[Gritter]

Sounding a bit authoritarian there Potash

[Oldmanmatt]

When people obsessively collect and post stories about any time a "migrant" is accused of committing a crime or doing something harmful -- or any time a Muslim does, for example -- I think most of us wouldn't have a problem recognizing this as xenophobic bullshit.

As an aside.
I think about this quite often.
I have felt quite anti-Muslim, from time to time, in the past. I had fair grounds to do so.

But I could never convince myself, not really. So, I did what I try to do when I can’t understand my gut. I thought about it, read up a bit.
Didn’t take much to realise I was biased. First off, as I have just repeated, I wondered how many Muslims lived around me (in the UK, then). It’s just under 4 million.
Big number, but only 6.7% of the UK population.
Let’s face it, even if only 2.5 or 3 million were adults, if then, only 10% of them were radical, suicidal Jihadists we’d be fucked.
The scale of the “problem” doesn’t add up. It’s not a Muslim problem or an Islam problem, it’s a fucking idiot problem.
You don’t need many fucking idiots to make a minor issue painful for everyone else, of course.
But, suddenly, I could negate my own bias. It’s unfounded. An irrational fear.

I’m getting the same vibes from this line of the discussion.

Which is just fascinating.

[Potash]

Sounding a bit authoritarian there Potash

Karl Poppers paradox of tolerance

[Gritter]

Jesus Potash, that's pretty weak even for you anarchists. I can't quite see that argument passing the medical ethics cross examination.

Judge 'So..... Dr Potash, why exactly did you remove the testicles of this 16 year old boy?'

Dr Potash 'Fack you judge fascist Nazi pig, he fackin wanted it didn't he, now he's whining, fackin' live with it, so what? Paradox ov fuckin intolerance innit!'

[Oldmanmatt]

Jesus Potash, that's pretty weak even for you anarchists. I can't quite see that argument passing the medical ethics cross examination.

Judge 'So..... Dr Potash, why exactly did you remove the testicles of this 16 year old boy?'

Dr Potash 'Fack you judge fascist Nazi pig, he fackin wanted it didn't he, now he's whining, fackin' live with it, so what? Paradox ov fuckin intolerance innit!'

Aaand… now you’re inventing scenarios to be angry and offended about.

Again.

This is the old “ playing chess with a pigeon “ cliché isn’t it? The pigeon is just going to knock the pieces over and shit on the board.

[Gritter]

Susie Green ex head (2022) of U.K. Charity Mermaids, took her 16 year old son to Thailand to have his genitals removed aged 16.

[Will Hunt]

Susie Green ex head (2022) of U.K. Charity Mermaids, took her 16 year old son to Thailand to have his genitals removed aged 16.

Given you're trying to argue that these people might regret their decision, and that this happened in 2009 and the person in question is still happily trans, this seems like a pathetically weak example to use.

[Potash]

Susie Green ex head (2022) of U.K. Charity Mermaids, took her 16 year old son to Thailand to have his genitals removed aged 16.

Given you're trying to argue that these people might regret their decision, and that this happened in 2009 and the person in question is still happily trans, this seems like a pathetically weak example to use.

And they literally waited until they were 16 and had legal agency.

[Oldmanmatt]

Gritter, do you really not see that you have put your own spin on a piece of information, that largely refutes many of your claims?
A spin almost instantly shot down by two people, who simply looked beyond your “headline”.
Did you not notice the dates?
Does it not matter if the individual concerned is happy with the situation?

You are winding yourself up.

You go looking for some bit of self affirmation, half read or don’t check it’s veracity and throw it up here.

Then you get shot down, so you throw out insults instead of cogent argument (sorry, sorry, they’re “jokes” not insults. Unknot yer knickers).

And repeat.

Edit:
Did anyone else get thrown a load of obviously anti trans and homophobia “recommendations “ by YouTube at the end of that clip?

[Alex B]

Ah, but you see I did not simply succumb to Slabs arguments. I’ve stated my opinion and the worth of it, clearly, and not moved much from that position. What I’ve been saying and arguing and reiterating is that neither you nor Gritter have made any sort of reasonable case for your positions.
In fact, I looked into it far more than I ever intended and discovered that it was even more complicated and complex than I had actually imagined. The biological aspect, in particular. I hadn’t realised the plethora of chromosomal arrangements possible, for instance. That alone should have been enough to scare even a half witted layman out of taking a stance like “There’s no biological basis for Trns people! It’s purely ideological!”

You don’t know that. If you take such a position, you are making an assumption based solely on preconceived notions.

