I have heard very weird comments about how people think children can chose what their sexuality is, and medically transition at that age. What are yall's thoughts on this?
How Young Does Someone Have to be to Choose Their Sexuality?
Posts
Total:
103
How one behaves oneself, in this case "sexually," is up to the individual. I maintain this principle whether one is nine years-old or ninety. If one isn't willing to conscript the services or resources of others in financing the medication or procedures for this transition, then leave one to one's own devices.
-->
@Athias
Ok but would you agree that a nine-year old doesn't have the metal capacity to make that type of life altering decision. Like I know that when I was nine, I still believed with all my heart that Santa Clause was real, but he really isn't. If I was nine years old, and I believed with all my heart I was a girl, then do you think that even if I had the right resources and money, I should be able to medically transition to a girl?
Are there no laws at all regarding physical transformation for gender purposes? Honest question I've actually never researched it. I would assume there's some sort of minimum age in the US you're allowed to do that but I don't know. I personally don't like the idea of anyone being able to physically change their sex until they're 18 in case of parents trying to force the issue. My comments regarding trans issues are usually reserved for adults.
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I agree
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
If one can choose sexuality, then this obviously implies that sexuality can be a consciously inspired decision rather than and inherently inspired decision.
Nurture rather than nature as it were.
Though whether this is actually the case is uncertain.
What's certain though is that evolutionary changes are affecting the way that the species functions, both physiologically and socio-psychologically.
Psychologically inspired mutation of base physiological systems perhaps.
Or maybe external environmental changes have an impact at a biological level.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Ok but would you agree that a nine-year old doesn't have the metal capacity to make that type of life altering decision.
Whose values matter more than the individual over his/her own body? To what extent does one require "mental capacity" to make value-based decisions about oneself? The mental capacity argument is a slippery slope. If you're going to argue that a person--in this case, a child of nine years--doesn't have the "mental capacity" to make a value-based decision over his/her body, then you're essentially relegating him/her as property of his/her custodians--typically their parents--or the State. And there's no argument you can offer that morally indemnifies this.
Like I know that when I was nine, I still believed with all my heart that Santa Clause was real, but he really isn't.
Santa Claus is real; you can't identify something that's not real. Even if Santa Claus were simply just an idea, that would not render Santa Claus unreal. But this conversation can take place in another thread at another time.
If I was nine years old, and I believed with all my heart I was a girl, then do you think that even if I had the right resources and money, I should be able to medically transition to a girl?
Yes. Whether I like it or not has nothing to do with your capacity to behave your own body. Even if you later come to regret this decision, it would still have been your decision.
-->
@Athias
You are trying to explain advanced logic here.
People only respect other person's choice if they agree with it. Otherwise, they do everything they can to take that choice away.
We live in a world where there is not so much of a "your body belongs to you" opinion, but there is a lot of "I think I am smarter than you, so I will make decisions about your body instead of you".
-->
@Athias
"Yes. Whether I like it or not has nothing to do with your capacity to behave your own body. Even if you later come to regret this decision, it would still have been your decision."
Someone at the age of nine can't and shouldn't make a decision to transition to the different sex, and irrevocably change themselves forever. They haven't fully developed and are making a decision based off of what they think is right, but their brain isn't even halfway developed fully yet. The human brain doesn't fully develop until the age of 25.
"If you're going to argue that a person--in this case, a child of nine years--doesn't have the "mental capacity" to make a value-based decision over his/her body, then you're essentially relegating him/her as property of his/her custodians--typically their parents--or the State. And there's no argument you can offer that morally indemnifies this."
Yes, I am saying children are property of the parent. The whole point of being a parent is to protect and teach your kids, so that they may live to survive in this world, and maybe even thrive. This isn't morally wrong; this happens even in nature with animals.
Let's look at an example:
If a child says to their parent that they want to cut off their arm, because they tell you they don't need the arm. Well, you as an adult know very well that they do indeed need the arm and you try to explain to them that doing that would harm them, and they would regret it later.
Same thing with transitioning. A girl might think that she is a boy, so she goes to her parents, and says I want to get rid of my uterus and have a penis. You as an adult know that that couldn't harm them and that they could regret it later.
I was born a biological male, and when I was young, I wore all kinds of dresses and skirts to play dress up with my sister. But now that I've matured, I realized that if me or my parents had transitioned me to be a girl, I would have regrated it.
-->
@Best.Korea
People only respect other person's choice if they agree with it. Otherwise, they do everything they can to take that choice away.
