Transgender stuff - what's going on?

[Moo]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Not sure how laws of commerce are supposed to translate to individual rights tbh.

Whatever you think about this "topic" that is a real slippery slope.

 

 

 

What about the age for smoking and drinking? The government decides kids can't do those.

[TheHowieLama]

30 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

how a child decides (or someone else decides for them) 

 

Someone else decides most stuff for a child, just not the gubmint.

Every kid is "indoctrinated" by nurture.

 

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Moo said:

 

What about the age for smoking and drinking? The government decides kids can't do those.

 

The gubmint enacts laws on the sale of those products to kids.

Commerce.

[Section_31]

9 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Not sure how laws of commerce are supposed to translate to individual rights tbh.

Whatever you think about this "topic" that is a real slippery slope.

 

 

Why can't kids smoke then? Or drink? Or get married, or get a job, or leave their parents and live with whoever they want?

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Why can't kids smoke then? Or drink? Or get married, or get a job, or leave their parents and live with whoever they want?

"Kids" do every single one of those things every day, bar legal marriage, church stuff that.

 

 

[Jack the Sipper]

14 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Someone else decides most stuff for a child, just not the gubmint.

Every kid is "indoctrinated" by nurture.

 

 

I'd just like to know how someone decides that a child is actually born into the wrong body and needs drugs to block the process of puberty, rather than deciding any number of other possibilities. I mean, surely you'd accept that coming to the conclusion that a child is born into the wrong body and needs therapy to change that is a rather drastic conclusion. 

 

What markers are there that would rule out that child 'just' being gay or different when coming to that conclusion? 

 

edit: presumably you're also convinced that puberty blockers aren't potentially harmful and are fully reversible.

[TheHowieLama]

2 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

I'd just like to know how someone decides that a child is actually born into the wrong body and needs drugs to block the process of puberty, rather than deciding any number of other possibilities. I mean, surely you'd accept that coming to the conclusion that a child is born into the wrong body and needs therapy to change that is a rather drastic conclusion. 

 

What markers are there that would rule out that child 'just' being gay or different when coming to that conclusion? 

 

No idea, no kid of mine or anyone I know has ever had the issue. Need to ask a parent.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

2 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Thanks, doctor, I really had no idea what HRT was; I just randomly bashed letters on the keyboard and hoped it would answer RT's question.

Well, that’s the probably been problem with the majority of your posts on this thread. 

 

 

 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

11 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

I'd just like to know how someone decides that a child is actually born into the wrong body and needs drugs to block the process of puberty, rather than deciding any number of other possibilities. I mean, surely you'd accept that coming to the conclusion that a child is born into the wrong body and needs therapy to change that is a rather drastic conclusion. 

 

What markers are there that would rule out that child 'just' being gay or different when coming to that conclusion? 

 

edit: presumably you're also convinced that puberty blockers aren't potentially harmful and are fully reversible.

There’s a kid in my lads class who has ADHD and autism (like my lad) One day they will tell everyone they are a girl and the next day they will declare they are a boy. 
 

Kids don’t really know who they are until later in life. Give them a choice to find this out and make an informed decision when they have the full mental capacity to do so. 

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

Kids don’t really know who they are until later in life. Give them a choice to find this out and make an informed decision when they have the full mental capacity to do so. 

 

This particular topic I find creates so much distortion.

Reframing the question using your post quoted:

 

Personally I am not a religious fella and I am quite sure children are unable to make any "choice" there much less an informed one and it is one of the most profound there is - also we know that some bad stuff happens regularly in that environment.

 

Should the gubmint make it illegal for kids to go to Church until a certain age? 

 

waits for the - "well they can always change their mind when they become old enough" angle.

[Jack the Sipper]

13 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

No idea, no kid of mine or anyone I know has ever had the issue. Need to ask a parent.

 

Ask them what? How they concluded their boy is actually a girl? Whether or not that's a drastic conclusion to reach? You seem quite invested in the topic; surely you have a view.

 

5 minutes ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

There’s a kid in my lads class who has ADHD and autism (like my lad) One day they will tell everyone they are a girl and the next day they will declare they are a boy. 
 

Kids don’t really know who they are until later in life. Give them a choice to find this out and make an informed decision when they have the full mental capacity to do so. 

 

That's my real concern here. If an adult after careful consideration and consultation wants to make that decision, not just that they need to change gender but to take medication or surgery to help achieve that as best as possible, then I would say that's their choice, no matter how I might feel about the validity of their decision. But when we're talking about a child who can't give that informed consent, who is subject to massive peer and adult pressure, and who might change their mind later on, then I would caution against anything as drastic as telling them they need to undergo gender-changing therapy.

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Jack the Sipper said:

You seem quite invested in the topic; surely you have a view.

 

 

As I said at every juncture here - remove the "topic" from the discussion - this is about individual rights.

 

Plead guilty to that, yea.

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

, then I would caution against anything as drastic as telling them they need to undergo gender-changing therapy.

 

This has nothing to do with the gubmint passing legislation.

[Riley Greenleaf]

31 minutes ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

Well, that’s the probably been problem with the majority of your posts 

 

Indeed

[Jack the Sipper]

13 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

As I said at every juncture here - remove the "topic" from the discussion - this is about individual rights.

 

Plead guilty to that, yea.

 

Individual rights? Even when we're talking about children? Really? That's a pretty fucking dark path you're taking there.

 

12 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

This has nothing to do with the gubmint passing legislation.

 

The government have just announced a ban on puberty blockers for children. What reason did they give for it? 

