-->
@bmdrocks21
"Gender Affirming Care" is a snare and a delusion
Posts
Total:
179
-->
@thett3
@Bones
If we wanted to address the risks it seems obvious that one necessary step would be validating the concept of nonbinary, or other genders, or validating non-traditional concepts of what a woman can be - this way trans people would feel like they could identify the way they want to without inward pressure to conform to a traditional idea of what a woman is through medical interventions. The idea that the trans and nonbinary genders are invalid is a major factor pushing people toward trying to "pass".
-->
@rbelivb
If we wanted to address the risks it seems obvious that one necessary step would be validating the concept of nonbinary, or other genders, or validating non-traditional concepts of what a woman can be - this way trans people would feel like they could identify the way they want to without inward pressure to conform to a traditional idea of what a woman is through medical interventions. The idea that the trans and nonbinary genders are invalid is a major factor pushing people toward trying to "pass".
I agree with the bolded part. Back in my day (I’m not even 30) we had a thing called “Tom boys”…a girl who was really into fishing or wanted play football wasn’t encouraged to take drugs or cut her breasts off, she was just a slightly boyish girl. Theres nothing wrong with that. It’s the gender ideology itself that says (in a very sexist manner imo) that non conformance means there’s something wrong with you that must be fixed. In a way it affirms traditional gender roles with a severity conservatism doesn’t even dream of.
I don’t agree that there are more than two genders. But if calling someone “xir” would keep them from mutilating themselves I would be happy to do it. But I think it’s quite the opposite. Right now there are hundreds of thousands of minors either on drugs or on the pathway to surgical mutilation soon, a number that has exponentially risen with the onset of gender ideology. But I’m to believe that affirming this ideology would make this go away? No. Telling the truth, that there are only two genders and they cannot be changed, there is no post transition promised land but instead you become a mockery of the thing you aspire to be with a destroyed body at the end, is what stops this.
-->
@rbelivb
If we wanted to address the risks it seems obvious that one necessary step would be validating the concept of nonbinary, or other genders, or validating non-traditional concepts of what a woman can be - this way trans people would feel like they could identify the way they want to without inward pressure to conform to a traditional idea of what a woman is through medical interventions. The idea that the trans and nonbinary genders are invalid is a major factor pushing people toward trying to "pass".
Then why are we seeing this transgender issue flare up when gender roles are at their weakest? After decades of feminism essentially trying to make women be men: working instead of bearing and raising children, trying to make women act dominant and aggressive, hookup culture. Why is it just now that people are feeling like they have to pass as a ‘woman’ whatever that means anymore?
What needs to happen is for people to acknowledge the reality of who they are, strive to reach their potential, and be content with that. Who you are is primarily determined at birth, and that can’t be changed.
But if the choice is further making womanhood a meaningless concept or having a handful of people that are confused about who they are, I’d pick the former. Just need to stop having adults implanting doubts of this variety in highly impressionable kids, and much of this transgender issue would go away overnight
Turning your son into a eunuch because he has some feminine traits is something I could see some barbarian khan from the steppe doing lol
-->
@thett3
Turning your son into a eunuch because he has some feminine traits is something I could see some barbarian khan from the steppe doing lol
The last time that practice was socially acceptable was when Nero led Rome. Something to keep in mind.
-->
@thett3
He isn’t a pedophile. He’s an Irishman. Capable of making good and soulful work but also a degenerate, very common for the emerald isle
That particular irishman, however, has the proclivity to engage in sexual banter with young teenage girls in the same way bsh1 creeped on a certain boy of the same age.
-->
@bmdrocks21
Then why are we seeing this transgender issue flare up when gender roles are at their weakest? After decades of feminism essentially trying to make women be men: working, not bearing children, trying to make women act dominant and aggressive, hookup culture. Why is it just now that people are feeling like they have to pass as a ‘woman’ whatever that means anymore?