This is deliciously ironic. I wasn't going to mention it because I don't like arguments from authority but I'm actually a geneticist. That was my gateway into this subject. It's why I know it's all a load of bollox. Your thinking is so muddled (great work Slab!) that it's not even wrong.

1) Being intersex has nothing whatsoever to o with being transgender. Totally different thing. I would actually argue that you cannot be both. The very prefix trans implies an opposition, two things being at odds, in this case sex and "gender identity". You cannot have a "gender identity" at odds with your sex if your sex is indeterminate.

What exactly is the argument here?
1. 2 in 100,000 people are intersex
2. ????
3. Therefore, 5% of the population identifies as transgender
4. ????
5. Therefore, 5% of people actually have a little homunculus in their brain that is opposite to the sex of their body, presumably because they inherited the "male body" gene alongside the "female brain" gene or vice-versa.

Please explain what exactly it is that you believe.

2. The idea that biological sex is a spectrum, or anything other than binary, is a lunatic fringe idea. Don't take my word for it. Try to find a single peer-reviewed article in a relevant journal that argues for sex being a spectrum. They don’t exist because they would never pass peer review. (Scientific American is a popular magazine, not a scientific journal). Jerry Coyne (a world expert on speciation) is representative of mainstream thinking on the subject.

3. Regarding sex chromosomes...47,XYY males and 47,XXX females account for the vast majority of sex chromosome aneuploidies. Phenotypically, they are indistinguishable from normal 46,XY males and 46,XX females. Most of them don't know they have the condition. The remainder are mostly 45,X0 (Turner syndrome) and 47,XXY (Klinefelters), the vast majority of whom are infertile.

4. There is almost certainly a genetic predisposition to experiencing gender dysphoria. What us "gender-critical" types dispute is 1) that this subjective (but very real) feeling of distress is explained by people having a brain trapped in the "wrong" body and 2) that this should be treated by bringing the body into alignment with the ailing mind. Gender dysphoria is the only mental illness we treat this way. We don't treatment anorexia with liposuction; we don't treat OCD with hand-washing.

If you have an open mind, give this a listen

[Oldmanmatt]

Ah, but you see I did not simply succumb to Slabs arguments. I’ve stated my opinion and the worth of it, clearly, and not moved much from that position. What I’ve been saying and arguing and reiterating is that neither you nor Gritter have made any sort of reasonable case for your positions.
In fact, I looked into it far more than I ever intended and discovered that it was even more complicated and complex than I had actually imagined. The biological aspect, in particular. I hadn’t realised the plethora of chromosomal arrangements possible, for instance. That alone should have been enough to scare even a half witted layman out of taking a stance like “There’s no biological basis for Trns people! It’s purely ideological!”

You don’t know that. If you take such a position, you are making an assumption based solely on preconceived notions.

This is deliciously ironic. I wasn't going to mention it because I don't like arguments from authority but I'm actually a geneticist. That was my gateway into this subject. It's why I know it's all a load of bollox. Your thinking is so muddled (great work Slab!) that it's not even wrong.

1) Being intersex has nothing whatsoever to o with being transgender. Totally different thing. I would actually argue that you cannot be both. The very prefix trans implies an opposition, two things being at odds, in this case sex and "gender identity". You cannot have a "gender identity" at odds with your sex if your sex is indeterminate.

What exactly is the argument here?
1. 2 in 100,000 people are intersex
2. ????
3. Therefore, 5% of the population identifies as transgender
4. ????
5. Therefore, 5% of people actually have a little homunculus in their brain that is opposite to the sex of their body, presumably because they inherited the "male body" gene alongside the "female brain" gene or vice-versa.

Please explain what exactly it is that you believe.

2. The idea that biological sex is a spectrum, or anything other than binary, is a lunatic fringe idea. Don't take my word for it. Try to find a single peer-reviewed article in a relevant journal that argues for sex being a spectrum. They don’t exist because they would never pass peer review. (Scientific American is a popular magazine, not a scientific journal). Jerry Coyne (a world expert on speciation) is representative of mainstream thinking on the subject.

3. Regarding sex chromosomes...47,XYY males and 47,XXX females account for the vast majority of sex chromosome aneuploidies. Phenotypically, they are indistinguishable from normal 46,XY males and 46,XX females. Most of them don't know they have the condition. The remainder are mostly 45,X0 (Turner syndrome) and 47,XXY (Klinefelters), the vast majority of whom are infertile.

