's wishes and complete challenge.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

Parents would be justified in wanting to wait to see if their child outgrows their dysphoria because, you know, what parent wants to see their teenage girl getting a radical mastectomy or having her uterus shrivel and her hormonal system go into early menopause with all the sh1t that brings, her hair fall out, her voice forever deepen, etc, or their little boy never have an adult-sized penis, never know what sex feels like with a mature body, be sterile, have prefrontal cortex development issues etc...and spend the whole of their life dependent on chemicals and likely have surgical pain and issues if they go the SRS route.

“Prefrontal cortex development issues”, well, at least you’ve moved away from calling it mental retardation. As for all the other stuff, yes, I’m not denying those are possible outcomes, but I don’t accept that they’re certainties, nor do I accept that they apply in all cases either as though that should settle any argument. Medicine is improving and progressing all the time, and the treatments used now are far, far from perfect, BUT, they’re better than the alternative which is to do nothing at all and just wait and hope the child grows out of it and becomes the adult we want them to be.

Gruffalux wrote: »

whereas this is not at all like parents re gay children who they know are just going to have a fine time like anyone else in their fully healthy fully functioning body that needs no chemicals or surgery!!

It’s exactly like that. Most children grow up to be heterosexual as adults is not a compelling argument to ignore the fact that some children don’t. Nor is the idea that based off a small scale study we can conclude that children who are transgender are in reality baby homosexuals. It’s literally suiting yourself, it does nothing for children.

It reminds me of my own parents approach to my issues that I experienced as a child. Their idea of the “watchful waiting” approach was to ignore my issues and play it down, pass it off as though I was faking it because I was looking for attention, etc. As an adult I did seek help for my issues and the first few doctors I went to couldn’t find anything wrong, until I was referred to an orthopaedic specialist and it took him all of two minutes to figure out that I’d been born with a click hip which hadn’t been detected at birth, a standard test which is performed on all babies, no different than spotting whether a baby has an inny or an outty, and they missed it, and I paid for it because by the time I was diagnosed by the consultant I was at the point where I’d contemplated taking a hacksaw to my leg to stop the pain.

“Watchful waiting” is fine as an idea as long as you’re prepared to ignore reality.

One eyed Jack

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

But what if they are one of the children that grow out of it or just turn out to be gay or suffer from gender dyphoria and still decide not to transition. Then you have put your child through serious medical treatments when you didn't have to,

I don't think its a case of people hoping they will grow out of it. It must be a terrible choice for most parents and doctors.

Its so hard to know if they will grow out of it or in the other case by delaying treatment that you are causing your child unnecessary suffering if they are going to transition later. And if it does turn out they transition later then the wait and see approach is going to cause them more suffering.

The girl who brought the case said that she wasn't challenged enough, there has to be a balance between no challenge to the child's wishes and complete challenge.

This is it though, the “one size fits all” blanket approach just doesn’t work. Each case will continue to be judged on it’s own merits and we have to trust that clinicians and the medical community are doing their best, not just because there are a whole slew of ethical and legal implications, but because they don’t want to have regrets about mistakes they made either that other people will have to pay dearly for.

ceadaoin.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s exactly like that. Most children grow up to be heterosexual as adults is not a compelling argument to ignore the fact that some children don’t.

But being gay has no health impacts. Being put on experimental drugs does. So I really don't see how the two scenarios are in any way similar.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

“Watchful waiting” is fine as an idea as long as you’re prepared to ignore reality.

.......

And people who accept that a man is a woman or vice versa are doing what?

One eyed Jack

ceadaoin. wrote: »

But being gay has no health impacts. Being put on experimental drugs does. So I really don't see how the two scenarios are in any way similar.

They’re similar in the same way as you’re using the idea that 90% of children grow up to be homosexual, thinking that’s an argument against treating children who are transgender (one has no bearing on the other). By the standards that you’re using the term “experimental drugs”, ALL drugs are experimental, they all have side effects, and the idea is that the benefits in terms of a person’s overall healthcare outweigh the risk of side effects.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

.......