It’s similar to second generation immigrants getting really defensive about “cultural appropriation” while people actually in those cultures couldn’t possibly care any less. Eventually a culture can become so hollowed out that only the physical trappings remain, causing those to be guarded jealously. Culture is a giant iceberg and the physical stuff is just what’s at the surface
Similar thing with gender. The people most susceptible to this (young urban liberals) are some of the most culturally deracinated people of all time. Separated from God and nature and non online human society to the point that even their conception of gender relies only on the type of physical trappings that could be visible on an instagram post. An odd teenage boy wants to experiment with wearing dresses or painting his nails? He must not really be a boy since boys don’t wear dresses, girls do. In reality those behaviors are the tip of the iceberg and even someone who doesn’t act like a man at all still has more male traits than female traits, they’re just less obvious. Certainly they’d be better off as an intact man with some weird behaviors than a man with a festering wound where his penis once was. This is intuitive to psychologically healthy people but unfortunately the impulse of liberalism to deconstruct absolutely everything means we have to waste time explaining it
-->
@thett3
My problem is with children who were very clearly groomed and manipulated into doing irreversible harm to their body.
Danielle seems to deny that this has occurred, continues to occur in the present and will by all counts continue, to the extent it isn't stopped.
She also appears to begin from the incorrect proposition that psychiatry as such is, by its nature, inherently non-malicious based on her assumption that the language of "therapy" and "care" imply the absence of such intentions. And presumably that the absence of such intentions, means the absence of resulting harm.
This naive understanding of the history of psychiatry is unavailing for reasons I have already outlined.
-->
@Greyparrot
In some states, it's easier for a minor to get Gender surgery or drug therapy than it is to get a tattoo.
That is the case in California, for sure.
Same for abortion.
-->
@thett3
And giving kids drugs as much as we do is obscene.
I don't have a problem with giving kids "ADHD medication," in most circumstances. Particularly teenagers who are both old enough to understand what amphetamines are and able to understand their risks. I object on principle to calling it "medication," because the normative justification the field of psychiatry invents to sell drugs to kids is exploitative. But the actual practice of taking adderall or whatever is something I don't object to in any way. Only the structures and norms surrounding why we do that, as a society.
But not every drug we prescribe to kids is as benign as amphetamines. In particular, antidepressants, anti-anxiety medications and pretty much any form of pharmaceutical intervention for socially constructed "disorders" like gender dysphoria is a pathological reflection of societal decay. And the idea of giving depo provera or other drugs in the same doses that were used to chemically castrate gay men less than two generations ago the last time the field of psychiatry over-reached is morally nauseating.
-->
@bmdrocks21
As for the topic, well-argued post. However, I would hesitate to throw all the blame on the psychology community. Many medical fields, especially those less based in concrete facts like psychology, are highly susceptible to public pressure. In fact, public pressure was a large driver of homosexuality’s removal from the DSM and popular sentiment in the years prior was part of the reason it was included in it.
You are quite correct that "public pressure" is why psychiatry branded homosexuality a disorder. That normative moralizing is not, contrary to the field of psychiatry's then-existing "experts" a "medical" practice.
But psychiatry is not medicine. It's psychiatry. I encourage you to read Madness and Civilization, Discipline and Punish and the History of Sexuality, by Foucault. He explores these themes at a greater level of depth.
The problem we have isn’t just coming from psychologists, although they do enable the problem by playing into the delusions of the mentally ill and confused. But the main issue we have is that of a perverted social status hierarchy. It is a very common experience for kids, especially girls, to brag about their mental illnesses. Being diagnosed with, say, depression and anxiety instantly grants you clout. The transgenderism movement is the newest, most “oppressed” status that you can attain. In addition to this, many try to escape their “oppressor” class of being white by joining the cult of the oppressed.And there is second-hand clout to be gained by being associated with a transgender, whether it be your child or your student that you helped confuse. So you can expect many adults in positions of trust to be provoking thoughts such as these within kids.Only by upsetting this prevailing societal dysgenic hierarchy can we expect downstream institutions to stop preying on the mentally ill, confused, and those incapable of making decisions for themselves (ie. Minors)
I agree with most of this, though remind me to respond to the rest, later. I don't have time right now, but I've got a lot to say on that.
