Transgender Discussion Thread III: Vote in our poll!

[Luminesa]

Aka child abuse

Find me a definition of child abuse which states that giving hormone blockers to an early teenage child with their consent is child abuse. I'll save you some time: you won't find one.

I’m pretty sure “9-years-old” isn’t “early-teenage-child”. 15, maybe.

[Khasinkonia]

Find me a definition of child abuse which states that giving hormone blockers to an early teenage child with their consent is child abuse. I'll save you some time: you won't find one.

I’m pretty sure “9-years-old” isn’t “early-teenage-child”. 15, maybe.

Well, I think NCR is more referring to what we might also call tweenagers, like right around the age they enter puberty. For cis girls(and, more pertinent to the topic of discussion, pretransition trans boys), puberty may well start around 9. It depends. The idea is to give trans kids time before entering puberty to ensure they go down the right puberty for them.

[Luminesa]

Uhhhhhh as far as I know “boy” means “male” and “girl” means “female”. If the doctor takes the baby out the womb and yells to the mom, “IT’S A BOY!” it’s because he knows that the genetic makeup of the baby means they are male.

No, it's not. Doctors don't perform karyotypes immediately after birth, they look at the genitalia of the baby, which do not necessarily have to be the same as what the genome of the baby would imply. The fact that doctors assume the gender of a child based on their genitalia is a huge issue, but it does not mean "boy/girl" and "male/female" are interchangeable.

Most people probably aren’t thinking about when they’re having a casual conversation.

And that's a problem.

In fact if you were to walk up to someone and say, “Um, no that’s not a ‘boy’ you’re referring to, it’s a ‘male’,” I’m pretty sure you’d either get a weird look or a slap.

Why would I do that? "Boy" is still a useful term, but my point is that "boy" and "male" are not synonyms. If you were to call a 60-year-old man a "boy", you would certainly be the one to get weird looks, while calling him "male" is perfectly normal, if clinical.

True, they don’t, but they can look it at and say, “So he has XY, he is a boy.” They would be saying he is a male child biologically. Of course we know where they look when the child is BORN, and then they say, “IT’S A BOY!” It’s...not “assuming the gender”. When the doctor checks-out the baby to put something on their medical records (which usually refer to the SEX if we want to split the terms up), they are recording if the child is male or female. They will put “male” or “female”, maybe sometimes “intersex” if something is up with the child’s genitalia, but they will probably refer to the child as a “boy” or “girl” to the parents.

The problem with policing people to say certain terms is it doesn’t work. If you told a doctor to refer to a heart attack as a “myocardial infarction” (the medical term) every time they talked to the patient, and got angry if they said, “So we gave you medicine to help the symptoms of your heart attack,” you’d be ignored. Most people use colloquial language, it’s not a bad thing unless you want to be incredibly pedantic and to aggravate people, particularly medical professionals, who do know what they are talking about.

Well now age is a part of it, and you would call him a “man”, the adult version of “boy”. Of course you wouldn’t call an elderly man “boy”, unless maybe you’re his peer or a close friend.

[Luminesa]

I’m pretty sure “9-years-old” isn’t “early-teenage-child”. 15, maybe.

Well, I think NCR is more referring to what we might also call tweenagers, like right around the age they enter puberty. For cis girls(and, more pertinent to the topic of discussion, pretransition trans boys), puberty may well start around 9. It depends. The idea is to give trans kids time before entering puberty to ensure they go down the right puberty for them.

It IS true that puberty for a lot of kids, transgender or not, has been starting earlier and earlier.

[Khasinkonia]

Well, I think NCR is more referring to what we might also call tweenagers, like right around the age they enter puberty. For cis girls(and, more pertinent to the topic of discussion, pretransition trans boys), puberty may well start around 9. It depends. The idea is to give trans kids time before entering puberty to ensure they go down the right puberty for them.

It IS true that puberty for a lot of kids, transgender or not, has been starting earlier and earlier.