And people who accept that a man is a woman or vice versa are doing what?

Not watchful waiting? I dunno, what are they doing?

jam_mac_jam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They’re similar in the same way as you’re using the idea that 90% of children grow up to be homosexual, thinking that’s an argument against treating children who are transgender (one has no bearing on the other). By the standards that you’re using the term “experimental drugs”, ALL drugs are experimental, they all have side effects, and the idea is that the benefits in terms of a person’s overall healthcare outweigh the risk of side effects.

No, you are using the idea that some young people and children who suffer from gender dysphoria turn out not to be transgender, as the girl who took the case. Some are gay, some are transgender, some treat their dysphoria without transitioning.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Not watchful waiting? I dunno, what are they doing?

Denying reality.

Bonniedog

Frankie Machine wrote: »

No, I don't think so.

The Cambridge Dictionary defines deviant (adj.) as



https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/deviant

It is fair to say that the consensus on this thread is that this topic is 'not usual', and also that it is 'unacceptable'.

We have had recourse to the dictionary in the context of 'adult human female'. It was good enough then, and is good enough now.

Lets not be squeamish just because the word has other connotations in other contexts.

The poster has the benefit of the doubt as to what they meant.


.

And just to be clear I was not referring to the children who are afflicted with gender dysphoria, i was referring to the small but vocal band of fanatics who are trying to push people into not only accepting chemical/physical transitioning on minors, but attempting to influence the children themselves.

It is rightly not legal for an adult to use their power to get a minor to steal, have sex with them, join an illegal organisation, become part of a religious cult, and so on. This is in the same cache as far as i am concerned.

volchitsa

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Plenty of people were and still are advocating conversion therapy, albeit by more subversive means as calling it “watchful waiting”, as though they’re hoping that the child will grow out of it, like many parents who would rather their children weren’t gay, etc. Pretending that the “cautious” approach addresses anything is nonsense, it’s literally avoiding the elephant in the room. Children, unlike plants, don’t have the capacity to wait around while the adults are humming and hawing and watchfully waiting. They require guidance throughout their development, and sometimes biology throws adults a curveball they weren’t expecting, like their children not being the perfect package that was meant to fulfil all their expectations. As their parents, it’s the parents responsibility to deal with it, not the child’s responsibility.

There is plenty of harm done btw by the “watchful waiting” approach, what do you imagine the child is supposed to do in the meantime while the adults figure their shìt out? I know where you’re coming from with the idea of having access to services for their mental health, but in this country the mental health system manages to fail spectacularly in regards to children’s mental health. In reality the responsibility for their children is ultimately on parents, and expecting parents to watch and wait while their children go through torture just to satisfy someone else’s ego is something that should never be expected of any parents.

Watchful waiting is another form of conversion therapy?? WTF?
No it isn't. "Watchful waiting" - unlike conversion therapy - is an actual medical process, and is part of standard medical practice in many situations.

It's based on the same idea as the part of the hippocratic oath that says "First, do no harm". Giving children drugs in an indication for which they have not been tested is the real ethical issue here, not watchful waiting.

One eyed Jack

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

No, you are using the idea that some young people and children who suffer from gender dysphoria turn out not to be transgender, as the girl who took the case. Some are gay, some are transgender, some treat their dysphoria without transitioning.

I’m really not. I’m saying that the idea that most children who identify as transgender are really homosexual is the same as arguments that imply most children who are homosexual are really heterosexual. It’s just shìtty logic which is dependent upon correlating two completely separate things - there is no relationship between transgenderism and sexual orientation, or transgenderism and autism, or anything else which people find a more palatable alternative explanation (some people have even tried to correlate transgenderism with sexual abuse in childhood), simply because of their own perceptions of all the negative stereotypes.

