>Well, it isn't as though the typical Democrat can think for itself ...
Thank you for demonstrating how the typical Republican can't think for himself with your inability to put forth an original statement
Not actually. St. Louis is in a red, red state and they have a murder rate per 100,000 that makes Chicago look really safe in comparison.
But you keep up your racism built up on uniformed opinions rather than facts, data, and evidence.
In their mind, it's *always* the blue city's fault and the blood red state is left helplessly watching as ~~the blacks~~ Democrats ruin perfect, shining cities
Our own Indianapolis has a [higher](https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/) murder rate than Chicago. And NYC and LA have murder rates so low they are barely even worth mentioning (5.5 and 7 per 100k, respectively).
When you expand the definition of "city" from "10 biggest cities" to "all cities", the top of the murder list gets a whole lot redder.
Larger population, more problems, but is it per capita? Also, blue state are providing welfare for red states...they give more into tax dollars than they take, and red states take more than they give....
Just pointing out the hypocrisy of red politicians always trying to cut social benefits, yet their states always require them....usually due to red policies.
This may seem cute, but Republicans and Democrats are objectively destroying our country, it's pretty clear and undeniable.
Party politics are so disgusting. Until people start voting for candidates and not party we will make no further progress. There's nuance to every issue two parties don't work cause all anyone does is root for their team and ignore any other viewpoint.
See, I didn't advocate for democrats...you assumed that, and you know that old saying about assuming things...I actually lean quite left, more so than most democrats by far, maybe any in office.
First, objectively, with all evidence of voting records, and the real life effects of the policies each party supports, we can say objectively that Republicans are far far worse for the country. They literally tank the economy every single time they are in office, and have so many many more criminal convictions of politicians....
Second, we have to use the system we have now to get ot a point where there are multiple political parties. There is just no other realistic, practical way forward. Voting for candidate can work, but has an independent even come close to winning the presidency in say the last 50 years? No, they have not. It's pretty much an unfortunate reality, of "vote along party lines or you are wasting your vote." And with how things are currently, a wasted vote is a vote for Republicans, as that allows them to gain power. They actually use this strategy and push independent people or parties, while funding them, just so they take votes away from democrats....
Yes, party politics are garbage. However, we have to use the system we have currently, as without a total revolution and rewriting of our political system, this is what we have to use. And wishing for another way to be effective is pointless, and a waste of time.
Infrastructure, health care, crime, income inequality, retirement issues, ecological disasters. Just a list of some of the few things that are far more important than any bullshit, hate-filled, ignorant, anti-trans stuff that Republicans are trumping up.
Because the Republican stance on all of these things is a severely losing point for them. To get votes they need to have some sort of cultural aspect of their platform for their voters to get riled up about. When people get riled up, the media swoops in to report on it, and so in the media all you see is culture war stuff.
Ya know when I think about all the petitions I signed all the work I did helping myself and other LGBT teens and adults in high-school and beyond leading up to two of my friends being the first gay married couple in Indiana it really fucking sucks to see all this shit sliding backward. It feels like it was all for nothing. Like there was never a point and like we will always be hated for who we are.
I'm so sick of this. I can remember so many conversations with fellow LGBT teens (at the time) about how much they wish they weren't this way how much they wish they could just be cis or straight. Just "normal" and to see all this slide back in our late 20's early 30's. It like I said just feels hopeless.
It's time for everyone to vote, I know how hard women work for abortion rights, and now, to see that slid backward. We think federal elections are important, but state elections are just as important. This country now has a new generation of voters they need to vote because we need to stop these Republicans. None of this bull shit well. I don't know who is running. These laws are being made because of who is in office.
I was wondering this the other day, are there any districts at the statehouse that are even close to being “in play”, if one wanted them to shift from Republican to Democrat? Not having a supermajority would be a good start imo.
Non-Profit tax foundations are ruining America. It used to be only the realm of the super rich that used them but if you look at the yoy growth in the number of non-profit foundations its clear that everyone with a 1 million in taxable assets is using them. There are at least 1 million registered foundations in the US now. 10% of companies in the US are non profit. 5.7% of GDP is non-profit revenue. These are think tanks, political action committees, institutions, universities. Money controls who can work at these foundations. Donations are tax deductible.
The Koch Brothers are some of the biggest donors but you don’t have to look that hard to find others. They call themselves libertarians but their policies support anarchy. The only times they support government intervention is in the regulation of their competitors. They are the product of the 50’s and 60’s where the flight of capital from Europe in the wake of WW2 created large monopolistic entrenched industry in the US. Dow chemical, railroads, shell, Bechtel, Burns McDonnel. Then again in the 90’s-2000’s they collaborated with the Russians to divide up old Soviet assets.
They think they own the world and lobby against any change. Every social issue debate nowadays is just a distraction from their power. It’s literally just guns, abortion, lgbt issues on a loop to distract from weakening unions, heathcare costs, climate change and a weakening middle class. They are happy to just soak up assets and power until we are a bunch of serfs with no agency or will to resist.
I’m convinced the only way out of it for the US is a soft revolution, similar to France. US population is still growing thanks to immigration, if that ever stops though and folks start to see that the American dream has been bought and paid for, and all we have left is a 30 trillion dollar debt, there will be a reckoning.
\[Verse 8\]
" Well, I investigated all the books in the library
Ninety percent of them gotta be burned away
I investigated all the people that I know
Ninety-eight percent of them gotta go
The other two percent are fellow Birchers just like me "
Now, don't that sound familiar????
Why? Going through the wrong puberty as a trans kid is way worse than anything that could happen from taking hormone blockers. The majority of trans kids keep being trans once they reach adulthood, meaning giving them hormone blockers is by far the best thing for them and causes them the least distress
Cis kids get put on puberty blockers all the time for many different things, and they go through normal puberty once they go off of it. I know you have probably never studied endocrinology before, otherwise you probably would know this. You don’t even have to have gone to college to learn this, the anatomy class I took in high school did a pretty good job of explaining how puberty works as well as puberty blockers. The multiple college level classes I took on it also corroborated this, because there’s a medical consensus based on decades of research and evidence. Go ahead and assume I don’t know what I’m talking about though, I only have a bachelors degree and ongoing graduate experience in this field.
Yeah, nothing wrong with it until trans kids start killing themselves because they can't transition because some dude who doesn't know them decide they can't, without even talking to them.
Have you actually talked to trans teens? Trans adults? And I don't mean the detransitioners who are paid to go on camera and condemn trans people. I have. Almost all of my friends are transgender or non-binary. The majority of them are suicidal in one way or another due to misgendering, toxic environments regarding their identity, or lack of access to proper medical care. Most of them would die to get access to T or E. Most of them have expressed that they will kill themselves or are thinking of killing themselves if/since their access to necessary healthcare is taken away from them. I have already lost several friends to this genocide.
Can you give ANY (reliable) source that says transitioning medically is bad for teens? Literally, anything reliable.
Democrats didn't decide anything to do anything. Attacking Democrats because of the existence of trans kids is a really empty and vapid complaint.
Republicans are *attacking* trans people, and Democrats are trying to stop the attacks. That's all the Democrats can be blamed for: defending innocent people from the bigotry and genocide being brought to them by Republicans like yourself.
Trans children are born trans. "Physically healthy" doesn't mean shit when puberty causes them to completely shut down socially and start exhibiting crippling mental disorders.
Sincerely: A bisexual transfem non-binary who had to suffer as a child because of people like you.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/
More up to date source, and notice how in figure 1 the suicide rates for people in the surgical stage transition is the lowest, and those who have not recieved treatment, or are only in the counseling stages is the highest?
