LGBT and the US Conservative Movement

I've edited it to say "he's" instead of "you're". Is that good enough?

I don't know how to do a nested quote here without potentially making a mess of TS's quote system.
I went ahead and fixed it for you, bintananth. You can simply delete out the ="Member Name", post: ID#, Member: #" part of the QUOTE tag.
 
So, can anyone clarity what's the actual point being discussed here? After reading the last half dozen or so pages, I'm not able to figure out what people are debating, or if there even is a debate.

The lie I used to be fed, which I can agree with, went like "we don't know enough about the brain, so changing the body is is our best solution for now."

The problem being that no one is seriously looking into fixing the brain, and these days you will often get called a transphobic Nazi for even suggesting it.

To my understanding, we still know so little about how the brain functions that there's no point in trying to address gender dysphoria from the mental side. Your criticism is akin to suggesting the greeks were at fault for failing to figure out how to treat high blood pressure, while disregarding the fact that they had next to no knowledge of how the circulatory system worked.
 
So, can anyone clarity what's the actual point being discussed here? After reading the last half dozen or so pages, I'm not able to figure out what people are debating, or if there even is a debate.



To my understanding, we still know so little about how the brain functions that there's no point in trying to address gender dysphoria from the mental side. Your criticism is akin to suggesting the greeks were at fault for failing to figure out how to treat high blood pressure, while disregarding the fact that they had next to no knowledge of how the circulatory system worked.
Only if the Greeks called others racists for trying to learn more.

Like, you'd have a point if it wasn't considered transphobic to even consider investigating other options.
 
To my understanding, we still know so little about how the brain functions that there's no point in trying to address gender dysphoria from the mental side.
It is not really true though, we know enough to start research on it. But we don't for the same reason that sociopathy was removed from the diagnostic manual: the culture of the mainstream psychological medical practice is not concerned with the cause of illnesses, they are only concerned with pragmatic treatment of illnesses and are at times very lazy about it.

Basically it was as if the greeks had a doctor who knew about high blood pressure, but all his books got burned because treating people based on humors was more intuitive and easier to teach to new doctors.
 
To my understanding, we still know so little about how the brain functions that there's no point in trying to address gender dysphoria from the mental side. Your criticism is akin to suggesting the greeks were at fault for failing to figure out how to treat high blood pressure, while disregarding the fact that they had next to no knowledge of how the circulatory system worked.
Yet they thought they knew enough about the brain to stuff a generation of kids full of 'anti-depressants' which turned out to make them even more depressed/suicidal, if they weren't already.
 
Except we don’t have the medical technology to do that. So you get people that under go these surgeries and don’t actually become what they want.

Except that actual medical studies consistently show that while transition isn't perfect, it generally results in positive patient outcomes. Even McHugh admitted this; he just argued that the patient outcomes weren't positive enough to justify keeping the clinic open.
 
So, can anyone clarity what's the actual point being discussed here? After reading the last half dozen or so pages, I'm not able to figure out what people are debating, or if there even is a debate.

It's honestly become something of an umbrella thread with several not particularly related sub-arguments around LGBT rights/persons.

My current involvement is debating @The Immortal Watch Dog over the attacks he's been aiming at trans people in this thread, more specifically on his claims regarding the Reimer case.
 
Actually I see it as a warning that circumcising people should be banned, except for maybe a religious exemption. After all if American doctors weren’t retards then there would be no need to have a debate about the kids gender.

In this particular case, the infant was not circumcised for cultural reasons; the infant was circumcised as a treatment for phimosis.
 
Except that actual medical studies consistently show that while transition isn't perfect, it generally results in positive patient outcomes. Even McHugh admitted this; he just argued that the patient outcomes weren't positive enough to justify keeping the clinic open.

If this is the case, what's with all the lawsuits from young adults who have 'de-transitioned'?
 
If this is the case, what's with all the lawsuits from young adults who have 'de-transitioned'?

Who often accuse their parents of using them to score social points or their mother of having munchausens by proxy or being groomed by corrupt school counselors or predatory trannies.

Older trans people do groom autistic children. It's all.over twitter in public view and the munchausens thing I can see as well. Since the net is full of parents talking about drugging their kids against their will when they begin to say they aren't trans.

This is an incredibly dangerous form of pederasty and child ritual abuse that needs to be addressed not by understanding and tolerance by the full weight of the law, the wrath of enraged normal people and social pressure in the form of economic retaliation against corporations that enable this stuff.

Like grill bros need to start doing organized stock dumps of any megacorp caught sponsoring transitioning children or funding those clinics that throw hormones at runaways.
 

Not sure if this has been posted here, since I haven't really been tracking this thread. IMO this links back to the thread that originally spawned this thread - the sexual harassments of young men by John Weaver, who was part of the Never-Trump Lincoln Project but had a long history in the Republican Party before that.

I think that, regardless of what overall policy should be, there is a notable trend of predatory homosexuals being protected within the conservative movement.
 

Not sure if this has been posted here, since I haven't really been tracking this thread. IMO this links back to the thread that originally spawned this thread - the sexual harassments of young men by John Weaver, who was part of the Never-Trump Lincoln Project but had a long history in the Republican Party before that.

I think that, regardless of what overall policy should be, there is a notable trend of predatory homosexuals being protected within the conservative movement.
So I don't have time to read the whole article can you summarize? Did Judge Napolitano sexually harass men? Not women?
 
I honestly have wondered if part of this push for hormone blockers was Ts trying to live by proxy through others, since they look at their mutilated bodies and think of how much better it would have been if they'd been given these blockers and received hormone treatments earlier so they could have looked more along the lines of what they wanted. Kind of like the women who put their little daughters through beauty contests because they wished they could have done that themselves.
 
Ok realistically what is the goal?

In my case the goal is atonomy I want to be able to exist in peace, and left alone.

I want other people to enjoy the same thing, my path to acheiving this goal is to devolve power down to more local levels and have checks on the powers of powerful people. The goal is in my case atonomy, for as many people as possible.

Some one being gay in and of itself is not a threat to my goal, some one using their sexuality as a clugon to enforce their values on every one else is.

In other words gay people are not the problem, self rightous activist assholes are, and those come in every color, sex, gender and oritenation.
 
Is there any proof it was for a medical reason? Because in America almost all boys are circumcised for culture but Dr. make up cope about how it’s medically healthy.

It was confirmed by the journalist who broke the case, and circumcision for cultural or religious reasons is quite invariably done much sooner than eight months, so the timeline of the case would not be consistent with a "regular" circumcision.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top