The girl who took the case, it was simply that clinicians were working off the best information they had at the time, they’re no more infallible in the area of transgender healthcare than clinicians in any other area of medicine. Paediatric care has a far higher mortality rate for example. It’s not because the people involved are all constantly making mistakes or because nobody cares, it’s simply because clinicians and physicians aren’t miracle workers, but the area is developing all the time.

I know that there are all different groups of people within the whole “transgender” identity, but that’s why there can’t be a one size fits all model like the “wait and watch” model or the “affirmative care” model, or the medical or social model, because each individual must be treated as such and the people involved in their healthcare are the people who are in the best position to determine the most suitable course of treatment which they hope will have the best long term outcomes.

silverharp

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m really not. I’m saying that the idea that most children who identify as transgender are really homosexual is the same as arguments that imply most children who are homosexual are really heterosexual. It’s just shìtty logic which is dependent upon correlating two completely separate things - there is no relationship between transgenderism and sexual orientation, or transgenderism and autism, or anything else which people find a more palatable alternative explanation (some people have even tried to correlate transgenderism with sexual abuse in childhood), simply because of their own perceptions of all the negative stereotypes.

The girl who took the case, it was simply that clinicians were working off the best information they had at the time, they’re no more infallible in the area of transgender healthcare than clinicians in any other area of medicine. Paediatric care has a far higher mortality rate for example. It’s not because the people involved are all constantly making mistakes or because nobody cares, it’s simply because clinicians and physicians aren’t miracle workers, but the area is developing all the time.

I know that there are all different groups of people within the whole “transgender” identity, but that’s why there can’t be a one size fits all model like the “wait and watch” model or the “affirmative care” model, or the medical or social model, because each individual must be treated as such and the people involved in their healthcare are the people who are in the best position to determine the most suitable course of treatment which they hope will have the best long term outcomes.

or they have lost the run of themselves, medicine used to work on the principle of do no harm, now medicine has decided it can interrupt normal biological processes to make these frankenpeople , with kids, not even grown adults.
I'd like to think we are in the middle of a mania, and this will be seen as the child abuse scandal of this century

jam_mac_jam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m really not. I’m saying that the idea that most children who identify as transgender are really homosexual is the same as arguments that imply most children who are homosexual are really heterosexual. It’s just shìtty logic which is dependent upon correlating two completely separate things - there is no relationship between transgenderism and sexual orientation, or transgenderism and autism, or anything else which people find a more palatable alternative explanation (some people have even tried to correlate transgenderism with sexual abuse in childhood), simply because of their own perceptions of all the negative stereotypes.

The girl who took the case, it was simply that clinicians were working off the best information they had at the time, they’re no more infallible in the area of transgender healthcare than clinicians in any other area of medicine. Paediatric care has a far higher mortality rate for example. It’s not because the people involved are all constantly making mistakes or because nobody cares, it’s simply because clinicians and physicians aren’t miracle workers, but the area is developing all the time.

I know that there are all different groups of people within the whole “transgender” identity, but that’s why there can’t be a one size fits all model like the “wait and watch” model or the “affirmative care” model, or the medical or social model, because each individual must be treated as such and the people involved in their healthcare are the people who are in the best position to determine the most suitable course of treatment which they hope will have the best long term outcomes.

I didn't say most children who suffer dysphoria are homosexual just that some are. I am not confusing the two but some gay young people are not gender conforming and may suffer from dysphoria.

I agree that you have to take it on a case by case basis.

And to be honest I think the biggest issue is that there are not enough studies to know if either the affirmation model or watchful waiting is the best model.

This is a new area and I honestly think we don't know yet.

One eyed Jack

volchitsa wrote: »

Watchful waiting is another form of conversion therapy?? WTF?
No it isn't. "Watchful waiting" - unlike conversion therapy - is an actual medical process, and is part of standard medical practice in many situations.

It's based on the same idea as the part of the hippocratic oath that says "First, do no harm". Giving children drugs in an indication for which they have not been tested is the real ethical issue here, not watchful waiting.