[TheHowieLama]

Just now, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Individual rights? Even when we're talking about children? Really? That's a pretty fucking dark path you're taking there.

 

 

Huh? This "right", as with every other they have at that age, are in the hands of their parents. Whether you agree with them or not. That's the point.

[TheHowieLama]

5 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

The government have just announced a ban on puberty blockers for children. What reason did they give for it? 

 

My comment is re: your post - reasonable context and comments there.

 

None of which had to do with the gubmint legislation.

 

As for the question I have no idea - did they say?

[Jack the Sipper]

19 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Huh? This "right", as with every other they have at that age, are in the hands of their parents. Whether you agree with them or not. That's the point.

 

There's a lot of rights they don't have that are afforded to adults. Why do you think that is?

 

Do you think they should gave the same rights in all cases, or just when choosing to make drastic changes to their body because they think, or been told, they're the wrong gender?

17 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

My comment is re: your post - reasonable context and comments there.

 

None of which had to do with the gubmint legislation.

 

As for the question I have no idea - did they say?

 

Maybe you should find out why the government have banned PBs for children but not adults, and ask yourself if children not being able to give informed consent is a part of it.

[Jack the Sipper]

Also  if you defend a child's right to make drastic changes to their body, how does that sit with your earlier claim that adults make decisions for them, when I first asked how the process worked?

[TheHowieLama]

13 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

There's a lot of rights they don't have that are afforded to adults. Why do you think that is?

 

 

Again you seem to be bogged down in the "issue". I am not taking any side in that or defending any action. I don't have any reason to, or any expertise to contribute.

 

What I am talking about is the concept of gubmint legislation and where/when it infringes on individual rights. At it's core it is similar to freedom of speech. I don't have to agree with what someone says to respect their right to say it.

 

So your quote above is meaningless (see what I did there)- they are always in the care of their parents. For good and bad.

There are commerce laws - you have named some - which if they are broken have consequences. The parents are often liable for the childrens actions at that point.

 

There was a story on here a couple of days ago about a diabetic girl born to parents who do not believe in traditional medicine. Horrific. Child was taken away and the parents were found guilty of neglect. The child is given back to the parents. They again withheld insulin and the child died.

 

Should the gubmint enact legislation re: forced medicine?

 

[Jack the Sipper]

13 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Again you seem to be bogged down in the "issue". I am not taking any side in that or defending any action. I don't have any reason to, or any expertise to contribute.

 

What I am talking about is the concept of gubmint legislation and where/when it infringes on individual rights. At it's core it is similar to freedom of speech. I don't have to agree with what someone says to respect their right to say it.

 

So your quote above is meaningless (see what I did there)- they are always in the care of their parents. For good and bad.

There are commerce laws - you have named some - which if they are broken have consequences. The parents are often liable for the childrens actions at that point.

 

There was a story on here a couple of days ago about a diabetic girl born to parents who do not believe in traditional medicine. Horrific. Child was taken away and the parents were found guilty of neglect. The child is given back to the parents. They again withheld insulin and the child died.

 

Should the gubmint enact legislation re: forced medicine?

 

 

It seems to me that you think children should  be allowed to undergo potentially life changing, certainly body changing therapy, because they think they might be born into the wrong body (or because an adult has made that decision for them) because its their individual right. 

 

What have I missed there?

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

It seems to me that you think children should  be allowed to undergo potentially life changing, certainly body changing therapy, because they think they might be born into the wrong body (or because an adult has made that decision for them) because its their individual right. 

 

What have I missed there?

 

I most certainly feel that a family makes any decision regarding their child, certainly not any gubmint - the rest of it has nothing to do with it.

 

Think if you really boiled it down - from reading your posts here - your feeling is that the parents are not making the right decision. Two different things entirely.

 

[Clem H Fandango]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

Why can't kids smoke then? Or drink? Or get married, or get a job, or leave their parents and live with whoever they want?

Its a good point.

 

When i was 12 i identified as as a smoker/drinker. But the gubmint denied my choices.. thank god for my older girlfriends to get me ciggies and booze.

 

[Moo]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

There was a story on here a couple of days ago about a diabetic girl born to parents who do not believe in traditional medicine. Horrific. Child was taken away and the parents were found guilty of neglect. The child is given back to the parents. They again withheld insulin and the child died.

 

Should the gubmint enact legislation re: forced medicine?

 

 

Forced medicine? Perhaps not. I don't know if there's a specific rule around that but laws on child neglect possibly cover it.

What about car seats for children? Education? The government decides these things.

Are you suggesting the government should put no safeguarding measures in place for children and leave everything up to the parents?

 

[TheHowieLama]

8 minutes ago, Moo said:

 

Forced medicine? Perhaps not. I don't know if there's a specific rule around that but laws on child neglect possibly cover it.

What about car seats for children? Education? The government decides these things.

Are you suggesting the government should put no safeguarding measures in place for children and leave everything up to the parents?

 

 

That was the crux of the case - the mother served time for neglect, that is a crime, not withholding medication. The child ended back up with the family and died from lack of insulin. Someone may remember what thread it is in.

Education - plenty of people homeschool and there is no Federal truancy law so not sure what you mean there - unless truancy laws are different in the UK. Fun fact - truancy laws were enacted so both parents could work.

Car seats - that was again commerce driven law. Insurance companies demanded that, same with seat belts for adults, and air bags.

 

As for the last - it depends on what we are talking about but I cannot think of anything I would support the government legislating.

What are you thinking of?