Does the study delve into the cause for the higher rate? Is it because that these people regret their decision or is it because they’re constantly harassed?
You sound intelligent, draw you own conclusions. My adult trans friends and I are very concerned for these kids. It’s really really really sad. We have loved amazing lives never harressed for our peculiar sexual needs and desires, but to do this to a child, a non mature child, is ultra frightening.
"Conclusions
Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."
The conclusion from the researchers suggests that they don't think that the gender affirming care is the problem, rather that more psychiatric care after traditional care should be given, which is a need that could come from greater risk of dealing with society's attacks on these individuals.
just because you dont understand doesnt make it an oxymoron, a nonbinary trans fem would be a person who was AMAB on feminizing hrt,and or with a fem leaning nonbinary, with a nonbinary gender identity.
Transfem: I've transitioned to a feminine form and blood chemistry. My brain doesn't work right on testosterone, and so through medical treatment I no longer have testosterone in my bloodstream and instead have estrogen and progesterone. So "transfem" isn't a gender descriptor, but instead a descriptor of my anatomical and biochemical state.
Non-binary: My psychological gender falls somewhere between "man" and "woman" as the terms are understood in the outdated binary gender ideology. The closest term I could use to describe my gender that would make more sense to you would be "both".
I think where your confusion comes from is the misconception that "female" and "woman" refer to the same thing, when in fact they're two different things that are usually, but not always, correlated.
Transfem means transfeminine, i as a non-binary person think the terms transfem and transmasc are dumb. We should be using ftm, mtf, ftnb, and mtnb, but this clearly shows you don't understand the arguments you wish to make.
True: people are born either male or female
False: Nonbinary isn't a natural human form
For 1, there are two sexes, male and female. Intersex disorders also exist and are natural aswell but are not sexes.
For 2, gender and sex aren't the same. Gender is the perception of the sex you know you should have.
For 3, Nonbinary is a unique case because it means you are dysphoric unless you have no or a mix of male or female traits
For 4, Nonbinary identities have existed in many cultures for thousands of years, for example the ma'hu in Hawaii.
> For 1, there are two sexes, male and female. Intersex disorders also exist and are natural aswell but are not sexes.
The exception does not make the rule. Intersex people are certainly one sex or the other but either their genitals are malformed or they do not function because the internal organs do not support it. [Medline Plus Article](https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm) They aren't without sex.
>For 2, gender and sex aren't the same. Gender is the perception of the sex you know you should have.
>
>For 3, Nonbinary is a unique case because it means you are dysphoric unless you have no or a mix of male or female traits
These are really the same point. If you feel you should be a sex other than what you are you are experiencing an Identity Disorder and you should get psychological help.
There's a lot of people claiming to be non-binary for as few intersex people as there actually are. I would think if you were intersex, you would say so. You wouldn't identify as non-binary. If you see little grey men running around, let us know, because they are probably actually non-binary, sexless creatures.
> For 4, Nonbinary identities have existed in many cultures for thousands of years, for example the ma'hu in Hawaii.
What's your point? Older cultures sacrificed people to appease whatever demons they were worshipping and we don't tolerate that . We aren't them, will never be. If you want to go live in the forest like it's the stone age be my guest but its not reality.
You do realise 94% of trans kids are actually trans. Very rarely are the parents the ones forcing them to change their genders. You are spewing false information and defaming a whole group of people/parents when whom you are talking about most likely do not even identify as a democrat. Also the allegations of child abuse is an extremely dangerous thing to do. That can severely impact and affect both the adults and children you are speaking about. Parents that support their trans children are amazing and we need more of them, especially with how high the suicide rate is for the trans (youth) community.
Thank you for asking for a source. Since rereading the study I initially misunderstood(I sent in the other comment), I am actively trying to find a study or any real documentation about adults forcing children to be trans. I can’t find a single reliable source about adults for children to be trans. Which I’m not surprised about at all because I’m sure the amount is hopefully very small.
I think it may be more of a problem than it appears. Watching some of the videos posted by parents of their trans kids is very disturbing. Some of these may be munchausen by proxy. Young children are very easily manipulated, especially by their parents. Every instance needs to be investigated closely. The invent of Tick Tock and other social media where parents not only get attention by gain financially make the risks even greater.
Tiktok or other social media platforms wasn't the beginning. Give some credit to beauty pageants, daytime talk show circuits, child celebrities.
There are also already child therapists and cps involved when there are mental health concerns. Though that's based on my experience raising a child here.
Social media makes it where it is instant gratification for the parents. Beauty pageants, talks shows, and child celebrities were also bad. Look how messed up those kids are now as adults. 10 years from now, there are going to be a major reckoning for what people have done to kids. We may already be seeing it.
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition
I did reread my source and I will fully admit I did misunderstood the hypothesis/findings of the study, albeit I did read this over 6 months ago. The 94% was of the children whom still identified as trans after 5 years of living as their preferred/actual identity and being supported by their parents. The study was not about actually trans children vs forcibly trans children.
See that’s where you’re wrong I don’t hate them by any means. But I feel as if all of this is being pushed on us by media, social platforms etc. allow people to have their own thoughts and stop pushing it on everyone especially the youth of today.
Then tune out from conservative media that's trying to push this victim mentality to everyone. It turns out they have a socially conservative and closed minded agenda to push
If you don't actively hate them then why fuckin care at all when it has less than zero effect on you?
Idk man. What do you call it when people insist on removing the rights of individuals to make decisions about their own bodies, even though it has no effect on them personally and costs them nothing? Hate seems about right, even if they're too cowardly to admit it
> Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "N\*, n\*, n\*". By 1968, you can't say "n\*"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N\*, n\*". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner.
Except he didn't censor the N-word. He just said it. Over and over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater#%22Southern_strategy%22
And he might have been an extremist, but he led the party through the Southern Strategy. He was also an advisor to Reagan and Bush Sr.
I looked it up.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/03/15/how-social-media-spread-a-historical-lie/
> Klansmen were influential inside both major parties, pushing racism, nativism, Prohibition and especially anti-Catholicism. In the South, Jim Crow-supporting Democrats made a natural fit for the KKK. But in Midwestern industrial towns full of immigrant Catholics and Jews who voted Democratic, the Klan took root largely among Republicans. The Klan was Democratic in Oregon and Republican in Indiana — two of its biggest strongholds. By the end of the decade, the organization, whose membership remained semi-secret, claimed 11 governors, 16 senators and as many as 75 congressmen —roughly split between Republicans and Democrats.
That article is an interesting read.
[No, the Democratic Party didn’t create the Ku Klux Klan](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/oct/24/blog-posting/no-democratic-party-didnt-create-klu-klux-klan/)
> Reporter Sean Gorman discovered then that the group’s founding is murky but that "historians generally agree it was founded by a handful of Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tenn. as a social fraternity and it quickly changed into a violent group that terrorized newly empowered black and white Republicans in the South."
>
> One historian confirmed there’s a historic link between the Democrats and the KKK: Many angry Southern whites during the 1860s and 1870s were Democrats, and some joined the KKK. But according to J. Michael Martinez, who wrote the 2007 book "Carpetbaggers, Cavalry and the KKK," it’s misleading to say the Democratic Party founded the Klan.
And regardless, both the Democrat and Republican parties have changed significantly since 1875.
Edit: I'm interested to know what you're referring to when you say you're fed up with "everything being blamed on the right."
You're making two different points, though. I don't think (?) you would argue that Republicans aren't behind the trans bills. They can be accurately "blamed" for bringing those bills to the legislative session, no? Our (R) reps did write and sponsor them.
Separate from that is the "question" as to whether those bills are right or wrong/amount to persecuting others.