Also, this is flawed thinking because just because someone disagrees with you their choice doesn't mean they are going to do everything they can to take that choice away.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Someone at the age of nine can't and shouldn't make a decision to transition to the different sex, and irrevocably change themselves forever. They haven't fully developed and are making a decision based off of what they think is right, but their brain isn't even halfway developed fully yet. The human brain doesn't fully develop until the age of 25.
Therefore all value-based decisions by one before the age of 25 years as it concerns one's own body are invalid?
Yes, I am saying children are property of the parent.
If that's the case, I presume you take no issue with parents making that decision. That is, if a nine year-old boy wants to stay a boy, but the parents decided they'd rather have a girl, and not undertake the challenges of pregnancy again, I presume, once again, that you'd take no issue with the parents coercing the nine year-old boy into a physical transition because as you said, "children are the property of the parent," yes?
Let's look at an example:If a child says to their parent that they want to cut off their arm, because they tell you they don't need the arm. Well, you as an adult know very well that they do indeed need the arm and you try to explain to them that doing that would harm them, and they would regret it later.
Then the parent(s) can do everything within their capacity to persuade the child so long as it does not involve coercion or violence.
Same thing with transitioning. A girl might think that she is a boy, so she goes to her parents, and says I want to get rid of my uterus and have a penis. You as an adult know that that couldn't harm them and that they could regret it later.I was born a biological male, and when I was young, I wore all kinds of dresses and skirts to play dress up with my sister. But now that I've matured, I realized that if me or my parents had transitioned me to be a girl, I would have regrated it.
I would presume virtually everyone has made a decision that they've later regretted; it wouldn't have made it any less their decision to have made. It's a slippery slope: if you're going to argue that how one behave one's body is subject to the discretion of those who have different interests, e.g. parents, custodians, the State, etc., then as my hypothetical above demonstrates, the child's body is the within domain of someone else's whim whether it's to the child's presumed benefit or harm.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
" just because someone disagrees with you their choice doesn't mean they are going to do everything they can to take that choice away."
I had like 70% of my choices in life stolen from me, and here you are saying that people are not doing what they have been doing for 2000 years.
Nice delusions you got there.
There is a woman here who has published her story locally. She stated she knew by age 10 that she was a woman in a male body. She was honest with her parents and they were encouraging and they basically allowed her to dress as she wanted and to choose a girl's name. It wasn't until after she hit puberty that they really did anything as far as physicality and I believe at that point she was allowed to start accepting hormones so that she would not developmental traits like beard mustache etc. While she has augmented her chest she is not done anything to her original genitalia. She also does nothing to conceal it. Quite honestly you would never know she was born a guy. I don't see anything wrong with how her parents handle that situation.
Certainly, I was sufficiently aware of my sexuality at the age of nine to have a name for it and to go to the library and read about it. Such awareness did not imply an ability to act on that knowledge or even a willingness to talk about it with anybody else.
I understand that there is some recent scientific thinking that suggests that some surgical and chemical changes before puberty can circumvent a lot of the discomfort associated with such transitions but I really have no sense of how valid or adopted is this scientific claim. I guess I am willing to medical professionals and insurers in this regard. I don't think insurance companies would be wiling to fund such a transition without some real confidence about such a process' value.
The entire question seems fairly rare and extremely private. Such questions of personal identity and personal comfort aren't a matter for public consideration and we should recognize that public interest and opinion is 99% prurient and 100% unwelcome.
-->
@Athias
@#7
I'd prefer to say, charge of their guardians,
Than slave of their parents, myself,
We restrict children from certain pursuits,
Encourage directions,
'Force directions,
So long as it's not so extreme that society disagrees, what's the issue?
By restrict certain pursuits, I mean children are given curfews, restricted from associating with certain people,
. .
By directions, I mean we indoctrinate our children, 'even the hands off free range parents, I'd argue, doing nothing is a choice, if one chooses to live in a certain area, say certain ideas, molding is occurring.
. .
Force directions, school, timeouts, spankings in some families.
. . .
. . .
In some families, children work, do chores,
Born into life, conscripted into life,
Though free when of age, except in some societies.
. . .
. . .
I'm a bit leery of a kid choosing their sexuality, at the point of surgery,
,
Might be I'm making an unconnected argument,
But if a kid is old enough to chop their d*** or t***s off,
Then wouldn't they be old enough to consent to sex?
Which I've always argued against in the past,
And still do now.
