Ohio Transwoman killed, called "Satan"

[United Marxist Nations]

1. The books come from the tradition of the Church, their inclusion was not arbitrary.

2. And yes, it is a threadjack to debate Christian doctrine.

1. The translations and interpretations are highly questionable indeed.

2. Not as it relates to the factors that cause people to murder trans people.

1) If the translations were questionable, then not every group with any authority on the matter would agree on it.

2) Which this isn't relating to it.

[Des-Bal]

Homicides =/= hate crimes.

r/badstatistics

No they don't, hate crimes are a broader category. But even counting the alleged rash of hate crimes the transgender homicide rate is below the national average.

[Grenartia]

It's actually pointing to the opposite. See you can't use the fact that you're less likely than the average person to be murdered as evidence of a problem.

There have been over 10,000 homicides this year, if transgender people are nearly 1% of the population they're due nearly 100 murders.

Homicides =/= hate crimes.

r/badstatistics

Also, as I have previously pointed out whenever people try to statistically argue that we as a community are being 'undermurdered' (for lack of a better word), no attempts are made to correct for the fact that there are more people who self-identify as transgender on surveys (i.e., our primary source of numbers on how many trans people there are), than there trans people going through (or have gone through) transition (i.e., the part of the population who are both more likely to be targeted for being trans, and who are more likely to be reported by the media as being trans).

[Des-Bal]

Also, as I have previously pointed out whenever people try to statistically argue that we as a community are being 'undermurdered' (for lack of a better word), no attempts are made to correct for the fact that there are more people who self-identify as transgender on surveys (i.e., our primary source of numbers on how many trans people there are), than there trans people going through (or have gone through) transition (i.e., the part of the population who are both more likely to be targeted for being trans, and who are more likely to be reported by the media as being trans).

"The situation's cloudy, let's assume there's a catastrophe."

[Unified Heartless States]

Source

[. . .] making it nearly 20 in 2016 alone. Anyone who says transpeople just want attention, don't need equality, can wait, or that identity politics is the greatest evil ever . . .

Thoughts NSG?

20 20 20 20 20 20

Then I'll be the first to say that; trans folk just want attention (if their political about it), don't need equality (as they already have it), can indeed wait, and that identity politics is indeed the greatest evil ever as it's child abuse (when encouraged among children).

Bigoted people will always exist, attempting to use these few individual actions to imply some sort of systematic oppression is only as ignorant.

[Noraika]

[
When we factor in the degree of rape, poverty, harassment, assault, and discrimination....murder is just one part of, and points to, the much bigger problems within society regarding transgender people. The fact that these incidents are often hate crimes, and a part of the greater rhetoric of violence against transgender people, is supplementary to this as well.

It's actually pointing to the opposite. See you can't use the fact that you're less likely than the average person to be murdered as evidence of a problem.

There have been over 10,000 homicides this year, if transgender people are nearly 1% of the population they're due nearly 100 murders.

You missed everything else that I said. Murder is the most obvious crime, but plays into the fact regarding other violent crime, discrimination, harassment, and otherwise. That's why this report gets such attention. Its not just the murder of a single person that's important, but how that murder plays into the huge and disproportionate amount of rape, harassment, discrimination, lack of access to necessary medical care, and of course of hate crimes.

It also highlights the issue within society, as the rhetoric surrounding transgender people, by those opposed to them, not only promotes violence, and at times extermination, of transgender individuals, but also the general experience which, while not exclusive to murder, included murder.

Last time I checked there wasn't a trend in religious nuts shooting random people in the balls, or for religious justifications for violence against cisgender individuals. With transgender people it falls not only into individual incidents, but a larger rhetoric that's been used in social conservative circles of using violence and deadly force against transgender individuals, as well as the larger issue of violence and harassment against transgender people, at times religiously motivated and justified, so once again this particular instance points to greater issues in society, and isn't just an isolated incident based in an isolated individual.

The thing is, in your case, its a single person in a single instance, which is more or less isolated. With transgender people it points to a much larger problem within society, is not an isolated incident. So yeah, the range of things being covered is more than just the individual, although the primary story may be about that indiviudal. Its about an issue which is far-reaching in society, and thus impacts many more individuals directly, especially transgender people, and as more people know transgender people as friends, family, coworkers, etc, as these individuals are also effected by the struggles of their loved ones.

This dude right here.

She is wise.

Fixed.

[Noraika]

Then I'll be the first to say that; trans folk just want attention (if their political about it), don't need equality (as they already have it), can indeed wait, and that identity politics is indeed the greatest evil ever as it's child abuse (when encouraged among children).

Bigoted people will always exist, attempting to use these few individual actions to imply some sort of systematic oppression is only as ignorant.

Ensurance that transgender youth can, if need be, get necessary medical care = child abuse....okay...

You do realize that the American College of Pediatricians is not a recognized professional body within the psychiatric community, and is a recognized hate group right? Please check your sources.

Try the American Psychological Association. They have the most reliable and credible research on the matter. They're actually pretty much as credible and well-respected as you can go. I can provide you with some good information if you're interested.

[Grenartia]

Source

[. . .] making it nearly 20 in 2016 alone. Anyone who says transpeople just want attention, don't need equality, can wait, or that identity politics is the greatest evil ever . . .

Thoughts NSG?

20 20 20 20 20 20

1. Then I'll be the first to say that; trans folk just want attention (if their political about it), don't need equality (as they already have it), 2. can indeed wait, and 3. that identity politics is indeed the greatest evil ever as 4. it's child abuse (when encouraged among children).

5. Bigoted people will always exist, attempting to use these few individual actions to imply some sort of systematic oppression is only as ignorant.

