What type of people allow a 5 year old to transition!?

Post Reply New Topic

https://www.heritage.org/gender/comment ... e-evidence

Searched it for a minute, found this. It's a well known fact. It has been researched countless of times. You can search for it further yourself. You will see that it's a pretty well established fact and the medical community is fully aware of it. Shocking right?

I noticed that the pool size of the analysis is 324 people and covers the period 1973-2003, the data also states that it should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.

^ Basically suggesting that they are not receiving a supportive social environment, thus better care = fewer suicides.

"Woke" is often used to point out emotionalism.
"Woke" and being rational, objective, and pragmatic are usually at loggerheads.
"Woke" usually involves virtue signalling.

Interestingly, the original term "woke" was created by a black individual.

Everything about the way that's written makes it clear there's an agenda.

They regularly appear to fail to control between people who receive reassignment vs. people who were also considered to benefit from it who didn't receive it. Note in this instance 'control Swedes' are the average population, not people experiencing similar issues, to a similar degree of acuteness, who did not receive reassignment. That doesn't seem like a very apples to apples comparison to me.



Some of their criticisms of studies into this issue seem quite fair. About the strongest claim they make is:



It seems fair to point out flaws that exist within current research, a larger body of evidence is always a positive from a 'trying to understand the issue' perspective.

Also, Recidivist's criticism is valid alongside these. Without untangling how much of the negatives are due to social non-acceptance, they really don't make much of a point besides that ongoing struggle exhausts people.

I think we all knew that already.

Based on your typical use of emotionalism, that seems like you're saying "woke" is disagreeing with my perspective. You have a long record of dismissing opposing views you're unable to make compelling arguments against as based on emotionalism; even against people you're otherwise are fond of.

It's an emotional, ego preserving response.

Screaming "woke" as a thought-terminating cliché is neither rational nor objective; it's often an admission that one can't expand upon their critique beyond a slogan. It's impossible to seek pragmatic compromise with such individuals since they're unwilling to search for common ground.

Virtue signalling is another one of those phrases that is often little more than a snarl word, especially within certain political blocs. You might as well of said opinions I don't like are opinions I don't like. It's not as though many of us aren't familiar with your vernacular.

Interestingly, there's a long history of terms that originate within the black community both being borrowed by broader society, as well as losing their original definition. In this case it's been appropriated to mock the original meaning by people who totally don't have bad faith motives for doing so.

Because conservatives have made it it a huge issue. Right wing politions can't hold power over right wing voters without something to get them riled up about. If the GOP comes out and says "everything is fine, there's nothing to get angered about", they lose the ability to control the average man.

That's why they're always making federal cases about things (either figuratively or literally), be it the existence of transpeople, abortion, stem cell research, voter fraud, vaccines or the war on Christmas. In the past they got people riled up over miscegenation.


They sure talk about it a lot for something they don't care about.

Did conservatives push LGBTQ propaganda in schools? No. Did conservatives pushed for hate speech laws penalizing midgendering ? No. The conservative attention to the matter came later as a rational counter reaction to the woke lunacy.

What does LGBTQ propaganda even mean buddy?

Is it simply just teaching kids that hey, these people exist too, and also deserve to be treated with respect?

Is it mentioning the LGBTQ in sex education? (are you against sex education?).

Like I don't know if you know this, but LGBTQ does not recruit, you cannot turn anyone gay, or whatever else, you are what you are.

https://segm.org/ajp_correction_2020

Here is an analysis of another more recent study with a greater number of participants, again from Sweden. Swedish society is one of the most supportive societies you can get.
The fact that a few years ago there was a consensus about the inefficiency of gender reassignment in alleviating gender dysphoria, and that now somehow there seems to be a debate about the obvious, it's a sign of heavy interference of woke politics with the scientific research. To the point where researchers prefer to avoid studying such politicaly contested topics because they fear for their carear. Woke activists track them down and cancel them if they don't agree with the conclusions of the research. The ones who are the true victims of woke inspired transgender activism are transgender people who are not getting the proper care they need because politics are interfering with the research on their condition. The fact that hormone therapy and gender reassignment are at best inefficient was a common understanding only a few years ago. And among medical professionals it still is a well known fact.



Psychiatric and somatic care refers to medical care, not a supporting social environment.