-->
@thett3
@bmdrocks21
Back in my day (I’m not even 30) we had a thing called “Tom boys”
Then why are we seeing this transgender issue flare up when gender roles are at their weakest?
Because the modern changes in the concept of gender are a phenomenon of the internet. I don't think psychological institutions or small groups of college students are actually what is causing this issue, and even if we removed them from the picture, this would not re-stabilize gender roles in society. People are being exposed to a new wave of technologies that allow them to express themselves in a more open-ended way, define new categories and so on. Two people across the globe with a similar interest or way of thinking can connect, when before they would have been isolated. This inevitably gives rise to a new societal self-understanding, a redrawing of boundaries and categories. The conservatives are attempting to reify the phenomenon into a problem of some marginal group of radicals who are supposedly imposing these ideas on the rest of society - it is not going away so easily.
On the internet, groups of people are united more by their ideas, rather than by blood or by land. Their self-conception inevitably becomes more fluid as a result of that.
Individual should be able to do anything he wants to his body.
However, incorrect education can result in change of decisions and harm to the decision making.
When people are being lied to about the outcome, their decision is negatively affected by someone else.
Thus, the only proper education is the one that is true and has the highest historical rate of success.
-->
@rbelivb
Because the modern changes in the concept of gender are a phenomenon of the internet. I don't think psychological institutions or small groups of college students are actually what is causing this issue, and even if we removed them from the picture, this would not re-stabilize gender roles in society. People are being exposed to a new wave of technologies that allow them to express themselves in a more open-ended way, define new categories and so on.
I agree with you, but this isn’t actually making an argument. Something can be new and driven organically by social media while also being maladaptive and ultimately false and harmful. The problem is that all of the institutions are going along with and encouraging behaviors that cause youth to sterilize and/or mutilate themselves in the pursuit of something that is not possible.
The conservatives are attempting to reify the phenomenon into a problem of some marginal group of radicals who are supposedly imposing these ideas on the rest of society - it is not going away so easily.
Nobody on this thread has done that really. There have been excellent arguments laid out by multiple posters explaining why they think the gender ideology is very very bad and you haven’t attempted to respond to them. To be frank, you’ve now made five posts on this thread and I have zero clue what your actual opinion is other than you don’t like conservatives and believe that gender ideology arose organically
-->
@thett3
I think part of the problem is that the left has been indoctrinated to blindly trust authority, and if you do not do this, then you are labeled stupid, a conspiracist, or worse, a conservative.
That kind of soft censorship needs to reverse course if our society is to survive modern advances.
-->
@rbelivb
This inevitably gives rise to a new societal self-understanding, a redrawing of boundaries and categories. The conservatives are attempting to reify the phenomenon into a problem of some marginal group of radicals who are supposedly imposing these ideas on the rest of society - it is not going away so easily.
You're deluded if you think this transgenderism wave is entirely organic and from the ground-up. It has the backing of every major institution except maybe that MyPillow guy's business. And banning views to the contrary to the prevailing narrative leads to highly impressionable people falling into the traps of what you seemingly support.
On the internet, groups of people are united more by their ideas, rather than by blood or by land.
Probably explains their lack of connection to anybody or anything, antidepressant use, and inability to socialize. How depressing
Because the modern changes in the concept of gender are a phenomenon of the internet. I don't think psychological institutions or small groups of college students are actually what is causing this issue, and even if we removed them from the picture, this would not re-stabilize gender roles in society.
No it's not being pushed primarily from the college students. They are being taught that, by established institutions. Brain washing is very powerful, exemplified by the voting patterns before and after college.