Yeah, so I think it got lost in translation between y’all. The point here, I believe, is that blockers for trans kids are good, and that some of us reckon it’s a shame we didn’t know earlier so we could’ve circumvented the damages of the wrong puberty.

[Tarsonis]

Artificially suppressing puberty, for a child who cannot reasonably make a decision about their gender identity, is nothing short of unethical. It's not like simply hitting pause on development as people make the claim. It can lead to developmental issues later on life.

Further more, studies have repeatedly shown that gender dysphoria usually doesn't persist past adolescence. Essentially, once they actually hit puberty, most children's genders conform to their sex. Which means that more than likely said child with "grow out of it" during puberty. Suppressing puberty actively blocks this correction.


The notion suppressing puberty is good medicine is nothing short of ideological nonsense, that flies in the face of observable fact.

What are the studies that you speak of?

https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-con ... -rates.pdf
Study found that roughly 2/3rds of observed children desisted.

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/ ... TATION.pdf

Study found that 88% desisted.

And suppressing puberty for a child ain't unethical.

In and of itself no. Neither is killing. But, I'm not speaking of it without context, were talking specifically about suppressing Puberty for children diagnosed with GD.

For one: they are used when children begin puberty too young - if their bodies start to change before the age of 8, they are prescribed puberty blockers.

Good, but we're not talking about that now are we.

They are also a safe medication.
"Dr. Courtney Finlayson, a pediatric endocrinologist at Lurie Children’s Hospital, said, 'We have a lot of experience in pediatric endocrinology using pubertal blockers. And from all the evidence we have they are generally a very safe medication.'"

That's not as air tight as you think. Gender suppressants have been shone to be mostly safe in and of themselves, and when prescribed in cases of accelerated or early puberty, they effectively correct the development of the child.

But, that's not what they're being used for in the cases of GD. They're being used to unnaturally prolong adolescence as a part of a long term treatment plan. They problem there is the body doesn't stop developing just because puberty suppressants are introduced. It's not a veritable pause button so to speak. Children continue developing without the natural development that occurs during puberty.

Currently, the main concern is bone density and the likely hood of developing osteoperosis later in life, but the reality is we don't have much research into the effects of long term puberty suppressants, because that would be highly unethical in the normal sense. Using it to treat GD is a relatively new medical practice, and we won't know the long term effects until adequate research can be done.

Also:
"'That’s really what these pubertal blockers do,' Dr. Rob Garofalo told FRONTLINE. Garofalo is the director of the Lurie Children’s Hospital’s Gender and Sex Development Program. 'They allow these families the opportunity to hit a pause button, to prevent natal puberty … until we know that that’s either the right or the wrong direction for their particular child.'

That's a very unethical statement to make, mainly because it's all theory and little fact. As I said long term puberty suppressant is a very new form of treatment, and the long term effects are still unknown.

Doctors who use puberty blockers say they allow children who experience gender dysphoria — the feeling that they’re in the wrong body — the time and space to explore and settle on their gender identity."

Quotes are from: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/arti ... d-unknown/

Also from that article:

"However, the use of puberty blockers to treat transgender children is what’s considered an “off label” use of the medication — something that hasn’t been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. And doctors say their biggest concern is about how long children stay on the medication, because there isn’t enough research into the effects of stalling puberty at the age when children normally go through it."

"However, doctors caution that estrogen and testosterone, the hormones that are blocked by these medications, also play a role in a child’s neurological development and bone growth.

“We do know that there is some decrease in bone density during treatment with pubertal suppression,” Finlayson said, adding that initial studies have shown that starting estrogen and testosterone can help regain the bone density. What Finlayson said there isn’t enough research on is whether someone who was on puberty blockers will regain all their bone strength, or if they might be at risk for osteoporosis in the future.

Another area where doctors say there isn’t enough research is the impact that suppressing puberty has on brain development.

“The bottom line is we don’t really know how sex hormones impact any adolescent’s brain development,” Dr. Lisa Simons, a pediatrician at Lurie Children’s, told FRONTLINE. “We know that there’s a lot of brain development between childhood and adulthood, but it’s not clear what’s behind that.” What’s lacking, she said, are specific studies that look at the neurocognitive effects of puberty blockers."