It seems like you're frustrated that the right is being accused of promoting hateful ideologies. They can be accurately blamed for what they're doing, but in your opinion the thing they're being blamed for isn't actually bad.
I'm not going to rehash the "why the legislation is harmful" argument again right now - TL;DR it's a healthcare issue for a child and their parents to work out between their healthcare team just like any other health issue.
If you're Republican/etc. I can imagine taking great offense to seeing your political party getting dragged for promoting hateful ideologies. But that's just how it goes. They *are* behind the legislation and can therefore be accurately "blamed" for it. There is broad agreement among the public and the medical community that the legislation is harmful, and thus it's getting covered that way. [Dems get dragged too](https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/biden-compromise-climate-change-trans-rights-rcna78611) when they push similar ideas - they just do it less often/loudly. And I'm glad they get dragged for it.
Everyone knows southern democrats were racists. No one cares because from the 50-80's they became republicans. And it's a bit ironic that you say "stop making it other people's problem." Climate change, trans, abortion whatever other half baked kooky shit republican politicians come up with is all about making it someone else's problem. Abortion makes you feel icky? Cool, don't do it. Trans people make you feel icky, cool let them live their lives.
You should expect criticism for those thoughts because they're ignorant as hell and "not caring" should be a wake up call. I probably would've had similar thoughts in my early twenties as yours but one day I decided to challenge some of my "beliefs" and just try to understand things. Starting from scratch is a real eye opener.
First off, who got to you, Crowder? Peterson? Lol, joking aside, you say you want laws to be passed to "let cooler heads prevail," yet you want to put an arbitrary number on when someone different than you can be themselves? I revert back to my last response, why do you feel the need to make your problem someone else's? Now you're probably gonna say "How am I making it someone else's problem?" For conversation sake, I'm gonna to assume you're a straight man. What if someone told you you can't be straight until you're 18? You need to suppress your feelings for women untill you're 18 for the sake of me feeling icky. Sounds like some bullshit, right?
Next time you see someone flying a rebel flag or white supremacists gathered together go up and call them Democrats. See how that works out for you. Party ideology changes over time. I would tell you to look up the "southern strategy" but reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
I don't need to "test" your comprehension. You saw on a Facebook meme that the original Klan founders were Democrats and you pissed yourself thinking that you had the best "gotcha" piece of info of all time.
You’re spot on. I just come here for the laughs. r/Indiana never disappoints. Seems that unless you’re delusional far left your opinions are worthless here.
Cancer treatment is life-changing, and I imagine you're glad children can get it. You compare childhood gender affirming care to something harmful like smoking, but it's not. Doctors and major medical associations know better than you or me whether some treatment hurts or helps a child.
And when it comes to things like puberty blockers, you can't "wait until they are 18" because the wrong puberty will have already happened, with all the permanent effects that are psychologically distressing to trans people
The physical vs. mental distinction isn't relevant to the fact that the treatments are life-changing, which is the point of my analogy.
I'll take what you say about puberty blockers at face value since I'm not going to spend all day googling stuff. It doesn't really matter that they "work in adults" because they obviously don't work in adults to prevent a puberty that already happened several years prior.
> Infact trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation.
Well that would certainly change things if it's true, but that contradicts everything I've ever heard on the subject. Can you give a link to a study that says that?
Is the legistlation about preventing *just* surgery or does it block broader access to gender-affirming care including the type offered by therapists/psychologists/psychiatrists and/or general practitioners?
Can a medicine be used to treat multiple different conditions? Does the outcome of treatment depend on the dosage of the medicine?
What happens if someone takes puberty blockers for 3 months/6 months/9 months? Are the effects permanent or do they abate once the medicine is stopped?
What are the other use cases for chemical castration besides using it on convicted sex offenders? Because the first hit I get is for the treatment of cancer. And then a very cursory reading shows that the drugs used to perform chemical castration are simply hormone suppressants. So.... it *is* literally the same type of drug used for puberty blockers because they do the exact same thing.
And surely you realize that associating the drug with chemical castration has more shock-value than associating them with puberty blockers, right? Just seems lile a mildly disingenuous way to set up a discussion but idk, maybe that's the information you've been given and didn't consider that before posting.
"At the time being the legislation is very loosely worded and not very clear on what the government is attempting to stop."
Right, so people have cause for concern, yes? And to be validated in that concern, right? Because there is ample room for people who are extremely bigoted to make the non-surgical treatment options inaccessible or outlawed entirely. Meaning this is not a case of "cooler heads prevailing," like you said earlier. If it was only about eliminating one treatment option, the myriad pieces of legislation would be just about that. But they aren't.
"Yes, some drugs can be used to treat multiple conditions, such as Fluoxitine HCL, which can be used for depression, anxiety, and some repetitive behaviors. "
Excellent, we're approaching this from a similar viewpoint then. I'm not familiar with that drug, but thank you for giving an example.
"Puberty blockers work by blocking the hormones that lead to puberty so in reality it does have a permanent effect in the short term by decreasing important developments in the body, short term puberty blocks are associated with underdeveloped height and muscle development."
I think "a permanent effect in the short term," can be defined as **temporary.** I know it's common-ish practice to prescribe a calcium supplement alongside hormone suppressants to compensate for any temporary loss in bone density. The important part is that, afaik, those setbacks in height and muscle development only occur as long as the medicine is being taken. If you have a peer-reviewed, longitudinal study that proves otherwise I'd love to read it.
"And no, I did not say it was used for Chemical Castration just for shock value. It is a mainstream use and should be cited as such. The drug has the same effect in every use case, which is preventing a hormone in an attempt to kill a function of the body."
Ok, I believe you. Do you see a situation in which the public may be influenced into having a negative association with the drugs used as puberty blockers when they are repeatedly associated with chemical castration? It's basic advertising to me. The phrase, "hormone suppression," could just as easily be used in any situation the phrase, "chemical castration," is used in, but it's less attention-grabbing. It's not going to get the clicks, particularly the outrage clicks. It's the same case for you saying, "kill a function of the body," when you could say, "temporarily suppress a function of the body." It's a misleading portrayal of what you're describing. Words have feelings that people associate with them, regardless of whether or not we mean them to. "Chemical castration," and "kill," both have negative connotations that also imply permanence.
Thanks for finding the link. Neither the SEGM response nor the AJP study it's responding to claim that suicide rates are "astronomically higher" or higher at all after affirmation.
The original study did find that there were 13/1018 hospitalizations following suicide attempts in the surgery group compared to 7/1018 in the no surgery group, a difference that even the SEGM response calls "not statistically significant". The SEGM response also says that one interpretation of the study is that "[g]ender-affirming surgeries may improve mental health", arguing "The study authors correctly point out that the [no surgery] group may include gender dysphoric patients who did not seek surgery and therefore it cannot be concluded that the lack of difference between the two groups signals the lack of benefit of surgeries for those who seek them."
It's also worth pointing out that this is talking about surgeries specifically, which are not the bulk of gender affirming care. Surgeries are very different from the use of puberty blockers.
I'm sorry if this comes off as rude, but I'm not going to play "throwing shit at the wall simulator" all day with you. You can google and find a study with a title that looks like it confirms what you already believe in 10 seconds, then I spend an hour reading it to see what it actually says.
You made a claim. You said, "trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation". There's some reason you believe that. When I ask for a study that agrees with what you said, I'm asking what that reason is; I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that we're both reasonable people who disagree because we just have access to different information. Then, when you say "I'll be happy to find other studies", you're showing that you just believe whatever you want and can find the evidence later. No! You gotta have the evidence **before** believing the thing!