Yes, buddy. It means exactly that. First of all these are matters that don't concern children. Talking to them about genitalia and sex. Also "gender studies" is not just about that. It is about an ever evolving conglomerate of postmodernist inspired pseudo-disciplines in the humanities. Commonly refered to as woke politics by outsider observers (not only right wingers but moderate liberals also). It's about teaching childre that there are more than one genders and similar peculiar absurdities that don't align with reality and allude to a cult. And the tax payer pays for those teachers to teach their children a weird cult, all under the disguise of inclusivity. Give me a brake.

So you want children to turn into teens, that know nothing about their genitalia and sex? That's a recipe for disaster. States with "abstinence-only' education also have the highest rates of teen pregnancy, which also usually correlates with the most religious as well (not surprising). They need to be taught appropriate science and fact based things about their bodies and sex, when they reach an appropriate age. My school didn't teach that until age 10, that makes sense, just before puberty.

I can also add that you can talk about LGBT in entirely family-friendly ways, without going into any "technical" details.

My younger daughter asked me who are gays when she was 5. Trying to find possibly neutral terms that a 5yo would understand, I answered that they are men who fall in love with other men, not women. And that's all she needed to know.
However, when anti-gay propaganda vans appeared on the streets, shouting that gay couples adopt children to molest them (yes, that could be encountered here ), I had a lot more difficult explanations to make to my kids, on many levels - especially that it was after a family member came out and started to attend family holidays with her girlfriend, so my daughters already had a close perspective on how harmful and blatantly false these slanders were.

Polska can sometimes be a frightening place for people who are not straight white catholics. Which is why as an Atheist, I am glad that my parents immigrated to Canada in 89/91, or else I'd be the "communist".

Gosh, where to begin?

Firstly, it’s just straight up wrong to say that there was “a consensus” that gender reassignment didn’t work. In actuality, the consensus was (and remains) that it did work.
See:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6546862/

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.e ... er-people/

(These are both meta-analyses of multiple studies, rather than cherry-picked examples)

Secondly, when there is a disconnect between what the evidence shows and what an individual thinks, this does not show that the evidence is biased - it shows that the individual is biased. Facts disproving your views isn’t proof that facts are woke, it is proof that your views are wrong.

That’s just a fact. There are as many genders as there are people, although we can broadly categorise people as “man”, “woman”, “boy”, “girl”, “non-binary”, “genderfluid”, “agender”, etc. Why shouldn’t we teach children these facts? If a child asks me how many genders there are, I’m not going to lie and say there is only one.

"Atheism=communism" is a bit outdated stereotype that our ruling party tries to cling to, largely beating a dead horse.
I could go lengths about local politics here but nvm - Polish society suffers a polarization similar to American and the more agressive side A becomes, the stronger support for side B and vice versa. Unhealthy pendulum and not enough forces willing to slow it down.

Generally, the more Catholic church tries to present themselves as attacked victims of "communists" and try to "justly fight back", the more people just stop going to church.

As a mother, grandmother, teacher, 4h leader and homesteader, I can assure you that these matters DO concern children.

My 2 y.o. Grandson followed his mommy into the bathroom last week and intimidated a very concerned conversation about her “missing” penis.

This month I had to inform a 9 y.o. Girl -during a discussion about ordering chicks by mail that ”sex” is not a bad word.

My teens and preteens come to school activities and dances with or to see their girlfriends and boyfriends and nothing They are learning in school is more important to them than exploring and defining their social identities.

Being able to casually say “my moms” or “my dads” the same way other kids can say “my mom and dad” in a conversation without a huge derailment or explanation is really important to a young child’s social development. Why do schools have to “teach this propaganda”? Because parents are at home teaching their children to interrupt the conversation to tell the kid who just said “my moms won’t let me get my ears pierced.” That the people that child loves most in the world are going to hell. That is a problem. That is age inappropriate communication. THAT is propaganda.

When I was a teen, my mother told me that she didn’t see any difference in skin color, but that she had a problem with interracial marriages because they caused too many problems for the kids. There was a lot to unpack there. Starting with me telling her that what she just said was one of the things causing problems for those kids. (The assumption that all couples would have children, the fact that if you don’t differentiate by skin color then there is no “interracial marriage”…..)

Years later, my grandmother asked me if the girlfriend of my husband’s biracial cousin was black or white. I asked her back “is (cousin) black or white?” She said “well he’s….I don’t know do I? I’ve never seen him.” Then we had a great conversation about the things she was using “black” and ”white” as shorthand for.