1. We don't have equality. We have second-class citizenship. That is why we need to "be political about it".

2. Can "wait" for what?

3. "Identity politics" sounds like the biggest made-up rightwing buzzphrase since "political correctness" and "cultural marxism".

4. Nora has already addressed why your source is shit, so I won't.

5. Except, there is, in fact, systematic oppression. In many jurisdictions, we can't even fucking shit in safety. Much less the countless (expensive) legal hoops we have to jump through in order to obtain identity documents which don't threaten to out us to bigoted assholes who need to see them (such as many cops, bouncers/bartenders, persons at the DMV/Social Security Office/etc, potential employers, etc.). For fucks' sakes, until less than 6 months ago, we couldn't even openly serve in the armed forces. And you dare to say we aren't systematically oppressed? Maybe you should actually get educated about something before saying something so blatantly incorrect.

[Camicon]

*snip*

You absolutely fucking are assuming, the guy lived in the house. Why did he pick that moment to shoot her? Assuming that it was a hate crime full stop is a leap and it is not one I'm personally taking until more facts emerge.

I am done hearing that transgender people are almost always killed for their identity without some kind of substantiation. You're presenting information and making inferences that have nothing to do with the information.

Is it in any way possible that the idea that transgender people are constantly being murdered might be causing people to moderate their behavior out of fear? I'd say that's harm. Insisting a problem exists with no evidence and denying any evidence that it doesn't is dangerous business.

The man said "YOU ARE THE DEVIL" because she was transgender. He said "YOU ARE THE DEVIL" while he fucking murdered her. He wasn't thinking about the goddamn football game while he gunned this woman down. That it was a crime of passion does not mean it wasn't a hate crime.

You know, what you're saying is reminding me of another time a community was screaming at the top of their lungs that they were being brutalized and murdered because of who they were. Lots of people had the same response you have now: "you don't have the crime stats", or "the crime stats we do have disagree with you", or "law enforcement says everything is fine, let's trust them". And then the world saw Rodney King beaten to a pulp by the cops. And then we started looking more closely at the data. And then we saw deeply ingrained, systemic discrimination and bias that skewed the data. And then people started realizing that the data we had was incomplete and lacking critical context.

We can see the same kinds of systemic discrimination and bias against transgender people. Only 14 states provide training to their law enforcement to address hate crimes. Only 17 have hate crime legislation that even covers gender identity. 12 major cities don't collect data on hate crimes, 92 major cities failed to report any hate crimes, and 36 reported only one hate crime in 2014 (this, in a country where the laughably incomplete FBI statistics recorded nearly 5500 hate crimes in 2014). The system that is supposed to be in place to keep track of hate crime in the USA is a complete and utter failure, particularly when it comes to transgender individuals.

"So what?" you're probably asking. I would ask you to remember Rodney King. Back then, our data was wrong because it was incomplete; the system we used to track general crime stats was broken and biased. And we are facing that same problems with hate crime. Our data is wrong because it is incomplete; the system we use to track hate crimes is broken and biased. So, when we can't trust the data, let's trust the community who tell us that they are being brutalized and murdered. And while we work to address their concerns let's overhaul the way we track hate crimes so that we can trust the data. But, in the meantime, doing nothing is not an option. Telling people to calm down and look away is not an option.

We have a moral obligation to protect the most vulnerable people in our society, and there are few more vulnerable than the transgender community. Trying to shut down the conversation like you are is not just unhelpful, it's harmful. Telling people to meet the victimized community begging for our help with skepticism is harmful. Do you get that?

[Unified Heartless States]

Then I'll be the first to say that; trans folk just want attention (if their political about it), don't need equality (as they already have it), can indeed wait, and that identity politics is indeed the greatest evil ever as it's child abuse (when encouraged among children).

Bigoted people will always exist, attempting to use these few individual actions to imply some sort of systematic oppression is only as ignorant.

Ensurance that transgender youth can, if need be, get necessary medical care = child abuse....okay...

You do realize that the American College of Pediatricians is not a recognized professional body within the psychiatric community, and is a recognized hate group right? Please check your sources.

Try the American Psychological Association. They have the most reliable and credible research on the matter. They're actually pretty much as credible and well-respected as you can go. I can provide you with some good information if you're interested.

No, forcing a minor into a life of artificial hormones along with the various health problems that fallow is child abuse. Your attempt to strawman away from this issues by reframing it is rather amusing though

Well, in all honestly, I probably shouldn't have used that source. Not because of your criticism, as that's simply an ad hominem; no, I don't care if Hitler wrote that article as it's their argument that ought merit a response. Though, still, the source I normally use has a compiled version of the DSM5 which makes it easier to hit all my points. I sadly could not locate the link, so I made due with the closest thing I could find. Oh well. I'll just do it by hand:

Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%. Persistence of gender dysphoria is modestly correlated with dimensional measures of severity ascertained at the time of a childhood baseline assessment. In one sample of natal males, lower socioeconomic background was also modestly correlated with persistence. It is unclear if particular therapeutic approaches to gender dysphoria in children are related to rates of long-term persistence. Extant follow-up samples consisted of children receiving no formal therapeutic intervention or receiving therapeutic interventions of various types, ranging from active efforts to reduce gender dysphoria to a more neutral, "watchful waiting" approach. It is unclear if children "encouraged" or supported to live socially in the desired gender will show higher rates of persistence, since such children have not yet been followed longitudinally in a systematic manner. For both natal male and female children showing persistence, almost all are sexually attracted to individuals of their natal sex. For natal male children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the majority are androphilic (sexually attracted to males) and often self-identify as gay or homosexual (ranging from 63% to 100%). In natal female children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the percentage who are gynephilic (sexually attracted to females) and self-identify as lesbian is lower (ranging from 32% to 50%).