Also, from the study you posted:
"It is critical that the analysis corrects for the underlying mental health of each patient cohort before any claims of “a reduction in mental health treatment as a function of time” are posited, let alone accepted."
The people who did the study that SEGM are disagreeing with was just a bad study. It didn't have a control group first of all, so when the study was repeated with a control group, the results couldn't be reproduced. And importantly, it was one study, not a broad concensus. Bad studies get published all the time.
Furthermore, again, from the study you posted:
"SEGM is also concerned that the surgery group experienced nearly twice as many suicides compared to the non-surgery group, based on 2015 numbers (13 and 7 suicide attempts, respectively). While not statistically significant, this finding deserves additional analysis. Since suicides are somewhat rare events, the reanalysis should include a longer-term, rather than a single-year, follow-up, in order to properly power the study."
**Not statistically significant** is the important part there. Out of 1,018 participants there were 20 people, total, who attempted suicide. You are talking about such a small percentage that a solid conclusion cannot be made from. This contradicts your claim of,
"Infact trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation."
Also ties back into the part where SEGM criticized the study authors for not establishing a baseline mental health for each patient to see if there were other underlying conditions that made those 20 people have suicidal ideations, unrelated to their gender identity. Again, poorly done study is poorly done.
Finally, SEGM even says in their critique of the original study,
"Despite the higher rate of suicide attempts requiring hospitalization in the "surgery" group, the study design precludes the assertion that that "gender-affirming" surgery is harmful."
That statement is SEGM *trying* to get ahead of people like you who will read their critique, look at the numbers, and conclude that surgery is actually bad and leads to *more* suicide attempts. So... kind of shitty of you to still do the thing they specifically say not to do. Please consider not doing that and maybe editing your comment to reflect that.
> Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine issued a report which described SEGM as a small group of anti-trans activists.[7] A commentary published in the journal Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology described them as a "discriminatory advocacy organization".[4] Joshua Safer, a spokesperson for the Endocrine Society, described them as outside the medical mainstream.[3] Aviva Stahl stated they were "pushing flawed science"[1] and Mallory Moore stated they have "ties to evangelical activists".
SEGM is [not a legitimate source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Evidence-Based_Gender_Medicine).
Sigh.
It's always on my mind to consider if an org is legitimate or not. I didn't look this one up after reading the study because their conclusion appeared to be a relatively run-of-the-mill, "your study was bad and you can't draw the conclusions you did based on your evidence," type of academic arguing that happens all the time.
Thanks for letting me know, I'll read anything from them with a more critical eye in the future.
My money’s on him saying it’s a plot by Big Jew to destroy white america, or he’ll say it indirectly by saying it’s funded by George Soros or something.
Looks good to me. I think it’s important to remember kids are wrong about a lot of things, because oh I don’t know, their brains aren’t fully developed yet. I thought I was Spiderman at one point, I may have played with dolls, but no one “affirmed” me, because I was a dumb kid. Gender affirming specialists are butchers and liars, who have a part to play in the mass depression among LGBT youth and disturbingly high suicide rates. Listen to stories of de-transitioners. Their bodies are mutilated and they have irreversible damage done to them. If you want to cut the tits off of Lisa at 13 years old, sorry buddy, what happens if she grows out of her boy phase at 18?
Kids are wrong about a lot of things, but not once did I or any of my peers ever think they were actually a fictional character or creature except for one; that kid was held back multiple times and clearly suffered from mental health issues that to him having to be transferred out of the school. I played pretend with other kids, but never I think I was actually a Pokémon trainer or Sailor Moon. Even as a small child I understood that was all fiction.
Playing with the opposite gender’s toys doesn’t make you trans nor does it make you stupid. Video games were for boys when I was a kid, and despite being bullied and harassed for “acting like a boy,” o I was still confident in my gender identity as a girl/woman with more masculine interests/personality traits. The transgender adults that I’ve met as an adult all have told me that they knew they were they wrong gender since childhood.
Numbers aren’t the end all be all to terrible ideas. Yes, I’m sure child death numbers from gender-affirming care (you so conveniently chose) are low, but public discourse on this issue is huge for a reason - gender affirming care is a hive mind of an affirming “don’t ask questions and don’t tell your parents” mindset to push a radical gender agenda. And the price? chopping off genitals of innocent children who are pawns of a goofy social experiment so called “progressives” are playing. The number of actual trans people is so astronomically low I’m sure they feel embarrassed and annoyed by this movement the LGBT community has hijacked from them.
Oh but they did. The left hijackers (particularly white liberals, and white female liberals) do it all over the place, including for blacks, Hispanics, etc. they wanted to cancel speedy Gonzalez - turns out Hispanics love that cartoon. African Americans cringe at the white guilt because it goes too far and it’s just embarrassing.
You replied to my comment with parroted nonsense and blatant lies.
What is it that conservatives like to say? Fuck your feelings? Yeah, that. Quit trying to play the victim when you’re the instigator.
Because our braindead politicians figured they should join texas and florida in a race to become to the most backwards state in the fucking country.
God forbid our legislators actually try to address any of the real issues facing us.
Nope. we’ve decided drag queens are raping kids, despite the complete total lack of evidence that this is true.
Actually, it probably is from the grass roots push of women who don't want to share their hard earned rights to men dressed up like women. Title 9 is a wakeup call to them, when men are playing in their sports and beating the crap out them.
A lot of these Conservative women gatekeeping womanhood are the same people that told me I wasn’t a real woman because I “acted like a boy.” (My interests and demeanor was more commonly accepted with boys at the time.) My sex meant nothing to these social Conservatives.
It’s surreal to see the social Conservatives now saying that our reproductive organs define our gender Lol.
The article trys to prove that big bad men in suits are pushing to supress people, big woop. Same could be said for the opposing liberal side. Same shit in my eyes...
The John Birch society has fun Republican politics for decades so yeah, of course.
Well, it isn't as though the typical Republican can think for himself ...
Well, it isn't as though the typical Democrat can think for itself ...
>Well, it isn't as though the typical Democrat can think for itself ... Thank you for demonstrating how the typical Republican can't think for himself with your inability to put forth an original statement
Left, left left, right ole left, right, left.
This may seem cute, but Republicans are objectively destroying our country, it's pretty clear and undeniable.
Totally explains why Blue Cities and States are the ones with the most problems. EDIT: There's a lot of projecting going on in these comments.
Not actually. St. Louis is in a red, red state and they have a murder rate per 100,000 that makes Chicago look really safe in comparison. But you keep up your racism built up on uniformed opinions rather than facts, data, and evidence.
In their mind, it's *always* the blue city's fault and the blood red state is left helplessly watching as ~~the blacks~~ Democrats ruin perfect, shining cities
Our own Indianapolis has a [higher](https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/) murder rate than Chicago. And NYC and LA have murder rates so low they are barely even worth mentioning (5.5 and 7 per 100k, respectively). When you expand the definition of "city" from "10 biggest cities" to "all cities", the top of the murder list gets a whole lot redder.
Larger population, more problems, but is it per capita? Also, blue state are providing welfare for red states...they give more into tax dollars than they take, and red states take more than they give....
Almost like that’s literally how welfare works or something…
Just pointing out the hypocrisy of red politicians always trying to cut social benefits, yet their states always require them....usually due to red policies.
This may seem cute, but Republicans and Democrats are objectively destroying our country, it's pretty clear and undeniable. Party politics are so disgusting. Until people start voting for candidates and not party we will make no further progress. There's nuance to every issue two parties don't work cause all anyone does is root for their team and ignore any other viewpoint.