In an ideal world where gender-affirming therapy doesn't have any irreversible effects, I would say it doesn't matter. Unfortunately we live in a world where hormone blockers and the like often have not only irreversible effects but often strictly negative effects (i.e., never going through puberty at all as opposed to going through a testosterone or estrogen based puberty.)
To me, your body should be as easily changed as your clothes. If you're feeling moody, you wear black, if you're feeling feminine, you get some boobs. Of course this is infeasible to current technology, but one can look to the future and hope.
-->
@K_Michael
Somehow I don't like the idea,
Suppose we had a pill that could give instant abs,
If I'm not the type of person to diet and exercise,
I feel as though I ought not 'have abs,
Sure physical appearance, not 'always reflection of inner person, habits, outward efforts, . . .
. . .
Course on another hand, video game avatars I use don't look like me,
But that's more like pretending to be someone else,
Or watching a movie of a character as you move them about,
Or playing with action figures.
-->
@Lemming
I'd prefer to say, charge of their guardians,Than slave of their parents, myself,
Lexical preference, in this case, doesn't change the reasoning, Lemming. If one is going to dismiss the priority a person has over one's body--even if that person is a child--in favor of another person's interests, then you're essentially suggesting that one is someone else's property because one doesn't even belong to oneself.
We restrict children from certain pursuits,Encourage directions,'Force directions,So long as it's not so extreme that society disagrees, what's the issue?
And to whose measure of extreme must one's behavior of one's body submit? Why does anyone else's measure matter as it concerns how a person behaves one's own body?
By restrict certain pursuits, I mean children are given curfews, restricted from associating with certain people,. .By directions, I mean we indoctrinate our children, 'even the hands off free range parents, I'd argue, doing nothing is a choice, if one chooses to live in a certain area, say certain ideas, molding is occurring.. .Force directions, school, timeouts, spankings in some families.
How do anecdotal accounts of how parents/custodians commonly treat their children address the contention that a person's body belongs to them--even if that person is a nine year-old child? The issue I take with suggesting that this presumed authority which alleges a traditional service to the child's benefit is the inconsistency in the nature of that authority when applying said authority produces harm. And if your remedy is that "society's interests" which I presume is code for a majoritarian consensus, prevents harm without consideration for the values an individual has over his or her own body, then every individual--including a child--is just the property of mob rule.
I'm a bit leery of a kid choosing their sexuality, at the point of surgery,,Might be I'm making an unconnected argument,But if a kid is old enough to chop their d*** or t***s off,Then wouldn't they be old enough to consent to sex?
Yes. That's very astute. And it displays the inconsistency of political parties that exploit identitarian narratives, namely homosexual and transgendered. According to that rationale, a child can identify their sexuality, but not express it physically.
Which I've always argued against in the past,And still do now.
The problem with suggesting that a person can't consent under some arbitrary division is that the same reasoning would inform that same person's incapacity to dissent. That would implicate that it's impossible to rape anyone under that arbitrary division. If this too is subject to "society's" discretion, then it isn't matter of "can" or "can't." It's a matter of decision by said "society."
-->
@Lemming
Stuff like an instant abs or instant boobs pill is probably not actually physically viable.
I suspect that eventually VR will get so good, especially after including other senses; touch, smell, sexual pleasure, that people will choose to be plugged into that most of the time. We called 2016 the dawn of the "post-truth" era, but it would take on a whole other meaning if one can pose as a body builder with a thought, or give themselves tails or scales or gills or penises. Personally, I value self-expression more than whether someone's appearance matches their genetics or life experiences. Someone who has had children shouldn't have to bear the literal scars of that, especially if most potential partners find them unattractive. I have stretch marks myself, from a growth spurt in middle school, but there's nothing about those that matter to me. They are blemishes on a canvas that only I should be able to paint.
-->
@Athias
People aren't property though,
Not objects, that is, (kind of)
Guardians are limited in 'what guidance they can give charges,
'Required to provide minimum living standards by society.
Measure of extreme is decided by society mostly,
Also individuals involved I suppose,
Society makes laws,
Some kids run away,
Other people's measure matters because of power.
Society doesn't like it when parent breaks their babies bones for crying, and society has the developed morals, laws, and power, to hold the guardian accountable.
I suppose the anecdotal accounts give example that we are 'not islands unto ourselves,
Mob rule, well , yes, I suppose,
Basic Social contract - Wikipedia theory, I'd say,
It's mildly annoying to be influenced by society at times, I suppose, but unless I want to go off the grid into the wild. . . .
For the if they can't consent, they can't refuse,
Well, I suppose it's a bit gray, (Depending on age)
How well informed, minimum parity of power,
Of course kids 'do express preferences for this or that, make choices.