I've left the full paragraph for pointless context and ease of location. The underlined is what is of importance to us. I will grant you your best argument and, as such, grant you the highest persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they progress in age (30% for males & 50% for females). I will not argue the increased chance of various sexual diseases (such as aids) that trans folk tend to get in higher numbers (to the national average) as these are often related to individual choice, nor will I argue the various health problems that come with taking hormones (such as cancer) because I'm somewhat lazy at the moment, instead I'll just point out the ridiculousness of encouraging (or "treating") a child when 70% of males and 50% of females will no longer be faced with their gender dysphoria (as they grow-up). Anyway, feel free to criticize the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

A link would encourage me more, ideally their research data.

In overall summary, I take the same stance to treatment on gender dysphoria as I do circumcision, wait till they are a (young) adult. Gender Dysphoria is not like Gangrene, they'll survive 18 years. Although I can't approve the butchering of oneself, I approve less the butchering of children, if I must make a compromise then I'll make it for legal adults.

[Vassenor]

Ensurance that transgender youth can, if need be, get necessary medical care = child abuse....okay...

You do realize that the American College of Pediatricians is not a recognized professional body within the psychiatric community, and is a recognized hate group right? Please check your sources.

Try the American Psychological Association. They have the most reliable and credible research on the matter. They're actually pretty much as credible and well-respected as you can go. I can provide you with some good information if you're interested.

No, forcing a minor into a life of artificial hormones along with the various health problems that fallow is child abuse. Your attempting to strawman away from this issues by reframing it is rather amusing though

Well, in all honestly, I probably shouldn't have used that source. Not because of your criticism, as that's simply an ad hominem; no, I don't care if Hitler wrote that article as it's their argument that ought merit a response. Though, still, the source I normally use has a compiled version of the DSM5 which makes it easier to hit all my points. I sadly could not locate the link, so I made due with the closest thing I could find. Oh well. I'll just do it by hand:

Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%. Persistence of gender dysphoria is modestly correlated with dimensional measures of severity ascertained at the time of a childhood baseline assessment. In one sample of natal males, lower socioeconomic background was also modestly correlated with persistence. It is unclear if particular therapeutic approaches to gender dysphoria in children are related to rates of long-term persistence. Extant follow-up samples consisted of children receiving no formal therapeutic intervention or receiving therapeutic interventions of various types, ranging from active efforts to reduce gender dysphoria to a more neutral, "watchful waiting" approach. It is unclear if children "encouraged" or supported to live socially in the desired gender will show higher rates of persistence, since such children have not yet been followed longitudinally in a systematic manner. For both natal male and female children showing persistence, almost all are sexually attracted to individuals of their natal sex. For natal male children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the majority are androphilic (sexually attracted to males) and often self-identify as gay or homosexual (ranging from 63% to 100%). In natal female children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the percentage who are gynephilic (sexually attracted to females) and self-identify as lesbian is lower (ranging from 32% to 50%).

I've left the full paragraph for pointless context and ease of location. The underlined is what is of importance to us. I will grant you your best argument and, as such, grant you the highest persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they progress in age (30% for males & 50% for females). I will not argue the increased chance of various sexual diseases (such as aids) that trans folk tend to get in higher numbers (to the national average) as these are often related to individual choice, nor will I argue the various health problems that come with taking hormones (such as cancer) because I'm somewhat lazy at the moment, instead I'll just point out the ridiculousness of encouraging (or "treating") a child when 70% of males and 50% of females will no long be faced with their gender dysphoria (as they grow-up). Anyway, feel free to criticize the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

A link would encourage me more, ideally their research data.

In overall summary, I take the same stance to treatment on gender dysphoria as I do circumcision, wait till they are a (young) adult. Gender Dysphoria is not like Gangrene, they'll survive 18 years. Although I can't approve the butchering of oneself, I approve less the butchering of children, if I must make a compromise then I'll make it for legal adults.

Find a doctor who will prescribe anything other than blockers for an individual under the age of majority. Then we'll talk.

[Unified Heartless States]

20 20 20 20 20 20

1. Then I'll be the first to say that; trans folk just want attention (if their political about it), don't need equality (as they already have it), 2. can indeed wait, and 3. that identity politics is indeed the greatest evil ever as 4. it's child abuse (when encouraged among children).

5. Bigoted people will always exist, attempting to use these few individual actions to imply some sort of systematic oppression is only as ignorant.

1. We don't have equality. We have second-class citizenship. That is why we need to "be political about it".
2. Can "wait" for what?
3. "Identity politics" sounds like the biggest made-up rightwing buzzphrase since "political correctness" and "cultural marxism".
4. Nora has already addressed why your source is shit, so I won't.

5.1. Except, there is, in fact, systematic oppression. In many jurisdictions, we can't even fucking shit in safety.
5.2. Much less the countless (expensive) legal hoops we have to jump through in order to obtain identity documents which don't threaten to out us to bigoted assholes who need to see them (such as many cops, bouncers/bartenders, persons at the DMV/Social Security Office/etc, potential employers, etc.).
5.3. For fucks' sakes, until less than 6 months ago, we couldn't even openly serve in the armed forces.
5.4. And you dare to say we aren't systematically oppressed?
5.5. Maybe you should actually get educated about something before saying something so blatantly incorrect.

Which rights don't you have?
I have absolutely no clue in what context the OP was using that term in.
These terms just try to label the things people are witnessing, it is what it is I guess.
I have countered with a new source, only somewhat more creditable this time.

5.1. Which jurisdiction wont let you, "shit it safety"?
5.2. People who change their name to, for instance, Flash Gordan will also have to deal with similar issues (in regards to documentation).
5.3. Though you still could serve in the military.
5.4. I do dare state that you are not systematically oppressed.
5.5. Educate me.