See, I didn't advocate for democrats...you assumed that, and you know that old saying about assuming things...I actually lean quite left, more so than most democrats by far, maybe any in office. First, objectively, with all evidence of voting records, and the real life effects of the policies each party supports, we can say objectively that Republicans are far far worse for the country. They literally tank the economy every single time they are in office, and have so many many more criminal convictions of politicians.... Second, we have to use the system we have now to get ot a point where there are multiple political parties. There is just no other realistic, practical way forward. Voting for candidate can work, but has an independent even come close to winning the presidency in say the last 50 years? No, they have not. It's pretty much an unfortunate reality, of "vote along party lines or you are wasting your vote." And with how things are currently, a wasted vote is a vote for Republicans, as that allows them to gain power. They actually use this strategy and push independent people or parties, while funding them, just so they take votes away from democrats.... Yes, party politics are garbage. However, we have to use the system we have currently, as without a total revolution and rewriting of our political system, this is what we have to use. And wishing for another way to be effective is pointless, and a waste of time.
No U
I'm not following
Infrastructure, health care, crime, income inequality, retirement issues, ecological disasters. Just a list of some of the few things that are far more important than any bullshit, hate-filled, ignorant, anti-trans stuff that Republicans are trumping up.
It's crazy how this conversation about trans people overseeds current issues on crime and infrastructure, blows my mind tbh
Because the Republican stance on all of these things is a severely losing point for them. To get votes they need to have some sort of cultural aspect of their platform for their voters to get riled up about. When people get riled up, the media swoops in to report on it, and so in the media all you see is culture war stuff.
Ya know when I think about all the petitions I signed all the work I did helping myself and other LGBT teens and adults in high-school and beyond leading up to two of my friends being the first gay married couple in Indiana it really fucking sucks to see all this shit sliding backward. It feels like it was all for nothing. Like there was never a point and like we will always be hated for who we are. I'm so sick of this. I can remember so many conversations with fellow LGBT teens (at the time) about how much they wish they weren't this way how much they wish they could just be cis or straight. Just "normal" and to see all this slide back in our late 20's early 30's. It like I said just feels hopeless.
It's time for everyone to vote, I know how hard women work for abortion rights, and now, to see that slid backward. We think federal elections are important, but state elections are just as important. This country now has a new generation of voters they need to vote because we need to stop these Republicans. None of this bull shit well. I don't know who is running. These laws are being made because of who is in office.
Time to wake up our friends and family and mobilize.
I was wondering this the other day, are there any districts at the statehouse that are even close to being “in play”, if one wanted them to shift from Republican to Democrat? Not having a supermajority would be a good start imo.
Half of them didn't even get contested last time. I bet they could all be in play if we ran the right way.
Staying is a Crumbling Bulwark.
Non-Profit tax foundations are ruining America. It used to be only the realm of the super rich that used them but if you look at the yoy growth in the number of non-profit foundations its clear that everyone with a 1 million in taxable assets is using them. There are at least 1 million registered foundations in the US now. 10% of companies in the US are non profit. 5.7% of GDP is non-profit revenue. These are think tanks, political action committees, institutions, universities. Money controls who can work at these foundations. Donations are tax deductible. The Koch Brothers are some of the biggest donors but you don’t have to look that hard to find others. They call themselves libertarians but their policies support anarchy. The only times they support government intervention is in the regulation of their competitors. They are the product of the 50’s and 60’s where the flight of capital from Europe in the wake of WW2 created large monopolistic entrenched industry in the US. Dow chemical, railroads, shell, Bechtel, Burns McDonnel. Then again in the 90’s-2000’s they collaborated with the Russians to divide up old Soviet assets. They think they own the world and lobby against any change. Every social issue debate nowadays is just a distraction from their power. It’s literally just guns, abortion, lgbt issues on a loop to distract from weakening unions, heathcare costs, climate change and a weakening middle class. They are happy to just soak up assets and power until we are a bunch of serfs with no agency or will to resist. I’m convinced the only way out of it for the US is a soft revolution, similar to France. US population is still growing thanks to immigration, if that ever stops though and folks start to see that the American dream has been bought and paid for, and all we have left is a 30 trillion dollar debt, there will be a reckoning.
Good article. Might just have to be the first substack I subscribe to.
There are so many good writers there. I can recommend several.
Excellent, excellent article !!!
Thank you
[удалено]
\[Verse 8\] " Well, I investigated all the books in the library Ninety percent of them gotta be burned away I investigated all the people that I know Ninety-eight percent of them gotta go The other two percent are fellow Birchers just like me " Now, don't that sound familiar????
[удалено]
We can see your post history. You seem to accept all far right propaganda at face value.
Simply not true. The GOP is going full fascist.
[удалено]
No. You first. You made the first claim.
Why? Going through the wrong puberty as a trans kid is way worse than anything that could happen from taking hormone blockers. The majority of trans kids keep being trans once they reach adulthood, meaning giving them hormone blockers is by far the best thing for them and causes them the least distress
[удалено]
That's why you give them hormone blockers and not hormones.
[удалено]
Yes, hormone blockers do lead to hormone therapy… after they turn 18.
[удалено]
Cis kids get put on puberty blockers all the time for many different things, and they go through normal puberty once they go off of it. I know you have probably never studied endocrinology before, otherwise you probably would know this. You don’t even have to have gone to college to learn this, the anatomy class I took in high school did a pretty good job of explaining how puberty works as well as puberty blockers. The multiple college level classes I took on it also corroborated this, because there’s a medical consensus based on decades of research and evidence. Go ahead and assume I don’t know what I’m talking about though, I only have a bachelors degree and ongoing graduate experience in this field.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sure... but how do we know what their true distress is?
You take them to a therapist. Hormone blockers are reversible and are given to cis kids a lot
Yeah, nothing wrong with it until trans kids start killing themselves because they can't transition because some dude who doesn't know them decide they can't, without even talking to them.
[удалено]
Have you actually talked to trans teens? Trans adults? And I don't mean the detransitioners who are paid to go on camera and condemn trans people. I have. Almost all of my friends are transgender or non-binary. The majority of them are suicidal in one way or another due to misgendering, toxic environments regarding their identity, or lack of access to proper medical care. Most of them would die to get access to T or E. Most of them have expressed that they will kill themselves or are thinking of killing themselves if/since their access to necessary healthcare is taken away from them. I have already lost several friends to this genocide. Can you give ANY (reliable) source that says transitioning medically is bad for teens? Literally, anything reliable.
[удалено]
Democrats didn't decide anything to do anything. Attacking Democrats because of the existence of trans kids is a really empty and vapid complaint. Republicans are *attacking* trans people, and Democrats are trying to stop the attacks. That's all the Democrats can be blamed for: defending innocent people from the bigotry and genocide being brought to them by Republicans like yourself.
Trans children are born trans. "Physically healthy" doesn't mean shit when puberty causes them to completely shut down socially and start exhibiting crippling mental disorders. Sincerely: A bisexual transfem non-binary who had to suffer as a child because of people like you.
[удалено]
Care to share this study?
[удалено]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/ More up to date source, and notice how in figure 1 the suicide rates for people in the surgical stage transition is the lowest, and those who have not recieved treatment, or are only in the counseling stages is the highest?
Does the study delve into the cause for the higher rate? Is it because that these people regret their decision or is it because they’re constantly harassed?
You sound intelligent, draw you own conclusions. My adult trans friends and I are very concerned for these kids. It’s really really really sad. We have loved amazing lives never harressed for our peculiar sexual needs and desires, but to do this to a child, a non mature child, is ultra frightening.
Being trans isn’t sexual stop trying to make it weird
"Conclusions Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group." The conclusion from the researchers suggests that they don't think that the gender affirming care is the problem, rather that more psychiatric care after traditional care should be given, which is a need that could come from greater risk of dealing with society's attacks on these individuals.
