Prime Time Gender Issues (READ OP BEFORE POSTING)

Maybe you should be finding the stats before concern trolling about non existent surgeries?

It's really not more complex

"Reducing" trans people is about eliminating them.

I think you have completely and intensionally misrepresented and misquoted what was said ,

Oh OK. So you are just guessing and don't have a clue then!

Did you miss this bit of the article?

What does reducing people mean so?

The first incorrect information that you've repeated multiple times is the suggestion that Irish children are having surgery. It's hard to see your good faith in this discussion when you keep repeating this with zero evidence.

Except that being trans isn't like being disabled. You don't become trans after a car crash or after acquiring a life threatening condition.

It's a fundamental part of a person's nature. How do you reduce trans people?

How about if she said reducing the number of gay people. The term really has to be explained better than a single sentence. Does she think therapy will dissuade people that they want a sex change?

How can it be "a fundamental part of someone's nature" when there are transitioners who later detransition? Clearly some people are getting their "inherent nature" wrong?

Also, how does this all fit with the idea of people being "gender fluid"?

Like, if gender is so innate that a male person can "be" female to the extent of needing hormones and surgery to "validate" their "real" gender because gender is a dichotomy, but if people are gender fluid, then it's not really a dichotomy, since people can indeed move about from one to the other. What's their "inherent nature"? Especially as teens, when identity is kind of fluid anyway.

Gay people don't require drugs and surgery to be gay though, so the comparison doesn't work. That's like saying we should reduce the number of red headed or lefthanded people: I mean - why??

Groups of people who need lifelong and expensive medical care just to remain normally healthy though - yeah, why would a country not want to ensure that numbers of those people weren't being unintentionally increased? Which is exactly the fear about puberty blockers etc: that they're pushing children onto a pathway of drugs etc that they would not otherwise be on.

You're proving my point: who needs a "diagnosis" of being gay?

Nobody.

The only reason anyone "needs" a diagnosis of being trans is because they require extra health care. Like someone who's disabled.

So comparing the idea of "reducing numbers" is nothing like reducing numbers of gay or lefthanded or red headed people, it's like reducing numbers of people with a certain disability.

And that's a perfectly reasonable thing for a healthcare system or a government to try to do - without being accused by extremists of wanting to kill the disabled. That's hysterical nonsense, such as we saw with the anti choice brigades about disability and pregnancy terminations.

I'm not against diagnosis of trans people but it you that is supporting the assumption that people are being misdiagnosed. Having disabilities is not a good comparison either so not sure why you are pushing it I thought the phrase of reducing numbers was from an anti trans activists so not from the government anyway. The source of the route can change the meaning of the phrase.

Like this Case involving Tavistock and it's not the only one

My fundamental issue with the whole thing is that it relies on putting people into boxes that fit some stererotypes.

Why cant you just have girls that like "boys" stuff and boys that like "girls" stuff? Why do we suddenly have to decide that they are the wrong gender and some action must be taken?

There arent multiple genders, there are two that correspond to the 2 sexes. I dont a flying continental if you are male and like barbie and dressing up, you are still male. Likewise if you are female and love nothing better than being up to your armpits in an mechanics pit of grease, you are still a woman.

Its actually amazing how backwards the whole trans thing is. Not long ago a male who liked some typically female things would have been called "a fag", now we are saying that they are actually a women in a mans body. No one can explain to me whats wrong with a man liking/enjoying things that aren't uber macho?

To be honest ite a mystery why anyone would qoute her good or bad. She is not an expert or a psychologist but makes grand claims on trans issues.

For any medical condition there will be misdiagnoses medical professionals are only human, so to say you want to reduce diagnoses is such an obvious phrase as to be trite. But if she wants to reduce transitions for properly diagnosed patients then I think can comes across as cruel.

For most of us its not even in the same continent I'm afraid.

Being gay or bi has zero to do with being trans. T is the worst thing to happen to LGB imo.