-->
@thett3
It’s similar to second generation immigrants getting really defensive about “cultural appropriation” while people actually in those cultures couldn’t possibly care any less. Eventually a culture can become so hollowed out that only the physical trappings remain, causing those to be guarded jealously. Culture is a giant iceberg and the physical stuff is just what’s at the surface
I have always held the more cynical view that they have learned the rules of society better than their parents had. They know they can use cultural appropriation as a battering ram to tear down anyone they don't like/disagree with. Because that tends to be how it is used. You'll notice nobody on the left cared about Elizabeth Warren's thieving of preferential treatment owed to another ethnic/cultural group- because the people that complain about it politically agree with her. She still has her political position. Nobody cared about Trudeau's blackface. It would be unimaginable for any right-winger to keep their position if it came out they did the same thing 20 years prior.
Similar thing with gender. The people most susceptible to this (young urban liberals) are some of the most culturally deracinated people of all time. Separated from God and nature and non online human society to the point that even their conception of gender relies only on the type of physical trappings that could be visible on an instagram post. An odd teenage boy wants to experiment with wearing dresses or painting his nails? He must not really be a boy since boys don’t wear dresses, girls do. In reality those behaviors are the tip of the iceberg and even someone who doesn’t act like a man at all still has more male traits than female traits, they’re just less obvious. Certainly they’d be better off as an intact man with some weird behaviors than a man with a festering wound where his penis once was. This is intuitive to psychologically healthy people but unfortunately the impulse of liberalism to deconstruct absolutely everything means we have to waste time explaining it
I think it is definitely tangential to what you say about being separated from God and nature. It is the fault of anti-identitarian and egalitarian liberalism. The idea that you are born a blank slate and can be whatever you want. That is why they viciously combat any claims that different genders, cultures, racial groups, and other categories of people are, on average, more and less capable than others in different areas. (Any disparities on these fronts are always attributed to some underhanded evil actions by some group).
They fight gender roles that evolved because biological realities over thousands of years. It is a trend- be citizens of the world (you're not bound to your countrymen), egalitarianism (you're not more likely to have any life outcomes), and feminism/transgenderism are cut from the same cloth. Now the very sex that you are born as doesn't matter and can be morphed at will. It is all a systematic rejection who you are born as.
I find it rather helpful to have much of my identity made for me by my circumstances. It's hard enough for teenagers in college to even figure out what they want to have as their job for the rest of their life. Clearly we shouldn't be encouraging people even younger than that to believe they can completely remake core biological parts of their identity.
-->
@bmdrocks21
I don't think it is depressing so much as that digital technologies define a new form of life and consciousness, with its own inner logic which has only begun to develop. People can transform their bodies medically, transform their mind with drugs, etc. - of course in the early stages these interventions come with risks. But the underlying dynamic is that people are reaching a new level of autonomy and control over their own material conditions of life. It is a breakdown of the division between production and consumption that goes along with industrial economies based on large, sedimented centers of production.
-->
@thett3
When you say "false" or "not possible" I can demonstrate, and have in debates with Bones, that these are purely ideological statements.
As for your statement that "nobody in this thread" has denied that "gender ideology" arose organically - the point is that your solution is to somehow just prove the new forms of expression related to gender "false" and return back to some default understanding of gender roles from the 1950s or whatever. My understanding is that the forms of personal expression are related to the economic and technological environment, so you can't just impose the forms of social cohesion characteristic of the industrial nation-state, onto the internet environment. In that case what you are imposing is not the real thing, but merely a symbol or mirage, a simulacrum of the traditional forms which is precisely what conservatism is today. The internet is not "false" or illusory, it is just a different form or structure of social integration which is different from the industrial one which gave rise to the nation-state, the nuclear family and so on.