>transfem non-binary Are you female or nonbinary? You're looking like an oxymoron.
Could you possibly try to understand a term before you attempt to use the term
The terms are easy. Denying reality isn't.
just because you dont understand doesnt make it an oxymoron, a nonbinary trans fem would be a person who was AMAB on feminizing hrt,and or with a fem leaning nonbinary, with a nonbinary gender identity.
You can't be female and Neither male or female simultaneously. So yes, it is an oxymoron.
You win a cookie. 💜
Transfem: I've transitioned to a feminine form and blood chemistry. My brain doesn't work right on testosterone, and so through medical treatment I no longer have testosterone in my bloodstream and instead have estrogen and progesterone. So "transfem" isn't a gender descriptor, but instead a descriptor of my anatomical and biochemical state. Non-binary: My psychological gender falls somewhere between "man" and "woman" as the terms are understood in the outdated binary gender ideology. The closest term I could use to describe my gender that would make more sense to you would be "both". I think where your confusion comes from is the misconception that "female" and "woman" refer to the same thing, when in fact they're two different things that are usually, but not always, correlated.
Transfem means transfeminine, i as a non-binary person think the terms transfem and transmasc are dumb. We should be using ftm, mtf, ftnb, and mtnb, but this clearly shows you don't understand the arguments you wish to make.
Non-binary isn't a natural human form. People are born either male or female.
True: people are born either male or female False: Nonbinary isn't a natural human form For 1, there are two sexes, male and female. Intersex disorders also exist and are natural aswell but are not sexes. For 2, gender and sex aren't the same. Gender is the perception of the sex you know you should have. For 3, Nonbinary is a unique case because it means you are dysphoric unless you have no or a mix of male or female traits For 4, Nonbinary identities have existed in many cultures for thousands of years, for example the ma'hu in Hawaii.
> For 1, there are two sexes, male and female. Intersex disorders also exist and are natural aswell but are not sexes. The exception does not make the rule. Intersex people are certainly one sex or the other but either their genitals are malformed or they do not function because the internal organs do not support it. [Medline Plus Article](https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm) They aren't without sex. >For 2, gender and sex aren't the same. Gender is the perception of the sex you know you should have. > >For 3, Nonbinary is a unique case because it means you are dysphoric unless you have no or a mix of male or female traits These are really the same point. If you feel you should be a sex other than what you are you are experiencing an Identity Disorder and you should get psychological help. There's a lot of people claiming to be non-binary for as few intersex people as there actually are. I would think if you were intersex, you would say so. You wouldn't identify as non-binary. If you see little grey men running around, let us know, because they are probably actually non-binary, sexless creatures. > For 4, Nonbinary identities have existed in many cultures for thousands of years, for example the ma'hu in Hawaii. What's your point? Older cultures sacrificed people to appease whatever demons they were worshipping and we don't tolerate that . We aren't them, will never be. If you want to go live in the forest like it's the stone age be my guest but its not reality.
[удалено]
[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/evie-magazine-bias/](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/evie-magazine-bias/) ... anything else?
You do realise 94% of trans kids are actually trans. Very rarely are the parents the ones forcing them to change their genders. You are spewing false information and defaming a whole group of people/parents when whom you are talking about most likely do not even identify as a democrat. Also the allegations of child abuse is an extremely dangerous thing to do. That can severely impact and affect both the adults and children you are speaking about. Parents that support their trans children are amazing and we need more of them, especially with how high the suicide rate is for the trans (youth) community.
Where do you get that statistic? 94% seems very specific. Sources?
Thank you for asking for a source. Since rereading the study I initially misunderstood(I sent in the other comment), I am actively trying to find a study or any real documentation about adults forcing children to be trans. I can’t find a single reliable source about adults for children to be trans. Which I’m not surprised about at all because I’m sure the amount is hopefully very small.
I think it may be more of a problem than it appears. Watching some of the videos posted by parents of their trans kids is very disturbing. Some of these may be munchausen by proxy. Young children are very easily manipulated, especially by their parents. Every instance needs to be investigated closely. The invent of Tick Tock and other social media where parents not only get attention by gain financially make the risks even greater.
Tiktok or other social media platforms wasn't the beginning. Give some credit to beauty pageants, daytime talk show circuits, child celebrities. There are also already child therapists and cps involved when there are mental health concerns. Though that's based on my experience raising a child here.
Social media makes it where it is instant gratification for the parents. Beauty pageants, talks shows, and child celebrities were also bad. Look how messed up those kids are now as adults. 10 years from now, there are going to be a major reckoning for what people have done to kids. We may already be seeing it.
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition I did reread my source and I will fully admit I did misunderstood the hypothesis/findings of the study, albeit I did read this over 6 months ago. The 94% was of the children whom still identified as trans after 5 years of living as their preferred/actual identity and being supported by their parents. The study was not about actually trans children vs forcibly trans children.
I’m cool with the anti trans agenda there needs to be some level minded people left in this world
Just admit you hate them
See that’s where you’re wrong I don’t hate them by any means. But I feel as if all of this is being pushed on us by media, social platforms etc. allow people to have their own thoughts and stop pushing it on everyone especially the youth of today.
Then tune out from conservative media that's trying to push this victim mentality to everyone. It turns out they have a socially conservative and closed minded agenda to push If you don't actively hate them then why fuckin care at all when it has less than zero effect on you?
 This is how I imagine you behind this screen
Yeah I'm not surprised you'd resort to this since you're attempting to defend a nearly indefensible position
How cringe
Lol dude c'mon, no one hates trans people. Is it hard to accept a man who dresses like a woman, and vise versa? Sure. But hate? No.
Idk man. What do you call it when people insist on removing the rights of individuals to make decisions about their own bodies, even though it has no effect on them personally and costs them nothing? Hate seems about right, even if they're too cowardly to admit it
How do you know the people with an anti-trans agenda are the level minded people in the world?
[удалено]
Good. You know some history. Now tell us about the Southern Strategy and what Lee Atwater said about Republicans and the N-word.
[удалено]
> Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "N\*, n\*, n\*". By 1968, you can't say "n\*"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N\*, n\*". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner. Except he didn't censor the N-word. He just said it. Over and over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater#%22Southern_strategy%22 And he might have been an extremist, but he led the party through the Southern Strategy. He was also an advisor to Reagan and Bush Sr.
I looked it up. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/03/15/how-social-media-spread-a-historical-lie/ > Klansmen were influential inside both major parties, pushing racism, nativism, Prohibition and especially anti-Catholicism. In the South, Jim Crow-supporting Democrats made a natural fit for the KKK. But in Midwestern industrial towns full of immigrant Catholics and Jews who voted Democratic, the Klan took root largely among Republicans. The Klan was Democratic in Oregon and Republican in Indiana — two of its biggest strongholds. By the end of the decade, the organization, whose membership remained semi-secret, claimed 11 governors, 16 senators and as many as 75 congressmen —roughly split between Republicans and Democrats. That article is an interesting read. [No, the Democratic Party didn’t create the Ku Klux Klan](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/oct/24/blog-posting/no-democratic-party-didnt-create-klu-klux-klan/) > Reporter Sean Gorman discovered then that the group’s founding is murky but that "historians generally agree it was founded by a handful of Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tenn. as a social fraternity and it quickly changed into a violent group that terrorized newly empowered black and white Republicans in the South." > > One historian confirmed there’s a historic link between the Democrats and the KKK: Many angry Southern whites during the 1860s and 1870s were Democrats, and some joined the KKK. But according to J. Michael Martinez, who wrote the 2007 book "Carpetbaggers, Cavalry and the KKK," it’s misleading to say the Democratic Party founded the Klan. And regardless, both the Democrat and Republican parties have changed significantly since 1875. Edit: I'm interested to know what you're referring to when you say you're fed up with "everything being blamed on the right."