What we have is physicians playing loose and fast with medication, using it in a manner that hasn't been vetted, and the long term effects are not known. While Off label usage isn't a particularly new practice (Viagra was a blood pressure medication after all), in this instance they are driving blind. They don't know the long term effects of it, and they cannot in any intellectually honest way, say that it is absolutely safe.

"Puberty blockers are commonly used for the transgender community. In this community, puberty blockers are used to provide transgender youth with time to further explore their identity, while halting the development of their predisposed sex characteristics caused by the onset of puberty.

This is of course ignoring that, as the above studies show, going through puberty effectually causes most GD diagnosed kids to desist.


...

Puberty blockers serve the transgender community by giving future trans men and trans women more time to solidify their gender identity, without developing secondary sex characteristics. If a child later decides not to transition to another gender, the effects of puberty blockers can be reversed by stopping the medication

Theoretically. While that is how it functions with children with early onset puberty, the long term effects on young adults is not researched or known.

. Another function of puberty blockers is that it gives the future transgender individual a smoother transition into their desired gender identity as an adult."
- Wikipedia

But at what cost? It prevents the onset of puberty which would cause most GD to desist, which means in favor of easier transition, you're effectively trapping most GD kids in a state they'll grow out of in natural course. As such I make no apologies for considering this use of puberty suppressants highly unethical, at this time. As such I see it as veritable child abuse.

[Vassenor]

What are the studies that you speak of?

https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-con ... -rates.pdf

We are concerned that the increased public awareness of transgender issues has led to parents worrying unnecessarily about normal childhood behaviours. Throughout the media, in cases of ‘trans kids,’ those parents who uncritically accept the trans ideology are the ones who are deemed ‘brave’ and ‘supportive,’ leading to huge pressure on parents to accept the diagnosis of transgender. When worried parents seek information online they inevitably come across sites that reinforce (and even glamourise) the notion of the transgender child. We wanted to create a site which balanced that view with some research and facts which challenge the prevailing acceptance of an ideology which is new, untested, and invariably based on personal belief systems.

We also want to provide information on legislation regarding the use of public toilets, bathrooms and changing rooms for parents who are concerned about the child protection and safeguarding issues this raises.

Oh, this site totally isn't biased at all. Nosiree.

In rebuttal:

When “desisters” aren’t: De-desistance in childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria

In light of these numerous factors known to be linked to persistence or desistance, it is not accurate to conceptualize “gender-dysphoric children” as a homogeneous group where any given member has a roughly 80% likelihood of desisting in their dysphoria. Instead, an individual member of this combined group should instead be understood as either falling into one group that is very unlikely to persist, or falling into another group that is very likely to persist.

[Tarsonis]

https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-con ... -rates.pdf

We are concerned that the increased public awareness of transgender issues has led to parents worrying unnecessarily about normal childhood behaviours. Throughout the media, in cases of ‘trans kids,’ those parents who uncritically accept the trans ideology are the ones who are deemed ‘brave’ and ‘supportive,’ leading to huge pressure on parents to accept the diagnosis of transgender. When worried parents seek information online they inevitably come across sites that reinforce (and even glamourise) the notion of the transgender child. We wanted to create a site which balanced that view with some research and facts which challenge the prevailing acceptance of an ideology which is new, untested, and invariably based on personal belief systems.

We also want to provide information on legislation regarding the use of public toilets, bathrooms and changing rooms for parents who are concerned about the child protection and safeguarding issues this raises.

Oh, this site totally isn't biased at all. Nosiree.

Ah the ad hominem fallacy, never gets old. Or is it bulverism... either way really.
The site probably is. But, I didn't actually link to their material. I linked to a study that was done independent of them. They however present the study for free, where as in other places it's behind a paywall.

[Arcturus Novus]

Guess who's out to her family?