4. There is almost certainly a genetic predisposition to experiencing gender dysphoria. What us "gender-critical" types dispute is 1) that this subjective (but very real) feeling of distress is explained by people having a brain trapped in the "wrong" body and 2) that this should be treated by bringing the body into alignment with the ailing mind. Gender dysphoria is the only mental illness we treat this way. We don't treatment anorexia with liposuction; we don't treat OCD with hand-washing.

If you have an open mind, give this a listen

You are absolutely correct that this is deliciously ironic!

Because you didn’t actually read what I wrote, did you?

Because I summed up:

That alone should be enough to scare even a half witted layman out of taking a stance…

My stance, which I have already made clear, is (I believe) the only correct stance for the layman.

I’m fully aware that my thinking is “not even wrong” and quite carefully didn’t state what it was I was thinking. I did not say that it was the cause of gender dysphoria.

Well done for finally putting up. I know I asked you, directly, from whence you derived your asserted opinion (education or experience) many posts ago.

If, you had an actual point to make, why undermine your own position posting so much drivel?

Do you imagine (setting aside you (second) point 4 of the post) that what you just wrote differs from what I have read?

I have run down similar rabbit holes in the past, cancer(s), decompression sickness (amongst others) because I can’t stand not understanding “why” (I’m a “high functioning” autistic Engineer. Note nested clauses and general mode of speech).
At base, it usually turns out that “why” is still elusive.

Frustrating. A term and position that is significant for someone like me (and I suspect you also. Which is why I take different tone with you than with Gritter).

Which brings me back to your second point 4 of the last post. That there are “genetic predispositions” for all of these things mentioned (and many others besides) for which the predictors remain (as yet) unidentifiable.
So, “treatment” of these various things, remains the preserve of those “doing what appears to work in a majority of cases”. Or, in short, imperfect. 

If I, for some bizarre reason, was forced to make a decision on what was the best course of action, in the case of such gender dysphoria, I would probably go with the following:

Humans habitually modify their phenotype and extended phenotype, from making holes in their ears to hang jewellery from, to shoving bags of fluid under their skin to change their shape. Body building, choosing friend groups or building entire civilisations, painting their faces, permanently making their skin. Using mechanical contrivances to make themselves fly or move faster and further than the body could alone. Simply picking different clothing to display their perceived personality or status or profession or whatever. Using quite dangerous compounds to alter their mental state.
And on and on.

How about undertaking high risk, illogical, activities for no other reason than the pleasure they give to the individual? I’m thinking of climbing here.

So, gender dysphoria, what have we got? Looks from the outside to be, do nothing (rarely helps in any matter, seems true of the matter in hand), try to talk people around to a place where they feel comfortable (well, it can work for other things. On the other hand, note the existence of the last 12 pages of this thread) or make physical changes to alleviate the issue.

So, I choose letting the professional dealing with the individual cases using the best available knowledge at the time, in consultation with the individual, to choose the (hoped for) best course of action.

Again, the main thrust of much of this debate has been that people are being coerced or forced to choose radical pathways or that vulnerable children are being systematically bullied into such. However, I have not seen anything to support that. I have only seen individual cases that might, prima facie, fall into such a category, which seems more appropriate to classify as malpractice.

Alex, in your own words, the “problem” clearly exists, your expertise and the combined expertise of your field, cannot (as yet) provide an identifiable cause, much less a “solution”. If I was to presume to know your field, as well as, let alone better than, you; you would rightly feel inclined to dismiss me. So to would any thoughtful observer. Yet, that is what you are doing.
If I was to sum it, brutally, your position amounts to “I don’t have an answer so you can’t either”.

Thanks for finally sharing your expertise, more please.
Forgive me for trying to separate your opinions from your knowledge. I hope you can understand why.

[slab_happy]

Edit:
Did anyone else get thrown a load of obviously anti trans and homophobia “recommendations “ by YouTube at the end of that clip?

Not surprising since it's from Graham Linehan's YouTube channel. He's been repeatedly kicked off Twitter for hate speech -- including "joking" about killing protestors at a Posie Parker rally -- and is currently facing libel proceedings from one of the many people he's accused of being a "groomer".

[SA Chris]

The comedy writer Graham Linehan? He just plummeted in my estimation considerably.

[Fiend]

4. There is almost certainly a genetic predisposition to experiencing gender dysphoria. What us "gender-critical" types dispute is 1) that this subjective (but very real) feeling of distress is explained by people having a brain trapped in the "wrong" body and 2) that this should be treated by bringing the body into alignment with the ailing mind. Gender dysphoria is the only mental illness we treat this way. We don't treatment anorexia with liposuction; we don't treat OCD with hand-washing.

