Yet another trans thread.

Listen to the child's experience. Get them help with mental health experts. And if the child is sure, and the experts agree, then yes, you start early. Even as young as six.

It's not evil. And maybe if you walked a mile in the shoes of a trans parent, you might feel different.

 

Thank you for answering the question. There will be no further questions.

 

Plenty of articles like this. Chronicles the lives of 4 trans boys, including one that started showing signs at age 2 1/2. Mother now regrets waiting until age 8 to begin transitioning because her son has been much happier, healthier, and productive since the transition. Is this pure evil? Or just a parent doing what every parent tries to do? Which is so their best for their child.

Easy to criticize and say what you'd do in a situation. But until you actually face it, you don't really know. And what you call pure evil, I call parents trying to do right by their child.

 

I chuckled at this:

 

Just wondering, how does the parent know the post-transition child is “happier and healthier” ….. at say15 ….. than it would have been at 15 if they’d not been transition by the parent? What is the control reference the parent uses to come to that objective, factual conclusion?

 

What I find interesting in this discussion is ….. many supporting medical transition at an early age believe that a child that lacks capacity to get married, vote, operate a motor vehicle, consume alcohol, purchase tobacco products, serve in the military, engage in consensual sex, enter into a legally enforceable contract, etc ….. possesses the maturity and intellectual capacity to decide it should be a biological sex other that it was a birth.

 

Good question. Outcomes is a thing that certainly should be studied by medical doctors/researchers. Does the treatment produce positive results vs control group. Of course “positive results” would be one group scoring better than the other, that’s how success is measured. Doesn’t mean 100% will be happy. For an individual case it’s an unknowable.

A better question is how would a politician know better than the child’s own parents and doctors?

 

Actually, I can't see how anyone truly knows if a child subjected to sex reassignment therapy/surgery is better off post treatment. How could anyone know since the control group (pre-reassignment individual) ceased to exist on the treatment commenced. Any assertion is just a guess, likely based upon one’s own bias.

 

You can’t help yourself wanting to normalize weirdness…and at the cost of young oblivious children.

 

Simple. Listen to the child and his/her experience. Ever been a parent? It's usually not too difficult to know wheen your child is happier and healthier. No matter what the situation, the parent should be the guide, but the child should decide which direction they are going.

 

The doctors and specialists are pushing it, because it opens up a new niche of enormous revenue for healthcare providers. Not just in the near term, but long term and the big pharmaceuticals know it. These children will inevitably have more health problems later in life as their endocrine systems will have been permanently F'd from a young age. Not to mention all of the psychological and emotional damage that will no doubt make these kids slaves to the mental health industrial complex for generations to come.

A wise man once said "follow the money." Parents are mostly going along with it at the prodding of physicians and specialists they trust to guide them in medical decision making for their children in good faith. Completely naive to the enormous financial windfall the medical industry stands to enjoy with this new phenomena that has zero scientific or medical basis, let alone a large sample size to study the long-term effects of such intervention at an early age.

 

Wow, you missed the entire point. Too biased to see beyond your opinion. Or, you just refuse to acknowledge how your comment lacks any logical basis.

I have two grown sons, both UF alums. I know the are good men, successful and happy in their chosen careers and that makes more extremely proud. However, I know I cannot assert they would not be happier in a different career because those individuals working in a different professional endeavor do not exist. There is simply no point of reference against which to compare.

 

What's the point? You should force your kid to do as you want regardless? Ever see a parent do that? What usually happens is the kid rebels and gets in trouble, and the parent never get what they want.

With trans kids, it's the same. Get them gender affirmative treatment, and odds improve of having a healthy kid. Don't, and odds of suicide increases. How is forcing kids to trust you know best always better when in trans kids, results in more suicides?

In all cases, parents need to listen to their child's experience. Then make hopefully informed, and wise decisions based off this. Then, hope for the best. In this, trans kids are no different than any kid facing difficulties.

 

Ugh …. not going to attempt to explain a point of logic even a middle schooler would get.

 

Then explain how I'm wrong. And why we shouldn't follow the latest research which shows gender affirming care leads to better outcomes the majority of the time.

 

I'm with you on all of this, but you're wasting your time. Most of them are simply regurging talking points Big Pharma and MSNBC gave them and have no clue what they're talking about.

 

So, *if* you are willing to keep the genders attached to the sex, then it's extremely easy to keep a parallel here. If you are going to tell me that "man" simply means "presenting as what one believes represents a male" then sure. The part that is still ambiguous is why "presenting as" should be taken as "is." It's only when people try to suggest that gender is not binary and not attached to sex in any way shape or form that the confusion presents itself (seemingly obviously). Perhaps you are not of that view. Sex is binary, and one's adherence to sexual preference may indeed fluctuate, but the basic reference points will always be binary in nature (at least as it pertains to humans in the modern era ).

Interesting choice of words, because if all trans did identify as "trans man" or "trans woman" then I don't think there would be any issues, but let me ask you: do you believe there's ANY difference between a "trans woman" and a "woman?"

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Accurate and Simple aren't always friends. Where competing views exist, it's healthy to explore more about a topic to whatever extent people are willing to present...even if it only tells us more about what the other believes and not necessarily anything that would constitute objective knowledge.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

The narrative regarding a new revenue stream is absurd on its face. There is a shortage of mental health professionala and the psychiatrists, clinical psychologists and clinical social workers that are treating transgender patients would have no problem finding other patients were they to stop treating patients who may be questions their gender identity or have already been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Similarly the physicians performing surgical procedures are virtually all board certified plastic surgeons, urologists or OB/GYNs. They also would have no problem providing services to other patients. The same applies to pharmaceuticals. The drugs prescribed to treat transgender patients who are or have transitioned are also prescribed for other uses and a number of them are generics with relatively low profit margins.

 

Well, that is part of the problem. Their argument changes almost daily. What you'd expect when dealing with individuals who are very mentally ill.