[Vassenor]

5.1. Which jurisdiction wont let you, "shit it safety"?

You mean aside from states like North Carolina which passed laws requiring individuals to use the toilets corresponding to their birth gender regardless of presentation or transition?

[Unified Heartless States]

5.1. Which jurisdiction wont let you, "shit it safety"?

You mean aside from states like North Carolina which passed laws requiring individuals to use the toilets corresponding to their birth gender regardless of presentation or transition?

Oh ok, sure, how will that bill make it less safe for trans folk and/or less safe to "shit in safety".

[European Guilds]

Satan? How stupid. She was obviously Lilith.

[Llamalandia]

Therefore transpeople's fears are mostly internal and their fear shouldn't be focused on getting murdered just because.

If there's nothing for us to be afraid of, then I invite you to walk a mile in our shoes, and see for yourself, instead of speculating on things you have no experience with from within your bubble.

Doesn't this become of matter of passability at some point though? Like an obvious dude in a dress can if nothing else be called out as lazy. A dude who actually puts in the work and ...looks like a lady! Well presumably few if anyone would even detect them.
Not saying violence against trans becomes ok just because they don't pass, but it does seem like passing and efforts to pass would help trans people to fly under the transdar of violent people.

[Grenartia]

1. We don't have equality. We have second-class citizenship. That is why we need to "be political about it".
2. Can "wait" for what?
3. "Identity politics" sounds like the biggest made-up rightwing buzzphrase since "political correctness" and "cultural marxism".
4. Nora has already addressed why your source is shit, so I won't.

5.1. Except, there is, in fact, systematic oppression. In many jurisdictions, we can't even fucking shit in safety.
5.2. Much less the countless (expensive) legal hoops we have to jump through in order to obtain identity documents which don't threaten to out us to bigoted assholes who need to see them (such as many cops, bouncers/bartenders, persons at the DMV/Social Security Office/etc, potential employers, etc.).
5.3. For fucks' sakes, until less than 6 months ago, we couldn't even openly serve in the armed forces.
5.4. And you dare to say we aren't systematically oppressed?
5.5. Maybe you should actually get educated about something before saying something so blatantly incorrect.

Which rights don't you have?
1. I have absolutely no clue in what context the OP was using that term in.
2. These terms just try to label the things people are witnessing, it is what it is I guess.
3. I have countered with a new source, only somewhat more creditable this time.

5.1. Which jurisdiction wont let you, "shit it safety"?
5.2. People who change their name to, for instance, Flash Gordan will also have to deal with similar issues (in regards to documentation).
5.3. Though you still could serve in the military.
5.4. I do dare state that you are not systematically oppressed.
5.5. Educate me.

1. Then why did you counter the statement if you have no clue what it actually means?
2. And yet, they are undefined, and seem to vary depending on who is using the term. The only consistent usage seems to be to describe some boogeyman the user is trying to rant about.
3. And yet, your argument is still easily rebutted against. I'll do it right now.

Ensurance that transgender youth can, if need be, get necessary medical care = child abuse....okay...

You do realize that the American College of Pediatricians is not a recognized professional body within the psychiatric community, and is a recognized hate group right? Please check your sources. : )

Try the American Psychological Association. They have the most reliable and credible research on the matter. They're actually pretty much as credible and well-respected as you can go. I can provide you with some good information if you're interested. ; )

3.1: No, forcing a minor into a life of artificial hormones along with the various health problems that fallow is child abuse. 3.2: Your attempting to strawman away from this issues by reframing it is rather amusing though ; )

Well, in all honestly, I probably shouldn't have used that source. 3.3: Not because of your criticism, as that's simply an ad hominem; no, I don't care if Hitler wrote that article as it's their argument that ought merit a response. Though, still, the source I normally use has a compiled version of the DSM5 which makes it easier to hit all my points. I sadly could not locate the link, so I made due with the closest thing I could find. Oh well. I'll just do it by hand:

Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%. Persistence of gender dysphoria is modestly correlated with dimensional measures of severity ascertained at the time of a childhood baseline assessment. In one sample of natal males, lower socioeconomic background was also modestly correlated with persistence. It is unclear if particular therapeutic approaches to gender dysphoria in children are related to rates of long-term persistence. Extant follow-up samples consisted of children receiving no formal therapeutic intervention or receiving therapeutic interventions of various types, ranging from active efforts to reduce gender dysphoria to a more neutral, "watchful waiting" approach. It is unclear if children "encouraged" or supported to live socially in the desired gender will show higher rates of persistence, since such children have not yet been followed longitudinally in a systematic manner. For both natal male and female children showing persistence, almost all are sexually attracted to individuals of their natal sex. For natal male children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the majority are androphilic (sexually attracted to males) and often self-identify as gay or homosexual (ranging from 63% to 100%). In natal female children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the percentage who are gynephilic (sexually attracted to females) and self-identify as lesbian is lower (ranging from 32% to 50%).

3.4: I've left the full paragraph for pointless context and ease of location. The underlined is what is of importance to us. I will grant you your best argument and, as such, grant you the highest persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they progress in age (30% for males & 50% for females). 3.5: I will not argue the increased chance of various sexual diseases (such as aids) that trans folk tend to get in higher numbers (to the national average) as these are often related to individual choice, 3.6: nor will I argue the various health problems that come with taking hormones (such as cancer) because I'm somewhat lazy at the moment, 3.7: instead I'll just point out the ridiculousness of encouraging (or "treating") a child when 70% of males and 50% of females will no long be faced with their gender dysphoria (as they grow-up). Anyway, feel free to criticize the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

A link would encourage me more, ideally their research data.

4. In overall summary, I take the same stance to treatment on gender dysphoria as I do circumcision, wait till they are a (young) adult. Gender Dysphoria is not like Gangrene, they'll survive 18 years. Although I can't approve the butchering of oneself, I approve less the butchering of children, if I must make a compromise then I'll make it for legal adults.