. . .
I suppose as you say, society can just say 'legally can't consent.
-->
@Lemming
People aren't property though,Not objects, that is, (kind of)
What is a person without the most fundamental discretion he or she can possess: the discretion to behave him or herself?
Measure of extreme is decided by society mostly,Also individuals involved I suppose,Society makes laws,Some kids run away,Other people's measure matters because of power.Society doesn't like it when parent breaks their babies bones for crying, and society has the developed morals, laws, and power, to hold the guardian accountable.
But that's the thing: why oppose, for example, societies which decide that 10 year-old girls should be brides? Or that children should be conscripted into their militaries? Why does "society's" interest take priority over the individual in matters of his or her person?
I suppose the anecdotal accounts give example that we are 'not islands unto ourselves,Mob rule, well , yes, I suppose,Basic Social contract - Wikipedia theory, I'd say,
Can children sign contracts? (I'm being facetious in order to undermine the notion of a social contract that one has not seen and with which one has not agreed.)
It's mildly annoying to be influenced by society at times, I suppose, but unless I want to go off the grid into the wild. . . .
Why does it necessitate one's going off the grid? Why not just leave one to one's own devices?
How well informed, minimum parity of power,
It begs the question: how well informed must one be? How much power must meet parity? Sexual contact is not complicated. Despite my personal protests, it wouldn't be my decision. Or, it shouldn't be my decision to dictate how someone else behaves his or her body.
I suppose as you say, society can just say 'legally can't consent.
And this suggests that one's interests, even over one's body, don't matter.
-->
@Athias
Freedom, 'is important to people, often.
Societies interest takes priority, because of power.
Society, assumably has more power than the individual, or few,
Though the individual or few may still wish to follow their own values.
I'd agree it's a fair bit cr*ppy, to be 'born into an expectation/contract.
Children put their name on their homework, signifying ownership of the answers given to the questions,
Though that's not quite a 'contract, I suppose.
Going by this random bit of internet,
"A child under the age of 18 is considered a minor and can only sign a contract if it is essential items. Essential goods include medicines, food and medical services. Otherwise, the minor child must have the consent of a parent or guardian to the contract for it to be legally binding."
. . .
It doesn't sound that minors can contract, generally speaking,
Though it sounds more 'legal, than philosophical.
Going off the grid is required, I'd argue,
Due to interactions had with society,
Laws are ever existing in humans,
Even in gated communities, city limits, small laws exist.
Of being informed and parity of power,
I'd suppose that we use ages of consent as 'rough guidelines,
There exists adults of weak information and power,
There exist minors of information and power,
But minors perhaps are more often 'not informed or in power, also hormones, in care of guardians,
Very old individuals, also at times not informed, not in power, dementia, aged weak muscle, in care of nursing home.
Our interest matter, if our power and/or laws say they matter,
America is still big on individual power, but 'not 'completely.
@Poly
"Knowing one is a woman in a male body".
So, if one knows that one is a woman in a male body.
Then one also knows that one is in fact male.
-->
@Athias
Athias, you've obviously never had a child, any parent can tell you just how preposterous your position is. Children simply aren't viable on thier own, they need a parent or guardian to help them develop into an independent, responsible adult.
Any parent can tell you that what a child wants at age nine isn't what they wanted at eight, and won't be what they want at ten, a nine year old lacks the maturity and simply isn't responsible enough to make such life decisions, at nine they are probably just as likely to feel they are a Unicorn trapped in a human body.
There is a reason that the parent or guardian is legally responsible for raising the child, children are necessarily dependent upon a parent or guardian because they simply aren't capable of surviving on thier own.
Well, sexualities are not chosen, they are discovered. To be fair, we are all atheists(or agnostics) before our parents teach us about God(and stay that way if the parents, like mine, never told me about why God is true). We are probably all aces before we turn 10 as the hormones causing us to want sex hasn't secreted yet, and forcing children to be "gay", "straight" or "transgender" wouldn't make sense before that.
I would say the youngest someone would have to be to discover their sexuality is whenever they enter puberty.
-->
@Sidewalker
"Any parent can tell you that what a child wants at age nine isn't what they wanted at eight"
You dont understand the basic principle of individual sovereignty.
It is not about fullfilling every desire an individual has.
If child wants money to buy an iphone, parents have no obligation to provide the money.
If child has money to buy an iphone, parents have no right to force a child not to buy.
They can only talk with a child, assuming child wants to talk, until child changes opinion without force or violation of sovereignty.