Related: guess who's being made to see a therapist because she's apparently mentally ill?

Sounds like they did not take it as well as one might have hoped.

Yeah, not quite lmao.

A real therapist who will support and help you or one who will try to "convert" you to being cishet? There's a strong difference.

I don't think they'll send me to a conversion therapy center, my mom would never allow that. My dad, he just...

He sees this as a phase. Something that's arisen in the past few months, something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

[Tarsonis]

https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-con ... -rates.pdf

We are concerned that the increased public awareness of transgender issues has led to parents worrying unnecessarily about normal childhood behaviours. Throughout the media, in cases of ‘trans kids,’ those parents who uncritically accept the trans ideology are the ones who are deemed ‘brave’ and ‘supportive,’ leading to huge pressure on parents to accept the diagnosis of transgender. When worried parents seek information online they inevitably come across sites that reinforce (and even glamourise) the notion of the transgender child. We wanted to create a site which balanced that view with some research and facts which challenge the prevailing acceptance of an ideology which is new, untested, and invariably based on personal belief systems.

We also want to provide information on legislation regarding the use of public toilets, bathrooms and changing rooms for parents who are concerned about the child protection and safeguarding issues this raises.

Oh, this site totally isn't biased at all. Nosiree.

In rebuttal:

When “desisters” aren’t: De-desistance in childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria

In light of these numerous factors known to be linked to persistence or desistance, it is not accurate to conceptualize “gender-dysphoric children” as a homogeneous group where any given member has a roughly 80% likelihood of desisting in their dysphoria. Instead, an individual member of this combined group should instead be understood as either falling into one group that is very unlikely to persist, or falling into another group that is very likely to persist.

Responding to perceived bias with overt bias. Well that's a bold move.


Any way this issue was actually addressed in Singh's dissertation:

"Of the 139 participants, 88 (63.3%) met diagnostic criteria for GID in childhood and
the remaining 51 (36.7%) were subthreshold for the diagnosis. "

"The two childhood diagnostic subgroups did not show significant differences in their developmental trajectories, at least in regard to persistence of gender dysphoria. In this study, the categorical diagnosis of GID itself was, therefore, not a good prognosticator of persistence/desistence of GID over time. "


So rebuttal rebutted.

[Vassenor]

Oh, this site totally isn't biased at all. Nosiree.

In rebuttal:

When “desisters” aren’t: De-desistance in childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria

Responding to perceived bias with overt bias. Well that's a bold move.


Any way this issue was actually addressed in Singh's dissertation:

"Of the 139 participants, 88 (63.3%) met diagnostic criteria for GID in childhood and
the remaining 51 (36.7%) were subthreshold for the diagnosis. "

"The two childhood diagnostic subgroups did not show significant differences in their developmental trajectories, at least in regard to persistence of gender dysphoria. In this study, the categorical diagnosis of GID itself was, therefore, not a good prognosticator of persistence/desistence of GID over time. "


So rebuttal rebutted.

In what way? Just pulling a random statistic out of the study and posting it devoid of context doesn't really do anything. And what is the bias in the source I linked?

[Novus America]

Sounds like they did not take it as well as one might have hoped.

Yeah, not quite lmao.

A real therapist who will support and help you or one who will try to "convert" you to being cishet? There's a strong difference.

I don't think they'll send me to a conversion therapy center, my mom would never allow that. My dad, he just...

He sees this as a phase. Something that's arisen in the past few months, something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

That last part is a very valid concern, given that transgendered individuals who do not have assistance are in fact disproportionately far more likely to commit suicide or other forms of self harm.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/

We need to move past the assumption that seeing a therapist makes one crazy if we are to improve mental health. So long as this is a reputable, properly licensed therapist it should be beneficial. Also receiving therapy is generally a prerequisite to receiving chemical and/or surgical treatment.

Of course this assumes the therapist is a proper therapist trained and experienced in dealing with these issues.

Have they chosen the therapist already? If so you probably should research the therapist to make sure they are legitimate. And if they have not chosen one maybe research and pick one.