3.1: As Vass already said, no reputable medical professional would prescribe anything but puberty blockers (which are easily reversible with no ill effects) to a minor, at least until around age 16 (which is pretty damned close to being an adult anyway, considering we let 16 year olds operate motor vehicles on a regular basis). Also, artificial =/= bad (unless you would like to argue the naturalistic fallacy isn't a fallacy). And the hormones themselves have minimally significant side effects (and, again, since they are only prescribed to people of an age who are already making daily life and death decisions, there is no ethical dilemma).

3.2: How, exactly, was anything she said a strawman?

3.3: Actually, its not an ad hominem. Its pointing out that your source cannot be trusted because it is not reputable, and heavily biased. Disputing the neutrality and credentials of your source =/= a personal attack.

3.4: So, if I'm getting this, you're saying that any treatment for childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria is child abuse because many or most children don't actually turn out to be transgender? I will not deny the factuality of the statistics. What I will deny, however, is that the treatment constitutes child abuse. It does not in any way, shape, or form, meet the criteria for child abuse definition.

What is child abuse? Child abuse is when a parent or caregiver, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm or risk of serious harm to a child. There are many forms of child maltreatment, including neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, exploitation and emotional abuse.

We've already established that you can't get HRT until you're at least old enough to legally operate a motor vehicle. And since puberty blockers have no significant negative side effects, there's no real risk of injury or harm from them. And before you ask about surgery, that NEVER happens before the age of 18, so talking about it in this instance is utterly irrelevant.

On the other hand, refusing to allow transition to a child with gender dysphoria is child abuse. HRT isn't as readily reversible as blockers, but only after an extended period of time to take them (some effects take up to 2 years to present themselves, and since we've already established that the patient is clearly capable of making life-altering decisions, there exists no ethical dilemma here). Other than that, every avenue of transition available to minors is purely social. So even in cases where the child does not actually have gender dysphoria, there is no logical reason to bar them from transitioning. On the other hand, it is well documented that the psychological wellbeing of people of any age with gender dysphoria is significantly negatively impacted by not being able to go through with transition. In extreme cases, this results in suicide. Statistics clearly show that transition is the only effective way to treat gender dysphoria (with 'conversion therapy' actually causing harm), and studies show that like with many illnesses, the earlier treatment is started, the better it works.

In light of these facts, it is clearly ethically mandated to allow minors to transition, even if most of them will not have gender dysphoria in adulthood, purely because those who do have it will have better outcomes, there is no negative outcome for those who transition without having gender dysphoria, and there is no way to tell which category an individual will be part of.

3.5: Then why even bring it up?

3.6: You neglect to mention that those risk factors are only raised to the level of the average for cisgender people who share the patient's gender (i.e., a transwoman's risk of breast cancer on HRT is about the same as a ciswoman's natural risk). An acceptable risk.

3.7: So, instead, we must sentence those who do have gender dysphoria to increased chance of suicide. Even though you did not say it, this is the logical consequence of barring transition to all minors. I don't know about you, but those are not acceptable losses, considering there is no harm being done by going the other route.

4. Not performing circumcision does not increase the risk of suicide. The same cannot be said of transition. Ergo, false comparison.

5.1: North Carolina, for instance. To say nothing of the numerous states where similar bathroom restrictions were narrowly avoided from being implemented.

5.2: Its not just name changes (but yes, name changes are another hoop to jump through, especially in the case of trans people, as in some jurisdictions, we are made to jump through hoops that those who wish to change their name for other reasons are not made to jump through). There's also the matter of gender markers on identity documents. Many jurisdictions require extensive (and expensive) requirements to be met before changing the marker on a driver's license, to say nothing of a birth certificates (which some jurisdictions require to be updated before other documents can be changed, and which certain jurisdictions refuse to allow to be amended). And to add further insult to injury, these oppressive laws often impede our ability to vote, since a lot of jurisdictions will keep you from voting if your gender presentation does not match the gender marker on your ID (or birth certificate, for those places that allow that to be presented instead of a photo ID). Also, due to a lack of federal-level laws preventing employment and housing discrimination against trans people, we are disproportionately unemployed and/or homeless, thus making it even harder to obtain the legal ability to vote in some jurisidictions (such as those that only require, say, a utility bill, in order to vote). There are also cases where individuals have been barred from taking their ID picture in their authentic gender expression if it does not match the gender marker on the ID itself (which creates the obvious problems of being asked to present your ID, only to have to show one where the picture clearly does not match the person presenting it).

5.3: Did you learn nothing from DADT?

5.4: Then I redirect you to 5.1 and 5.2.

5.5: I've given you a crash course already. If you would like to further discuss this, then you are more than welcome to ask questions in the Transgender Discussion Thread.

[Grenartia]

You mean aside from states like North Carolina which passed laws requiring individuals to use the toilets corresponding to their birth gender regardless of presentation or transition?

Oh ok, sure, how will that bill make it less safe for trans folk and/or less safe to "shit in safety".

There's also the risk of being arrested for using the one on the left, and of being raped or killed for using the one on the right.

[Des-Bal]

The man said "YOU ARE THE DEVIL" because she was transgender. He said "YOU ARE THE DEVIL" while he fucking murdered her. He wasn't thinking about the goddamn football game while he gunned this woman down. That it was a crime of passion does not mean it wasn't a hate crime.

You know, what you're saying is reminding me of another time a community was screaming at the top of their lungs that they were being brutalized and murdered because of who they were. Lots of people had the same response you have now: "you don't have the crime stats", or "the crime stats we do have disagree with you", or "law enforcement says everything is fine, let's trust them". And then the world saw Rodney King beaten to a pulp by the cops. And then we started looking more closely at the data. And then we saw deeply ingrained, systemic discrimination and bias that skewed the data. And then people started realizing that the data we had was incomplete and lacking critical context.