I didn’t say watchful waiting was a form of conversion therapy. Read it again, though I doubt you’ll be any less wtf on any subsequent reading. I know what it is, and I’m well aware of how and when it is used, and applying it in all circumstances in relation to children who are transgender or experiencing gender dysphoria would be unethical because it would be emotionally and mentally damaging and could cause long term harm. The “do no harm” is a principle, it has no practical application in medicine because all treatments, drugs, etc have both positive and negative outcomes. In reality it’s really “do as little harm as possible and hope for the best”, but that’s not as snappy.

Everything in medicine is an ethical issue, including watchful waiting. It’s no different than using drugs which were developed for another purpose for purposes which they weren’t developed for. It’s quite common in medicine besides just transgender healthcare, but calling them “experimental drugs” makes them sound more scary I suppose.

Bonniedog

Males who prefer sex with other males and females who prefer other females, are still biologically male and female.

there is only a very tenuous connection between homosexuality and gender dysphoria. So the whole LGB + T thing is merely a political tactic. nothing to whatsoever with the L, Gs and Bs!

Only anecdotal but there are clearly a lot of gay people who don't feel part of a "community" that includes all the add ons.

Larbre34

Whats raked all this nonsense over today, is it the Ellen Page thing?

One eyed Jack

silverharp wrote: »

or they have lost the run of themselves, medicine used to work on the principle of do no harm, now medicine has decided it can interrupt normal biological processes to make these frankenpeople , with kids, not even grown adults.
I'd like to think we are in the middle of a mania, and this will be seen as the child abuse scandal of this century

Medicine has always been about interrupting normal biological processes, ultimately with the idea of improving people’s quality of life, as opposed to the idea of creating frankenpeople (not sure how you feel about people who have had organ transplants and other mechanical devices inserted in their bodies?), but it’s done with children regularly.

On that basis I have no doubt that some people will see this as child abuse, just like every other procedure that gives people the willies because it involves children will be seen as the child abuse scandal of the century. It’s an easy way to determine their grasp on reality and their ability to put things in perspective. For me the thalidomide scandal is up there -


Irish government deliberately didn't issue warning about Thalidomide

Gruffalux

It is really weird the way I view medical procedures like lobotomy or forced sterilisation or symphysiotomy as being qualitatively different than the problematic early heart transplant attempts or novel tweaking of DBS for Parkinson's - it is almost as if not everything is comparable, that some of these things are not like the other...no matter how often I am told everything is the same.

Gatling

Larbre34 wrote: »

Whats raked all this nonsense over today, is it the Ellen Page thing?

We haven't got to that yet

mohawk

Larbre34 wrote: »

Whats raked all this nonsense over today, is it the Ellen Page thing?

No there was a court case in UK regarding whether children can consent to puberty blockers. The judgement was released today.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

It is really weird the way I view medical procedures like lobotomy or forced sterilisation or symphysiotomy as being qualitatively different than the problematic early heart transplant attempts or novel tweaking of DBS for Parkinson's - it is almost as if not everything is comparable, that some of these things are not like the other...no matter how often I am told everything is the same.

I don’t think it’s any more weird than your suggesting people who are transgender should be satisfied to be relegated to a third space because of the fear of men taking advantage of Irish legislation for nefarious purposes as though there is any relation between the two very different things, but that’s been the crux of your argument so far, when it wasn’t about mental retardation (I remember as a child that being said to my mother, that I would be better off in a special school, I wouldn’t be writing this now if she had taken their advice), autism, and just about everything you could throw out there save for the kitchen sink... although there are analogies there to plumbing that could practically write themselves.

Gruffalux

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t think it’s any more weird than your suggesting people who are transgender should be satisfied to be relegated to a third space because of the fear of men taking advantage of Irish legislation for nefarious purposes as though there is any relation between the two very different things, but that’s been the crux of your argument so far, when it wasn’t about mental retardation (I remember as a child that being said to my mother, that I would be better off in a special school, I wouldn’t be writing this now if she had taken their advice), autism, and just about everything you could throw out there save for the kitchen sink... although there are analogies there to plumbing that could practically write themselves.