-->
@rbelivb
I don't think it is depressing so much as that digital technologies define a new form of life and consciousness, with its own inner logic which has only begun to develop. People can transform their bodies medically, transform their mind with drugs, etc. - of course in the early stages these interventions come with risks. But the underlying dynamic is that people are reaching a new level of autonomy and control over their own material conditions of life. It is a breakdown of the division between production and consumption that goes along with industrial economies based on large, sedimented centers of production
And if you had to describe this as either “good” or “bad”, which would you choose?
-->
@bmdrocks21
What do you mean? Personally I am saying it's a good thing overall.
-->
@rbelivb
When you say "false" or "not possible" I can demonstrate, and have in debates with Bones, that these are purely ideological statements.
It’s not an ideological statement anymore than stating that the sky is blue is an ideological statement. It’s a statement of fact. The logical conclusion of the trans ideology is going through with the surgery which doesn’t do what it purports to do. The penis is not made into a vagina but instead becomes a festering wound that the body tries desperately to heal. These “doctors” that cut off teenage girls breasts and harvest skin and muscle from their forearms to make a fake penis with an artificial urethra make a mockery of the very thing the patient aspires to. It never, ever makes a man into a woman or a woman into a man, what happens is the destruction of the body. It’s literally ghoulish body horror. All of this is because “You will never be a woman” is the truth. We need to discourage people from walking down that path even if it hurts some feelings.
As for your statement that "nobody in this thread" has denied that "gender ideology" arose organically - the point is that your solution is to somehow just prove the new forms of expression related to gender "false" and return back to some default understanding of gender roles from the 1950s or whatever.
The solution is to tell the truth, which is not socially constructed but based in reason and science. If an alien species came and investigated humanity they would classify us as a sexually dimorphic species and would lump everyone into the same categories that the supposedly archaic gender binary does.
As coal and I demonstrated its actually the gender ideology itself which conforms to archaic gender roles with an intensity that social conservativism wouldn’t even dream of. No conservative would dare suggest that a dominant pantsuit wearing “girlboss” type is potentially a man because she doesn’t want to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, or that a man who wants to paint his fingernails isn’t a man. Or that breasts are not an important organ in the female body, but are merely sex toys. It’s the gender ideology that suggests this, in defiance of the reality of sexual dimorphism. Like I said in an earlier post, making your son into a eunuch because he’s a little feminine is something I could see some barbarian khan from the steppe doing, it has no place in the 21st century. There are only two genders and someone can express themselves however they like—but giving mentally ill kids drugs that block puberty, ensuring a boy never fully becomes a man, giving opposite sex hormones that used to be used to castrate sex offenders, giving girls drugs that sterilize them, cutting off the genitals of children—all of these things are abominations.
My understanding is that the forms of personal expression are related to the economic and technological environment, so you can't just impose the forms of social cohesion characteristic of the industrial nation-state, onto the internet environment. In that case what you are imposing is not the real thing, but merely a symbol or mirage, a simulacrum of the traditional forms which is precisely what conservatism is today. The internet is not "false" or illusory, it is just a different form or structure of social integration which is different from the industrial one which gave rise to the nation-state, the nuclear family and so on.
I don’t get the point you’re trying to make. I agree that the rapid spread of the trans ideology is a pathology that largely came about because of social media and the internet. That doesn’t make it a good thing, and that doesn’t make it something that is irreversible. I have absolutely zero doubt that it is going to be reversed and these type of “gender affirming” medical interventions will be viewed with the same revulsion as lobotomies. You’ve yet to make an argument for why the gender ideology is a good thing
-->
@thett3
Do you recognize that the trans community makes a distinction between gender and sex, so that they actually fully agree with your statement that we are a "sexually dimorphic species"? In other words, when we call a trans woman "a woman" we are using a shorthand, to say that she identifies socially as female.
As for your statement that "gender ideology" claims that people who don't conform to traditional gender roles have something wrong with them, this is a complete fabrication. Of course, if someone doesn't conform to traditional gender roles but doesn't want any medical intervention, then nobody is claiming there's anything wrong with that.