We can see the same kinds of systemic discrimination and bias against transgender people. Only 14 states provide training to their law enforcement to address hate crimes. Only 17 have hate crime legislation that even covers gender identity. 12 major cities don't collect data on hate crimes, 92 major cities failed to report any hate crimes, and 36 reported only one hate crime in 2014 (this, in a country where the laughably incomplete FBI statistics recorded nearly 5500 hate crimes in 2014). The system that is supposed to be in place to keep track of hate crime in the USA is a complete and utter failure, particularly when it comes to transgender individuals.

"So what?" you're probably asking. I would ask you to remember Rodney King. Back then, our data was wrong because it was incomplete; the system we used to track general crime stats was broken and biased. And we are facing that same problems with hate crime. Our data is wrong because it is incomplete; the system we use to track hate crimes is broken and biased. So, when we can't trust the data, let's trust the community who tell us that they are being brutalized and murdered. And while we work to address their concerns let's overhaul the way we track hate crimes so that we can trust the data. But, in the meantime, doing nothing is not an option. Telling people to calm down and look away is not an option.

We have a moral obligation to protect the most vulnerable people in our society, and there are few more vulnerable than the transgender community. Trying to shut down the conversation like you are is not just unhelpful, it's harmful. Telling people to meet the victimized community begging for our help with skepticism is harmful. Do you get that?

I'm sure this will come as a shock to you but many murderers are less than respectful in the midst of the murders they commit. If they had been in an argument about a drug deal and he shot her because of that in your mind would he have yelled "I respect your gender identity, this is motivated solely by financial concerns!"

I'm not trusting anybody about shit until they have something to show me. You don't get unquestioning support, you never get that and you have no right to ask for it. Stop yelling that numbers don't mean anything then parading the number 20 around. If you want to argue hate crimes against the transgendered are troublingly common then present a clear cut hate crime and data set and talk about that. If you want to talk about the way we collect hate crime data being flawed then present evidence of that and talk about that. What you don't get to fucking do is drag a body to the podium and demand free license to spread the kind of dishonest bullshit that is mocked in every other circumstance.

(Image)

There's also the risk of being arrested for using the one on the left, and of being raped or killed for using the one on the right.

Oh sad, the law doesn't effect that in any meaningful way, but sad.

[Unified Heartless States]

Which rights don't you have?
1. I have absolutely no clue in what context the OP was using that term in.
2. These terms just try to label the things people are witnessing, it is what it is I guess.
3. I have countered with a new source, only somewhat more creditable this time.

5.1. Which jurisdiction wont let you, "shit it safety"?
5.2. People who change their name to, for instance, Flash Gordan will also have to deal with similar issues (in regards to documentation).
5.3. Though you still could serve in the military.
5.4. I do dare state that you are not systematically oppressed.
5.5. Educate me.

1. Then why did you counter the statement if you have no clue what it actually means?
2. And yet, they are undefined, and seem to vary depending on who is using the term. The only consistent usage seems to be to describe some boogeyman the user is trying to rant about.
3. And yet, your argument is still easily rebutted against. I'll do it right now.

3.1: No, forcing a minor into a life of artificial hormones along with the various health problems that fallow is child abuse. 3.2: Your attempting to strawman away from this issues by reframing it is rather amusing though ; )

Well, in all honestly, I probably shouldn't have used that source. 3.3: Not because of your criticism, as that's simply an ad hominem; no, I don't care if Hitler wrote that article as it's their argument that ought merit a response. Though, still, the source I normally use has a compiled version of the DSM5 which makes it easier to hit all my points. I sadly could not locate the link, so I made due with the closest thing I could find. Oh well. I'll just do it by hand:3.4: I've left the full paragraph for pointless context and ease of location. The underlined is what is of importance to us. I will grant you your best argument and, as such, grant you the highest persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they progress in age (30% for males & 50% for females). 3.5: I will not argue the increased chance of various sexual diseases (such as aids) that trans folk tend to get in higher numbers (to the national average) as these are often related to individual choice, 3.6: nor will I argue the various health problems that come with taking hormones (such as cancer) because I'm somewhat lazy at the moment, 3.7: instead I'll just point out the ridiculousness of encouraging (or "treating") a child when 70% of males and 50% of females will no long be faced with their gender dysphoria (as they grow-up). Anyway, feel free to criticize the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

A link would encourage me more, ideally their research data.

4. In overall summary, I take the same stance to treatment on gender dysphoria as I do circumcision, wait till they are a (young) adult. Gender Dysphoria is not like Gangrene, they'll survive 18 years. Although I can't approve the butchering of oneself, I approve less the butchering of children, if I must make a compromise then I'll make it for legal adults.

3.1: As Vass already said, no reputable medical professional would prescribe anything but puberty blockers (which are easily reversible with no ill effects) to a minor, at least until around age 16 (which is pretty damned close to being an adult anyway, considering we let 16 year olds operate motor vehicles on a regular basis). Also, artificial =/= bad (unless you would like to argue the naturalistic fallacy isn't a fallacy). And the hormones themselves have minimally significant side effects (and, again, since they are only prescribed to people of an age who are already making daily life and death decisions, there is no ethical dilemma).

3.2: How, exactly, was anything she said a strawman?

3.3: Actually, its not an ad hominem. Its pointing out that your source cannot be trusted because it is not reputable, and heavily biased. Disputing the neutrality and credentials of your source =/= a personal attack.

3.4: So, if I'm getting this, you're saying that any treatment for childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria is child abuse because many or most children don't actually turn out to be transgender? I will not deny the factuality of the statistics. What I will deny, however, is that the treatment constitutes child abuse. It does not in any way, shape, or form, meet the criteria for child abuse definition.