Then present it to them as someone who can help you and help protect you and all. If you say something like “I really think seeing Dr. X will make me less likely to suffer serious harm and possibly death” you can probably at the very least guilt them into accepting your choice.

[Mercuriuseudoro]

something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrary distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex - so that they can conform with those arbitrarily roles."

This never made sense to me.

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that? What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc? Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

You're beautiful just the way you are.

[Vassenor]

something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrarily distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex."

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that?

What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc?

Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

[Philjia]

something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrary distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex - so that they can conform with those arbitrarily roles."

This never made sense to me.

Probably because you've got the wrong end of the stick.

[Tarsonis]

Responding to perceived bias with overt bias. Well that's a bold move.


Any way this issue was actually addressed in Singh's dissertation:

"Of the 139 participants, 88 (63.3%) met diagnostic criteria for GID in childhood and
the remaining 51 (36.7%) were subthreshold for the diagnosis. "

"The two childhood diagnostic subgroups did not show significant differences in their developmental trajectories, at least in regard to persistence of gender dysphoria. In this study, the categorical diagnosis of GID itself was, therefore, not a good prognosticator of persistence/desistence of GID over time. "


So rebuttal rebutted.

In what way? Just pulling a random statistic out of the study and posting it devoid of context doesn't really do anything.

I gave you the context, the "Singh dissertation" it was the second study I cited that showed of observed children 88% desisted after adolescence.

She addressed that her subjects were in two groups, above and below threshold for diagnoses for GD. There was no significant statistical differentiation in either group. Which means that in her survey, the children of both groups desisted at the same rate. Which means your rebuttal there isn't really a rebuttal. They're trying to say "not true GID", while the survey says A. yes they are true GID, and two, it actually doesn't matter if they are or not, they desist at the same rate.

And what is the bias in the source I linked?

It's a transgender activist website.

"Zinnia Jones is a marketer, researcher, writer, and activist, and is the creator of Gender Analysis. Her work focuses on insights across transgender sociology, public health, transfeminism, and analytic philosophy. "

"Gender Analysis is a web series launched in 2014 exploring transgender science and life experiences in depth, and revealing the many insights to be found at their intersection. We take a closer look at fields such as sociology, public health, psychiatry, cognitive science, and more, weaving these diverse perspectives into a deeper understanding of gender-related phenomena. Gender Analysis goes beyond the 101s to educate both trans and cis viewers on some of the most fascinating dimensions of our lives – and the pressing issues we face in society."


You cited a blog.

[Tarsonis]

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrarily distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex."

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that?

What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc?

Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

I feel thats true for just about anything.

[Mercuriuseudoro]

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

Or maybe people who want to cut their genitals also want to cut their wrists because it's part of the same general discontent?

You aren't going to have less sterilized people / dead people because you moralize about how people should be nice to people who want to sterilize themselves and eventually kill themselves because of the depression of having no family or romantic future.

Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of normal people to win the battle against their own instinctive reaction to people who sterilize themselves and kill themselves, you should spend your energy asking why people even want to do this.

Since it's a new thing with no historical precedent, but which is suddenly popular, it's reasonable to conclude that it is the product of a new culture or a new chemical environment, but that it is not really innate to the human condition. People certainly weren't doing this, or thinking about doing it on any scale fifty years ago.

[Novus America]

something that I'm doing just to find a sense of belonging in the world. Something that needs to be taken care of before I end up hurting myself, I guess.

Well, where's the lie?

"Gender roles are socially arbitrary distinctions, that's why we need to sterilize children with hormones and make them appear to be the opposite sex - so that they can conform with those arbitrarily roles."

This never made sense to me.

What was the suicide rate for transgenders? 44%, or something like that? What about their lifespans, and rates of depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, AIDS, other STDs, etc? Wanting to cut off your hand because you identify as disabled, for example, is classified as a psychiatric disroder - "body dysmorphia" or something like that. Still, compared to transgenderism, people who go down the "this is not my hand" path have a better prognosis in terms of mental health, social integration and life expectancy.