There are only two genders and someone can express themselves however they like—but giving mentally ill kids drugs that block puberty, ensuring a boy never fully becomes a man, giving opposite sex hormones that used to be used to castrate sex offenders, giving girls drugs that sterilize them, cutting off the genitals of children—all of these things are abominations.
So just to clarify, if trans people were to avoid all medical interventions, but still identify as the opposite gender (not sex) and go by those pronouns, you would have no objection to it? This section made it sound like your problem is entirely with the idea of medical interventions, and not with the underlying idea that people can express themselves as the gender they wish to identify with.
To be clear, I agree as a rule that we should be cautious about medical interventions and underage people should not be allowed those elective surgeries.
An excellent breakdown of this pathological insanity:
An excerpt of that breakdown:
Politically charged ignorance and stupidity aside, there is an objective reality to these issues that must be confronted.
Flat-out refusal to acknowledge what is happening doesn't change the fact that reality is exactly what I said it was.
If you support so-called "gender affirming care," then you are either stupid or morally depraved.
-->
@coal
Abigail Martinez described her daughter as a "girlie girl" during her early childhood who loved to dress up like a princess.
During seventh and eighth grade, she started to display signs of depression.
Martinez said she reached out to school officials for help and asked them to "keep an eye on her."
She said her daughter was bullied at school and that kids called her ugly. Once she arrived in high school, the young girl decided she wanted to be a boy.
"When she started high school, the doors opened to what she was talking about, like transgender, going to meetings, going to all the support that they think they have for these children ... which is not," Martinez recalled.
"The school counselor was involved, DCFS (Department of Children and Family Services) was involved, LGBT was in there too, trying to 'help' my daughter on the transition of being transgender," Martinez noted. "I was accused that I didn't want to open my eyes since she felt since she was a little girl that she was a boy which was not true. She was not even close to a tomboy ... she was the girlie girl in the house."
Martinez said she met with the school principal and counselor but they actually made things worse. After a failed suicide attempt, her daughter was placed in foster care and then started going by the name of Andrew.
"The school psychology and LGBT told DCFS that my daughter would be better off out of the house," the distraught mother said. "They took away my daughter when she was 16-years-old. I tried my best to get her back... going to court every single month."
She continued, "When I went to court, I asked the judge to please let my daughter have a psych evaluation." But since her daughter's social worker said she needed to be acknowledged as transgender, the judge denied Martinez's request.
She said an LGBT group encouraged her decision to transition to a male identity and told her that the state of California would pay for her surgeries.
"'This was the best time to do it,"' they told her daughter, '"because if you don't do it right now, nothing is going to make you happy. You're unhappy with your body, you hate your body so you go for it.'"
Martinez said she urged the courts to focus on the mental health crisis rather than the gender identity issue and to "help her from the inside out."
She added, "What hurt me the most was that I was told not to talk about God."
A social worker warned Martinez that talking about God "was going to make him (Andrew) feel uncomfortable because he's in danger of committing suicide."
But it was too late.
Martinez said in September of 2019, her daughter committed suicide by kneeling in front of an oncoming train.
-->
@coal
I agree with most of this, though remind me to respond to the rest, later. I don't have time right now, but I've got a lot to say on that.
*Reminder*
Honosexuality is a disorder, I did not realise that was the part Coal had issue with.
It is a disorder that ideally harms neither the one experiencing it nor the consenting men/women they do things with. Therefore, it demands no treatment, much like high functioning autism, ADD, milder OCD and such, it is just a disorder, not inherently demanding treatment.
-->
@coal
And why is that?
Because you made a post pandering to 99% of users on the site that you already know oppose transitioning, and their opposition is rooted in a belief that gender is fixed in biology. But the central argument made by Foucault and post modernists is that things like race and gender are not biologically determined. They believe those things are social constructs. The people you want to like your post don't believe that.