What is child abuse? Child abuse is when a parent or caregiver, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm or risk of serious harm to a child. There are many forms of child maltreatment, including neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, exploitation and emotional abuse.

We've already established that you can't get HRT until you're at least old enough to legally operate a motor vehicle. And since puberty blockers have no significant negative side effects, there's no real risk of injury or harm from them. And before you ask about surgery, that NEVER happens before the age of 18, so talking about it in this instance is utterly irrelevant.

3.4.2. On the other hand, refusing to allow transition to a child with gender dysphoria is child abuse. HRT isn't as readily reversible as blockers, but only after an extended period of time to take them (some effects take up to 2 years to present themselves, and since we've already established that the patient is clearly capable of making life-altering decisions, there exists no ethical dilemma here). Other than that, every avenue of transition available to minors is purely social. So even in cases where the child does not actually have gender dysphoria, there is no logical reason to bar them from transitioning. On the other hand, it is well documented that the psychological wellbeing of people of any age with gender dysphoria is significantly negatively impacted by not being able to go through with transition. In extreme cases, this results in suicide. Statistics clearly show that transition is the only effective way to treat gender dysphoria (with 'conversion therapy' actually causing harm), and studies show that like with many illnesses, the earlier treatment is started, the better it works.

In light of these facts, it is clearly ethically mandated to allow minors to transition, even if most of them will not have gender dysphoria in adulthood, purely because those who do have it will have better outcomes, there is no negative outcome for those who transition without having gender dysphoria, and there is no way to tell which category an individual will be part of.

3.5: Then why even bring it up?

3.6: You neglect to mention that those risk factors are only raised to the level of the average for cisgender people who share the patient's gender (i.e., a transwoman's risk of breast cancer on HRT is about the same as a ciswoman's natural risk). An acceptable risk.

3.7: So, instead, we must sentence those who do have gender dysphoria to increased chance of suicide. Even though you did not say it, this is the logical consequence of barring transition to all minors. I don't know about you, but those are not acceptable losses, considering there is no harm being done by going the other route.

4. Not performing circumcision does not increase the risk of suicide. The same cannot be said of transition. Ergo, false comparison.

5.1: North Carolina, for instance. To say nothing of the numerous states where similar bathroom restrictions were narrowly avoided from being implemented.

5.2: Its not just name changes (but yes, name changes are another hoop to jump through, especially in the case of trans people, as in some jurisdictions, we are made to jump through hoops that those who wish to change their name for other reasons are not made to jump through). There's also the matter of gender markers on identity documents. Many jurisdictions require extensive (and expensive) requirements to be met before changing the marker on a driver's license, to say nothing of a birth certificates (which some jurisdictions require to be updated before other documents can be changed, and which certain jurisdictions refuse to allow to be amended). And to add further insult to injury, these oppressive laws often impede our ability to vote, since a lot of jurisdictions will keep you from voting if your gender presentation does not match the gender marker on your ID (or birth certificate, for those places that allow that to be presented instead of a photo ID). Also, due to a lack of federal-level laws preventing employment and housing discrimination against trans people, we are disproportionately unemployed and/or homeless, thus making it even harder to obtain the legal ability to vote in some jurisidictions (such as those that only require, say, a utility bill, in order to vote). There are also cases where individuals have been barred from taking their ID picture in their authentic gender expression if it does not match the gender marker on the ID itself (which creates the obvious problems of being asked to present your ID, only to have to show one where the picture clearly does not match the person presenting it).

5.3: Did you learn nothing from DADT?

5.4: Then I redirect you to 5.1 and 5.2.

5.5: I've given you a crash course already. If you would like to further discuss this, then you are more than welcome to ask questions in the Transgender Discussion Thread.

1. For the sport of debate, as even the devil needs an advocate.
2. Undefined yet varies in definition, lol. It has a definition, but too many people are trying to using it as an insult. Same thing happened with the term "cuck", it described a very specific instance though became a pretty meaningless term after people used it to insult liberals wholesale.
3.0. Well then, let us see:
3.1. This is a very shaky argument you have here, as "pretty damned close to being an adult" is by definition not an adult. As such, cross-sex hormones are being used on minors. Well, "minimally significant side effects", as in irreversible and leads to permanent infertility (for cross-sex hormones that is).
3.2. Might not actually be a strawman, as I take the time to think about it. Though, I still found it amusing. Reminds me of the, "think of the children" meme. Though, I guess, same could be applied to me.
3.3. You are right their, I used the wrong fallacy. Though, still, the source are correct today. Perhaps not yesterday, perhaps not tomorrow, but today is a different story as even fools will sometimes be right.

3.4.1 I'll be able to address the both of you now:

Find a doctor who will prescribe anything other than blockers for an individual under the age of majority. Then we'll talk.

See my reply to 3.1, as I and Grenartia have answered this. I'll also, likely, get an opportunity to discuss my issue with puberty blockers. So then: Restating your argument in an attempt to per-counter the fact that minors are indeed getting HTR is rather amusing. So here is my issue with puberty blockers. We have already established that (up to) 70% of males who face gender dysphoria (along with 50% of females) will not show persistence of that disorder in later life. So, we must now ask ourselves, what changes does a child face as they grow-up. The only thing I could think of is the development of primary and secondary sexual characteristics, i.e. puberty (though granted, growth of these characteristics also continues into later adulthood). Puberty blocks act to slow (or even stop) this development. So, this is my issue. Now, granted, the DSM5 points out that their has been little research done into this as overall their has been very little research done into what might correlate with an increased in persistence of gender dysphoria in children (as they age). As such, then the 100 pound gorilla riding the elephant in the room is puberty blocks. So if it is that puberty is lowering rates of persistence, of which I suspect (since fuck, not really sure what other major factor I can look to), then by giving children puberty blockers and encouraging their use is child abuse. Although the affects of puberty blockers are reversible, cross-sex hormone treatment is not; of which they will end up in as the likely candidate for limiting persistence of gender dysphoria is being chemically suppressed. Still, more research is needed to confirmed this (of which I welcome).