My mother was no saint but I do not insist on blaming her into adulthood for anything.

I never said relegate. Ever. It has a specific political atmosphere you wish to conjure that is all your own.

But if someone must be "relegated" in your mind then please 'relegate" me to the third space where women can compete in female sports, commune and organise as females, take refuge as females and find some peace away from those who berate them with the cretinous propaganda that biology is not real.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Larbre34 wrote: »

Whats raked all this nonsense over today, is it the Ellen Page thing?

No, the verdict in the Keira Bell case.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

My mother was no saint but I do not insist on blaming her into adulthood for anything.

I’m not sure what that’s in relation to but good for you, I guess?

Gruffalux wrote: »

I never said relegate. Ever. It has a specific political atmosphere you wish to conjure that is all your own.

But if someone must be "relegated" in your mind then please 'relegate" me to the third space where women can compete in female sports, commune and organise as females, take refuge as females and find some peace away from those who berate them with the cretinous propaganda that biology is not real.

I know you never said relegate, but anyone who imagines your idea would be for their benefit would have to be a cretin. I believe you’re perfectly free to find your own space, and you’re free to use whatever propaganda you think will be effective in organising others of a similar mindset to your own to join you in your space (something to do with freedom of association in Irish law, goes over my head), but what nobody is free to do is perpetuate unlawful discrimination against anyone else in Irish society. That protects you from discrimination as much as it does anyone else. I personally think it’s a good thing, but you’re free to believe otherwise and focus only on the negative.

The_Brood

Genuine question, if someone says "I have always identified as a rhinoceros, I feel that I should have been born a rhinoceros, and from now on I will identify as a rhinoceros and want everyone to refer to me and treat me as such" - is that in any way shape or form less valid than say the Ellen/Elliot Page news today? if yes, why?

The_Brood

The_Brood wrote: »

Genuine question, if someone says "I have always identified as a rhinoceros, I feel that I should have been born a rhinoceros, and from now on I will identify as a rhinoceros and want everyone to refer to me and treat me as such" - is that in any way shape or form less valid than say the Ellen/Elliot Page news today? if yes, why?

Because it's preposterous to think you can be a rhino. Your genetics will prove you aren't a rhino. You have a completely different biological make up from a rhino.

But men and women are the same.....

Apparently.

LLMMLL

The_Brood wrote: »

Genuine question, if someone says "I have always identified as a rhinoceros, I feel that I should have been born a rhinoceros, and from now on I will identify as a rhinoceros and want everyone to refer to me and treat me as such" - is that in any way shape or form less valid than say the Ellen/Elliot Page news today? if yes, why?

Makes no sense. Nobody claims to be a rhinoceros so why would it have any validity.

Its like asking should people who are sexually attracted to their car be allowed to marry it. And if not then why should gay people be allowed to marry.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not sure what that’s in relation to but good for you, I guess?

I know you never said relegate, but anyone who imagines your idea would be for their benefit would have to be a cretin. I believe you’re perfectly free to find your own space, and you’re free to use whatever propaganda you think will be effective in organising others of a similar mindset to your own to join you in your space (something to do with freedom of association in Irish law, goes over my head), but what nobody is free to do is perpetuate unlawful discrimination against anyone else in Irish society. That protects you from discrimination as much as it does anyone else. I personally think it’s a good thing, but you’re free to believe otherwise and focus only on the negative.

That's an entirely patronising post and is unbecoming of you. I've argued with you on many an occasion as I think we are diametrically opposed on many, many issues but you were one of the only ones on here I found respectful and reasoned.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Makes no sense. Nobody claims to be a rhinoceros so why would it have any validity.

Its like asking should people who are sexually attracted to their car be allowed to marry it. And if not then why should gay people be allowed to marry.

It's a valid question. Take away gay marriage. Why should a person who loves his car, not be able to marry it?