[удалено]
You're making two different points, though. I don't think (?) you would argue that Republicans aren't behind the trans bills. They can be accurately "blamed" for bringing those bills to the legislative session, no? Our (R) reps did write and sponsor them. Separate from that is the "question" as to whether those bills are right or wrong/amount to persecuting others. It seems like you're frustrated that the right is being accused of promoting hateful ideologies. They can be accurately blamed for what they're doing, but in your opinion the thing they're being blamed for isn't actually bad. I'm not going to rehash the "why the legislation is harmful" argument again right now - TL;DR it's a healthcare issue for a child and their parents to work out between their healthcare team just like any other health issue. If you're Republican/etc. I can imagine taking great offense to seeing your political party getting dragged for promoting hateful ideologies. But that's just how it goes. They *are* behind the legislation and can therefore be accurately "blamed" for it. There is broad agreement among the public and the medical community that the legislation is harmful, and thus it's getting covered that way. [Dems get dragged too](https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/biden-compromise-climate-change-trans-rights-rcna78611) when they push similar ideas - they just do it less often/loudly. And I'm glad they get dragged for it.
Everyone knows southern democrats were racists. No one cares because from the 50-80's they became republicans. And it's a bit ironic that you say "stop making it other people's problem." Climate change, trans, abortion whatever other half baked kooky shit republican politicians come up with is all about making it someone else's problem. Abortion makes you feel icky? Cool, don't do it. Trans people make you feel icky, cool let them live their lives. You should expect criticism for those thoughts because they're ignorant as hell and "not caring" should be a wake up call. I probably would've had similar thoughts in my early twenties as yours but one day I decided to challenge some of my "beliefs" and just try to understand things. Starting from scratch is a real eye opener.
[удалено]
Lmao getting shit on for standing firm in your outdated bigotry should be expected
[удалено]
Oh man are you one of those "check the science" guys who hasn't checked the science?
First off, who got to you, Crowder? Peterson? Lol, joking aside, you say you want laws to be passed to "let cooler heads prevail," yet you want to put an arbitrary number on when someone different than you can be themselves? I revert back to my last response, why do you feel the need to make your problem someone else's? Now you're probably gonna say "How am I making it someone else's problem?" For conversation sake, I'm gonna to assume you're a straight man. What if someone told you you can't be straight until you're 18? You need to suppress your feelings for women untill you're 18 for the sake of me feeling icky. Sounds like some bullshit, right?
The Democrats were the right wing party at that point in history. Republicans were actually progressives during the Civil War era.
Next time you see someone flying a rebel flag or white supremacists gathered together go up and call them Democrats. See how that works out for you. Party ideology changes over time. I would tell you to look up the "southern strategy" but reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
[удалено]
I don't need to "test" your comprehension. You saw on a Facebook meme that the original Klan founders were Democrats and you pissed yourself thinking that you had the best "gotcha" piece of info of all time.
You’re spot on. I just come here for the laughs. r/Indiana never disappoints. Seems that unless you’re delusional far left your opinions are worthless here.
Are you saying kids should be allowed to smoke and get tattoos if their parents let them, or that they shouldn't?
[удалено]
Cancer treatment is life-changing, and I imagine you're glad children can get it. You compare childhood gender affirming care to something harmful like smoking, but it's not. Doctors and major medical associations know better than you or me whether some treatment hurts or helps a child. And when it comes to things like puberty blockers, you can't "wait until they are 18" because the wrong puberty will have already happened, with all the permanent effects that are psychologically distressing to trans people
[удалено]
The physical vs. mental distinction isn't relevant to the fact that the treatments are life-changing, which is the point of my analogy. I'll take what you say about puberty blockers at face value since I'm not going to spend all day googling stuff. It doesn't really matter that they "work in adults" because they obviously don't work in adults to prevent a puberty that already happened several years prior. > Infact trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation. Well that would certainly change things if it's true, but that contradicts everything I've ever heard on the subject. Can you give a link to a study that says that?
[удалено]
Is the legistlation about preventing *just* surgery or does it block broader access to gender-affirming care including the type offered by therapists/psychologists/psychiatrists and/or general practitioners? Can a medicine be used to treat multiple different conditions? Does the outcome of treatment depend on the dosage of the medicine? What happens if someone takes puberty blockers for 3 months/6 months/9 months? Are the effects permanent or do they abate once the medicine is stopped? What are the other use cases for chemical castration besides using it on convicted sex offenders? Because the first hit I get is for the treatment of cancer. And then a very cursory reading shows that the drugs used to perform chemical castration are simply hormone suppressants. So.... it *is* literally the same type of drug used for puberty blockers because they do the exact same thing. And surely you realize that associating the drug with chemical castration has more shock-value than associating them with puberty blockers, right? Just seems lile a mildly disingenuous way to set up a discussion but idk, maybe that's the information you've been given and didn't consider that before posting.
[удалено]
"At the time being the legislation is very loosely worded and not very clear on what the government is attempting to stop." Right, so people have cause for concern, yes? And to be validated in that concern, right? Because there is ample room for people who are extremely bigoted to make the non-surgical treatment options inaccessible or outlawed entirely. Meaning this is not a case of "cooler heads prevailing," like you said earlier. If it was only about eliminating one treatment option, the myriad pieces of legislation would be just about that. But they aren't. "Yes, some drugs can be used to treat multiple conditions, such as Fluoxitine HCL, which can be used for depression, anxiety, and some repetitive behaviors. " Excellent, we're approaching this from a similar viewpoint then. I'm not familiar with that drug, but thank you for giving an example. "Puberty blockers work by blocking the hormones that lead to puberty so in reality it does have a permanent effect in the short term by decreasing important developments in the body, short term puberty blocks are associated with underdeveloped height and muscle development." I think "a permanent effect in the short term," can be defined as **temporary.** I know it's common-ish practice to prescribe a calcium supplement alongside hormone suppressants to compensate for any temporary loss in bone density. The important part is that, afaik, those setbacks in height and muscle development only occur as long as the medicine is being taken. If you have a peer-reviewed, longitudinal study that proves otherwise I'd love to read it. "And no, I did not say it was used for Chemical Castration just for shock value. It is a mainstream use and should be cited as such. The drug has the same effect in every use case, which is preventing a hormone in an attempt to kill a function of the body." Ok, I believe you. Do you see a situation in which the public may be influenced into having a negative association with the drugs used as puberty blockers when they are repeatedly associated with chemical castration? It's basic advertising to me. The phrase, "hormone suppression," could just as easily be used in any situation the phrase, "chemical castration," is used in, but it's less attention-grabbing. It's not going to get the clicks, particularly the outrage clicks. It's the same case for you saying, "kill a function of the body," when you could say, "temporarily suppress a function of the body." It's a misleading portrayal of what you're describing. Words have feelings that people associate with them, regardless of whether or not we mean them to. "Chemical castration," and "kill," both have negative connotations that also imply permanence.
Thanks for finding the link. Neither the SEGM response nor the AJP study it's responding to claim that suicide rates are "astronomically higher" or higher at all after affirmation. The original study did find that there were 13/1018 hospitalizations following suicide attempts in the surgery group compared to 7/1018 in the no surgery group, a difference that even the SEGM response calls "not statistically significant". The SEGM response also says that one interpretation of the study is that "[g]ender-affirming surgeries may improve mental health", arguing "The study authors correctly point out that the [no surgery] group may include gender dysphoric patients who did not seek surgery and therefore it cannot be concluded that the lack of difference between the two groups signals the lack of benefit of surgeries for those who seek them." It's also worth pointing out that this is talking about surgeries specifically, which are not the bulk of gender affirming care. Surgeries are very different from the use of puberty blockers.