You should google around for some graphic images of dilation if you really want to know what you are edging on, and ask yourself if maybe you would like to have children one day and not go extinct. It's the best thing in the world.

If you just adjust to your reality, instead of trying to adjust your reality to this new trend, you will be statistically much less likely to kill yourself.

You're beautiful just the way you are.

Considering we are not licensed, experienced therapists with an appropriate medical provider/patient privilege with the individual in question we probably should not make a recommendation as to what they should do about the issue, beyond seeking out an appropriate professional to consult.

[Khasinkonia]

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

I feel thats true for just about anything.

Yes, and this general trend does a rather good job of explaining our community’s suicide rate, funnily enough.

[Vassenor]

Statistically you are less likely to kill yourself if the people closest to you aren't twats to you about it.

Or maybe people who want to cut their genitals also want to cut their wrists because it's part of the same general discontent?

You aren't going to have less sterilized people / dead people because you moralize about how people should be nice to people who want to sterilize themselves and eventually kill themselves because of the depression of having no family or romantic future.

Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of normal people to win the battle against their own instinctive reaction to people who sterilize themselves and kill themselves, you should spend your energy asking why people even want to do this.

Since it's a new thing with no historical precedent, but which is suddenly popular, it's reasonable to conclude that it is the product of a new culture or a new chemical environment, but that it is not really innate to the human condition. People certainly weren't doing this, or thinking about doing it on any scale fifty years ago.

Bullshit. First reference to the term "transgender" in academia? 1965. First use of "transsexual"? 1949.

Just for giggles, google Joseph Lobdell. Transman born in 1829. Or Billy Tipton, born in 1914 and transitioned so completely that almost no-one realised until his postmortem. First recipient of a vaginoplasty surgery? Dora Richter. 1931.

[Mercuriuseudoro]

Probably because you've got the wrong end of the stick.

I'm okay with my stick, I'm on the right end of it, and I'm not planning on breaking it any time soon.

If I was in the other position, I would get along with that, too - but technology is just not at the point where that is something we can choose about ourselves.

My body is just a vehicle for my consciousness to operate on this earth, and it does not really cause me grief to adjust to the gender role that accompanies my biological sex. I would be comfortable either way, as long as I could reproduce, and doing that is pretty important to me since the other alternative is extinction.

The subject of this thread is a dangerous ideology which targets children, preys upon their insecurities and encourages them to go down a road where they end up alone and unattractive. It's really very cruel to be encouraging young people to commit suicide, especially when we used to just not do this, and it didn't cause us any problems.

[Mercuriuseudoro]

Bullshit.

Read: On any scale.

You bolded this part yourself.

[Ifreann]

Or maybe people who want to cut their genitals also want to cut their wrists because it's part of the same general discontent?

You aren't going to have less sterilized people / dead people because you moralize about how people should be nice to people who want to sterilize themselves and eventually kill themselves because of the depression of having no family or romantic future.

Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of normal people to win the battle against their own instinctive reaction to people who sterilize themselves and kill themselves, you should spend your energy asking why people even want to do this.

Since it's a new thing with no historical precedent, but which is suddenly popular, it's reasonable to conclude that it is the product of a new culture or a new chemical environment, but that it is not really innate to the human condition. People certainly weren't doing this, or thinking about doing it on any scale fifty years ago.

Bullshit. First reference to the term "transgender" in academia? 1965. First use of "transsexual"? 1949.

Just for giggles, google Joseph Lobdell. Transman born in 1829. Or Billy Tipton, born in 1914 and transitioned so completely that almost no-one realised until his postmortem. First recipient of a vaginoplasty surgery? Dora Richter. 1931.

But but modern degeneracy

[Vassenor]

Bullshit.

Read: On any scale.

You bolded this part yourself.

You said this wasn't happening fifty years ago. I provided actual examples of it happening far further ago than that. So maybe you should define what "on any scale" means here, and how that isn't an arbitrary definition.