That's a useful explanation of the stance.

1) that this subjective (but very real) feeling of distress is explained by people having a brain trapped in the "wrong" body

1. Is there convincing and extensive evidence either way??
2. If there isn't convincing and evidence to support your doubts that it's "having a brain trapped in the wrong body", then it seems sensible to default to the viewpoint of the people who actually matter, i.e. the people who say they "have a brain trapped in the wrong body".

2) that this should be treated by bringing the body into alignment with the ailing mind. Gender dysphoria is the only mental illness we treat this way. We don't treatment anorexia with liposuction; we don't treat OCD with hand-washing.

1. Again, it seems sensible to refer to the people actually in question, who want their body brought in alignment with their mind - and would probably reject it being called "ailing". It seems that they are often very specifically asking to transition, and it seems that once transitioned, they are generally happier with their gender situation. Therefore, subject to the nitty gritty about how to treat minors, it might be the way it should be treated.

(OBVIOUSLY there should be further research and IF it turns out that the net happiness (number of people X
"amount of happiness") of satisfied transitioned TGs is less than the net unhappiness of regretful "buyer's regret" transitioned TGs, then that would have to be reconsidered)

2. I suspect it's possible that Gender Dysphoria, due to what area of existence it concerns, is pretty different to other mental differences (again I suspect TGs would probably reject it being called "mental illness"), particularly because the TG perspective is "align my body to what my mind believes" rather than "cure me of what my mind believes" (I'm guessing the latter is more common with some other mental differences). I don't believe that with the vast array of mental differences in modern society that they should all be treated the same i.e. "Cure the mental difference".

It would be interesting to ask some transitioned TG people - again the people who actually matter in this discussion - "How should we have treated you? Should we have facilitated your transition? Or should we have cured your mental difference instead?". Maybe someone could PM Taylor Parsons?

[slab_happy]

The comedy writer Graham Linehan? He just plummeted in my estimation considerably.

Yup, the Father Ted and IT Crowd guy! If you didn't know, I am sorry to be the bearer of this deeply depressing news.

He disappeared fully down the rabbit hole circa 2018 and has become an obsessive anti-trans activist.

A few days ago he was calling David Tennant "disgusting" and an "abusive groomer" because Tennant wore a t-shirt supporting trans kids at a press event.

[SA Chris]

Damn.

[andy moles]

Feck. Arse. 

[mrjonathanr]

Interesting short video from a transgender Orthodox Jewess

https://www.theguardian.com/society/video/2023/sep/07/trans-and-orthodox-jewish-the-struggle-for-acceptance-in-conservative-religion-video

[spidermonkey09]

This is totally off topic so feel free to delete or move to another thread but it sparked a memory in my brain. No diss intended MrJR as from memory of some of your other posts you are either jewish/knowledgeable about Judaism and either way incredibly unlikely to want to cause offence, but is 'jewess' considered acceptable? All the online dictionaries seem to consider it either dated or offensive. Its not a word one reads very often.

[Dingdong]

You definitely can’t and shouldn’t call a Jewish women “jewess”

[mrjonathanr]

Is it? Not up to date on that tbh. I have some Jewish heritage, you are correct on that. Was used to specify gender despite being very old fashioned, but according to google you have a point. Other posters may know more. Thanks for pointing out!

[stone]

What us "gender-critical" types dispute is 1) that this subjective (but very real) feeling of distress is explained by people having a brain trapped in the "wrong" body and 2) that this should be treated by bringing the body into alignment with the ailing mind. Gender dysphoria is the only mental illness we treat this way. We don't treatment anorexia with liposuction; we don't treat OCD with hand-washing.

To me the whole point is that trans people often find that they benefit from gender affirmation treatment and go on to live happily. By contrast my impression is that anorexia and OCD cause ever greater mental and physical distress/danger if their impulses are re-enforced. A mental health  practitioner told me that the be-all-end-all of mental health care was to enable people to live well -that was all that mattered.

You seem to be saying that because you can't get your head around why trans people want to be as they are, that is reason enough to give them a hard time. I disagree. It's their lives to live as they wish and we should respect and cherish them as they choose to be IMO. I don't really care whether some theory behind their identity is or isn't sound -and even if I did I would still think that my opinion about that was immaterial. Perhaps it is a bit like how I think religious freedom is really important to defend even though I'm an atheist myself.