3.4.2. I'm having difficulty finding any sources that state their is a specific point where it is least irreversible, everything I'm finding just stresses it is irreversible (I'd appreciate your source). Still, I pretty much already touched on these issues in 3.4.1. & 3.7/4. Anyway, although it (gender inhibitors) clearly help individuals deal with their dysphoria; treating people for disorders they wouldn't have without the interference of these treatments is as far from moral as you can get. Also I did not bring up conversion therapy, so I won't be defending it (though I don't really see why ones sexuality is being brought up). I do understand the part of the DSM5 I sourced showed high rates associating trans folk with the want to have relations with individuals of the same natal/birth sex, though this is only coincidental as I did not want people to claim I posted the source without full context.

3.5. Prepping my ammunition for the next volley. I may end up needing it, so setting myself up to use it down the line might be a good idea. Though, I've yet the need.
3.6. And I will continue said neglect, as I'm pretty sure that is only a minor factor.
3.7/4. If a jewish teen demanded he be circumcised, otherwise he'd kill himself, then I'd still rather this individual be institutionalized until they are no longer a threat to themselves then allow them to butcher themselves (especially at that state). So I can compare them, as even pushing this to it's extreme, as I would be unchanged in my resolve.
5.1. Although I guess you could live in North Carolina, your posts wording leads me to think otherwise. I was under the impression you'd be informing me of your own personal struggles (in relation to said laws) as opposed to just pointed to various laws.
5.2. Ya, I'm pretty sure the United States federal government doesn't allow you to change the gender on you birth certificate. Any state government that asks you first to change your birth certificate, likely already knows you will not be able to do it or is simply ignorant of your actual ability to change that document. Well, that's a rather amusing law. Though, then again, things may have changed since the last time I looked into the changing of birth certificates. Still, if your ID states male and you can't change it to female. . . Then in all honestly, you'd only need to dress as a man when: Changing IDs, voting, & buying a home. Overall, minor inconveniences that could easily solve these issues.
5.3. I could have gone either way on said issue. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was not all that much of a political issue I cared for either way. If the ruling was reversed again and brought back, I doubt I'd notice.
5.4. But checking IDs is meant to prevent fraud. If I'm a bouncer and see a woman handing me the ID of a man, I'm going to think shes trying to pull one over on me. Is this really systematic oppression or simply happenstance? Seems like happenstance.
5.5. I don't know man, I've only recently started posting back their though, I'm not sure if I want my information from their. I try to stay way from moderator sanction forums, people get a bit too ban-happy. I'd rather get my information where my account is safe.

EDIT:

Oh ok, sure, how will that bill make it less safe for trans folk and/or less safe to "shit in safety".

There's also the risk of being arrested for using the one on the left, and of being raped or killed for using the one on the right.

Except that someone who is a male, who'd like to be treated as a female, can simply state they transitioned to a male but now have to use the female bathroom to stay within compliance of the law. Or, if they transitioned, simply not announce to everyone that they are a transsexual. As a man, I myself have used the female bathroom (by accident) and have yet to be attacked or arrested.

[Camicon]

*snip*

If you're not going to make even a passing attempt at reading my post, then just don't bother responding.

[Des-Bal]

If you're not going to make even a passing attempt at reading my post, then just don't bother responding.

See I feel like that's the problem, you're acting like people who aren't playing along aren't listening. You're making a plea not only that people ignore evidence but that they fabricate evidence of their own- that they respond to a dearth of information with the unquestioning support of whatever narrative you've created. You want better data collection? Great. You want acknowledgement the data we have isn't perfect? You have it. You want me to trust that there's a problem just because you say there is? Unequivocally no, you do not get to be held to a special, lower standard of proof? No, prove your shit or come back when you can. So fuck this shit that nearly every transgender homicide victim was killed because of their identity, fuck this shit that twenty is a big number in terms of the indeterminate percentage of "visible" transgender people, prove there's a problem just like any other person or group is expected to.

[Camicon]

If you're not going to make even a passing attempt at reading my post, then just don't bother responding.

See I feel like that's the problem, you're acting like people who aren't playing along aren't listening. You're making a plea not only that people ignore evidence but that they fabricate evidence of their own- that they respond to a dearth of information with the unquestioning support of whatever narrative you've created. You want better data collection? Great. You want acknowledgement the data we have isn't perfect? You have it. You want me to trust that there's a problem just because you say there is? Unequivocally no, you do not get to be held to a special, lower standard of proof? No, prove your shit or come back when you can. So fuck this shit that nearly every transgender homicide victim was killed because of their identity, fuck this shit that twenty is a big number in terms of the indeterminate percentage of "visible" transgender people, prove there's a problem just like any other person or group is expected to.

Again, that is not what I am saying. If you aren't going to read my post then don't bother responding.

[Arcipelago]

Oh ok, sure, how will that bill make it less safe for trans folk and/or less safe to "shit in safety".

There's also the risk of being arrested for using the one on the left, and of being raped or killed for using the one on the right.

Gee how do you survive a trip to the store? I mean honestly most people have used the other sexes bathroom before and have seen others do the same. Are you more likely to get in trouble or hurt, probably, but the risk shouldn't keep you up at night.

[Des-Bal]

]
Again, that is not what I am saying. If you aren't going to read my post then don't bother responding.

Since there's clearly a misunderstanding why don't you tell me exactly what I'm missing.