Individual sovereignty is not about "you deciding who has sovereignty". It is about "you realizing that everyone has sovereignty".
-->
@Lemming
Freedom, 'is important to people, often.Societies interest takes priority, because of power.Society, assumably has more power than the individual, or few,Though the individual or few may still wish to follow their own values.
Society's power is an illusion, as is the process with which this society--i.e. the United States--resolves its disputes, a.k.a. democracy. It's no more than a contest between eager posses and gangs.
I'd agree it's a fair bit cr*ppy, to be 'born into an expectation/contract.Children put their name on their homework, signifying ownership of the answers given to the questions,Though that's not quite a 'contract, I suppose.Going by this random bit of internet,"A child under the age of 18 is considered a minor and can only sign a contract if it is essential items. Essential goods include medicines, food and medical services. Otherwise, the minor child must have the consent of a parent or guardian to the contract for it to be legally binding.". . .It doesn't sound that minors can contract, generally speaking,Though it sounds more 'legal, than philosophical.
I'm not suggesting that children can't enter contracts philosophically; only that it would be inconsistent to argue those same children can't "consent" but not maintain the same reasoning/premise and suggest they can enter a contract.
Going off the grid is required, I'd argue,Due to interactions had with society,Laws are ever existing in humans,Even in gated communities, city limits, small laws exist.
And which law matters more than one that acknowledges and ensures one's right to oneself?
There exists adults of weak information and power,There exist minors of information and power,But minors perhaps are more often 'not informed or in power, also hormones, in care of guardians,Very old individuals, also at times not informed, not in power, dementia, aged weak muscle, in care of nursing home.
Exactly. So why is the priority of these the considerations given to outside parties, and not the involved parties to whom these considerations chiefly concern?
America is still big on individual power, but 'not 'completely.
That's mostly narrative.
-->
@Sidewalker
Athias, you've obviously never had a child
Naturally, you would know this.
any parent can tell you just how preposterous your position is.
I'm sure many would, given that my position would seek to undermine the authority they allege to have over their children.
Children simply aren't viable on thier own
This is true at certain ages, and not so true at others.
they need a parent or guardian to help them develop into an independent, responsible adult.
Not really. It certainly helps, though.
Any parent can tell you that what a child wants at age nine isn't what they wanted at eight, and won't be what they want at ten, a nine year old lacks the maturity and simply isn't responsible enough to make such life decisions, at nine they are probably just as likely to feel they are a Unicorn trapped in a human body.
I would imagine that this is true for everyone. Even at my advanced age of "mumble-mumble" years-old, I can tell you some of the things I want now isn't the same as what I wanted when I was 21, or even eighteen. What's your point? That people change their minds?
There is a reason that the parent or guardian is legally responsible for raising the child
Non sequitur. No one has argued that there isn't a reason that parents and/or guardians are responsible for raising a child. My contention is that the nature of this arrangement between parent and child should not involve the capacity to coerce.
children are necessarily dependent upon a parent or guardian because they simply aren't capable of surviving on thier own.
Again, true at certain ages, not so true at others.
-->
@Athias
I don't see how societies power is an illusion,
Though I would agree it is made of smaller groups,
Perhaps country the largest group, then smaller factions within, smaller faction withing those factions, and so on.
I would agree there is some inconsistency in the terminology of consent, even for adults,
But would argue this is why additional clarifiers are often made in arguments, such as informed consent, in medical for example.
I'd agree I see great value in one's right to themself,
A society that uses people for the good of the many,
Or some utilitarian goal,
I find a bit dislikable,
And admit such is even in American society, the military draft for example.
For younger individuals,
They've yet to acquire the ability to make living wills,
As opposed to older individuals,
If an older individual failed to make preparations, then lost their mind, it can be difficult to know what they would have wanted.
While I'd agree that preferences can be discovered,
I'd also argue that preferences can be conditioned,
I would admit though, that I think it likely people have inherent preferences, nature,
But if someone by nature, is inclined to be an alcoholic,
Just being 'inclined isn't reason to become or stay an alcoholic,
I'm not saying gays or trans are as bad, by my alcoholic example,
But that unless a society or individual views the natural inclination as good or neutral, That it is an inclination, is not reason enough to pursue it.
-->
@Athias
A 9 year old has no conceptual idea what sexuality is let alone the consequences of the multitude of actions and/or responsibilities, much less the consequences that go along with it.
You’re an idiot. A god damn idiot for saying that let alone supporting it. You rank up there with Epstein. Damn pedophile groomer.