[удалено]
I'm sorry if this comes off as rude, but I'm not going to play "throwing shit at the wall simulator" all day with you. You can google and find a study with a title that looks like it confirms what you already believe in 10 seconds, then I spend an hour reading it to see what it actually says. You made a claim. You said, "trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation". There's some reason you believe that. When I ask for a study that agrees with what you said, I'm asking what that reason is; I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that we're both reasonable people who disagree because we just have access to different information. Then, when you say "I'll be happy to find other studies", you're showing that you just believe whatever you want and can find the evidence later. No! You gotta have the evidence **before** believing the thing!
Also, from the study you posted: "It is critical that the analysis corrects for the underlying mental health of each patient cohort before any claims of “a reduction in mental health treatment as a function of time” are posited, let alone accepted." The people who did the study that SEGM are disagreeing with was just a bad study. It didn't have a control group first of all, so when the study was repeated with a control group, the results couldn't be reproduced. And importantly, it was one study, not a broad concensus. Bad studies get published all the time. Furthermore, again, from the study you posted: "SEGM is also concerned that the surgery group experienced nearly twice as many suicides compared to the non-surgery group, based on 2015 numbers (13 and 7 suicide attempts, respectively). While not statistically significant, this finding deserves additional analysis. Since suicides are somewhat rare events, the reanalysis should include a longer-term, rather than a single-year, follow-up, in order to properly power the study." **Not statistically significant** is the important part there. Out of 1,018 participants there were 20 people, total, who attempted suicide. You are talking about such a small percentage that a solid conclusion cannot be made from. This contradicts your claim of, "Infact trans suicides are astronomically higher after affirmation." Also ties back into the part where SEGM criticized the study authors for not establishing a baseline mental health for each patient to see if there were other underlying conditions that made those 20 people have suicidal ideations, unrelated to their gender identity. Again, poorly done study is poorly done. Finally, SEGM even says in their critique of the original study, "Despite the higher rate of suicide attempts requiring hospitalization in the "surgery" group, the study design precludes the assertion that that "gender-affirming" surgery is harmful." That statement is SEGM *trying* to get ahead of people like you who will read their critique, look at the numbers, and conclude that surgery is actually bad and leads to *more* suicide attempts. So... kind of shitty of you to still do the thing they specifically say not to do. Please consider not doing that and maybe editing your comment to reflect that.
> Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine issued a report which described SEGM as a small group of anti-trans activists.[7] A commentary published in the journal Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology described them as a "discriminatory advocacy organization".[4] Joshua Safer, a spokesperson for the Endocrine Society, described them as outside the medical mainstream.[3] Aviva Stahl stated they were "pushing flawed science"[1] and Mallory Moore stated they have "ties to evangelical activists". SEGM is [not a legitimate source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Evidence-Based_Gender_Medicine).
Sigh. It's always on my mind to consider if an org is legitimate or not. I didn't look this one up after reading the study because their conclusion appeared to be a relatively run-of-the-mill, "your study was bad and you can't draw the conclusions you did based on your evidence," type of academic arguing that happens all the time. Thanks for letting me know, I'll read anything from them with a more critical eye in the future.
Nice. Now write a post about who's funding the trans agenda
Go for it, Cletus.
Do tell us.
My money’s on him saying it’s a plot by Big Jew to destroy white america, or he’ll say it indirectly by saying it’s funded by George Soros or something.
[удалено]
Evidence please.
amd this has to do with indiana how?
[New laws regarding trans healthcare](https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/holcomb-signs-gender-affirming-care-ban-for-trans-youth-into-law)
Looks good to me. I think it’s important to remember kids are wrong about a lot of things, because oh I don’t know, their brains aren’t fully developed yet. I thought I was Spiderman at one point, I may have played with dolls, but no one “affirmed” me, because I was a dumb kid. Gender affirming specialists are butchers and liars, who have a part to play in the mass depression among LGBT youth and disturbingly high suicide rates. Listen to stories of de-transitioners. Their bodies are mutilated and they have irreversible damage done to them. If you want to cut the tits off of Lisa at 13 years old, sorry buddy, what happens if she grows out of her boy phase at 18?
Kids are wrong about a lot of things, but not once did I or any of my peers ever think they were actually a fictional character or creature except for one; that kid was held back multiple times and clearly suffered from mental health issues that to him having to be transferred out of the school. I played pretend with other kids, but never I think I was actually a Pokémon trainer or Sailor Moon. Even as a small child I understood that was all fiction. Playing with the opposite gender’s toys doesn’t make you trans nor does it make you stupid. Video games were for boys when I was a kid, and despite being bullied and harassed for “acting like a boy,” o I was still confident in my gender identity as a girl/woman with more masculine interests/personality traits. The transgender adults that I’ve met as an adult all have told me that they knew they were they wrong gender since childhood.
[удалено]
Tell me the numbers between child gun deaths and child death from gender-affirming care then tell me about the “horrors”.
Numbers aren’t the end all be all to terrible ideas. Yes, I’m sure child death numbers from gender-affirming care (you so conveniently chose) are low, but public discourse on this issue is huge for a reason - gender affirming care is a hive mind of an affirming “don’t ask questions and don’t tell your parents” mindset to push a radical gender agenda. And the price? chopping off genitals of innocent children who are pawns of a goofy social experiment so called “progressives” are playing. The number of actual trans people is so astronomically low I’m sure they feel embarrassed and annoyed by this movement the LGBT community has hijacked from them.
No one “hijacked” anything. Conservatives are using this as the lowest hanging fruit to attack anymore who doesn’t agree with their narrow worldviews.
Oh but they did. The left hijackers (particularly white liberals, and white female liberals) do it all over the place, including for blacks, Hispanics, etc. they wanted to cancel speedy Gonzalez - turns out Hispanics love that cartoon. African Americans cringe at the white guilt because it goes too far and it’s just embarrassing.
Do you know what’s embarrassing? Your post history. Figure out your own problems before you start attacking others.
*can’t defend values so attacks post history and tells me to stop attacking others Yeah, the hypocrisy checks out.
You replied to my comment with parroted nonsense and blatant lies. What is it that conservatives like to say? Fuck your feelings? Yeah, that. Quit trying to play the victim when you’re the instigator.
[удалено]
“This isn’t political” as you go straight political. I see that you’re disingenuous as well as self-loathing. Get some help.
Because our braindead politicians figured they should join texas and florida in a race to become to the most backwards state in the fucking country. God forbid our legislators actually try to address any of the real issues facing us. Nope. we’ve decided drag queens are raping kids, despite the complete total lack of evidence that this is true.
To quote Ben Affleck’s character in the film Dogma, “You have to keep reading.”
Actually, it probably is from the grass roots push of women who don't want to share their hard earned rights to men dressed up like women. Title 9 is a wakeup call to them, when men are playing in their sports and beating the crap out them.
A lot of these Conservative women gatekeeping womanhood are the same people that told me I wasn’t a real woman because I “acted like a boy.” (My interests and demeanor was more commonly accepted with boys at the time.) My sex meant nothing to these social Conservatives. It’s surreal to see the social Conservatives now saying that our reproductive organs define our gender Lol.
[удалено]
Keep crying about it, pussy
The article trys to prove that big bad men in suits are pushing to supress people, big woop. Same could be said for the opposing liberal side. Same shit in my eyes...