Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

The transgender insanity movement

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

1. To say someone deserves special protection is to say someone else deserves less.  I don't agree with that.  

2. Should someone be charged for doing it deliberately? Actually charged, for being a bit of an arse?

1. Right.  Someone deserves less because no one is targeting them.  Nobody is targeting the Scottish, so we don't make statements like "Leave the Scottish alone !".  The Jews, on the other hand, are being hunted again.

2. No.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

To say someone deserves special protection is to say someone else deserves less.

If a group is 'at special risk' they should get the 'same protection' as those not at special risk.  Got it.  

So, let's apply this logic elsewhere:  Children under a certain size are at special risk of being injured in a car accident.  But the government should not mention, notice or address that in any way, because to say a child under a certain size needs special protection is to say that a child over a certain size deserves less protection.

Poorer neighborhoods tend to have more domestic violence/crime than wealthier neighborhoods.  But police should not pay 'special attention' to poorer neighborhoods, because to do so is to say that wealthier neighborhoods deserve less attention.

Women and children are at greater risk of sexual assault than men.  No additional resources should be provided to women or children to prevent or address sexual assault, because that means that 'men deserve less'.

Is this really what you mean?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If a group is 'at special risk' they should get the 'same protection' as those not at special risk.  Got it.  

So, let's apply this logic elsewhere:  Children under a certain size are at special risk of being injured in a car accident.  But the government should not mention, notice or address that in any way, because to say a child under a certain size needs special protection is to say that a child over a certain size deserves less protection.

Poorer neighborhoods tend to have more domestic violence/crime than wealthier neighborhoods.  But police should not pay 'special attention' to poorer neighborhoods, because to do so is to say that wealthier neighborhoods deserve less attention.

Women and children are at greater risk of sexual assault than men.  No additional resources should be provided to women or children to prevent or address sexual assault, because that means that 'men deserve less'.

Is this really what you mean?   

This doesn’t make any sense at all, and I doubt that’s what he means.  You sound like that British lady interviewing Jordan Peterson that went viral.  So what you’re saying is .... insert straw man.  So what you’re saying is ... insert straw man.  So what you’re saying is... insert straw man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yeah, we addressed this above.  Try to keep up.  There's already a dialogue going on about these things, please join it.

Also - be aware that misgendering people is a hallmark of those who reject transgender rights completely, and likely a barrier to being included in a full public discussion.

Gender isn’t a choice.  Either is race, or height or eye colour etc.  Genetics, ie science dictate these things.  To ignore this is to ignore science.  Why do you deny science?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Truth Detector said:

Gender isn’t a choice.  

 Trans folks would agree with you that they didn't choose to feel how they are.

Edited by Michael Hardner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Right.  Someone deserves less because no one is targeting them.  Nobody is targeting the Scottish, so we don't make statements like "Leave the Scottish alone !".  The Jews, on the other hand, are being hunted again.

2. No.  

Should a Jew get more protection than a Jock under the law?  Should someone who hits a Jew be punished more than someone who hits a Jock?  I would say no.

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dialamah said:

If a group is 'at special risk' they should get the 'same protection' as those not at special risk.  Got it.  

So, let's apply this logic elsewhere:  Children under a certain size are at special risk of being injured in a car accident.  But the government should not mention, notice or address that in any way, because to say a child under a certain size needs special protection is to say that a child over a certain size deserves less protection.

Poorer neighborhoods tend to have more domestic violence/crime than wealthier neighborhoods.  But police should not pay 'special attention' to poorer neighborhoods, because to do so is to say that wealthier neighborhoods deserve less attention.

Women and children are at greater risk of sexual assault than men.  No additional resources should be provided to women or children to prevent or address sexual assault, because that means that 'men deserve less'.

Is this really what you mean?   

If you don't read my posts, I don't blame you.  After all, I don't always read others.  I said that people should get equal protection under the law.  I allowed how things like the welfare system would treat people differently.  Certainly car seat laws would fall under something like that.  I agreed with Mike that some people should be focused on rather more closely than others by the authorities based on race/religion/gender etc,  if there was a reasonable reason to do so.  So if a woman is assaulted and raped, I say, focus more on the men.  I don't have a problem with any of that.

If someone hits a Jew because they don't like Jews, and on the way to court, they hit me because I didn't give way to them at a four way stop, I want them punished equally. After all, if you prick me, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Should a Jew get more protection than a Jock under the law?  Should someone who hits a Jew be punished more than someone who hits a Jock?  I would say no.

Under the law ?  Protecting groups is a tactical response to a threat.  The law should be open to protecting whatever groups it needs to.  And, yes, hate crimes are a thing.  People bombing synagogues and LGBT clubs isn't just a murder.  There's ideology involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Under the law ?  Protecting groups is a tactical response to a threat.  The law should be open to protecting whatever groups it needs to.  And, yes, hate crimes are a thing.  People bombing synagogues and LGBT clubs isn't just a murder.  There's ideology involved.

Now we're getting somewhere.  I don't care. 

It works both ways.  If someone murders a person for their cash, I want the same response from the justice system as if they were murdered because they drew Muhammad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It works both ways.  If someone murders a person for their cash, I want the same response from the justice system as if they were murdered because they drew Muhammad. 

You don't get a response from the justice "system" you get a police response.  Why don't you just say what you are getting at ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

You don't get a response from the justice "system" you get a police response.  Why don't you just say what you are getting at ?

Jail time.  That would be the justice system, wouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 1:28 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

It is none of society's business what you wear or what gender you are.

Agreed. But it is society's business if you have boy parts and want to dress and undress in the ladies room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2018 at 10:32 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Here you go, let's start the discussion:

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/comeoutforLGBT/lgbt-in-britain/hate-crime

That's a pretty high number.  What groups deserve more attention, do you think ?  I would say Muslims and Jews do also but a lot of people can't even get their minds around a government statement about Islamophobia, let alone doing something to protect members of our community.

This is the UK. Even a minor insult based on being a member of an identity group constitutes a hate crime. If you look at the report, 87% of these hate crimes are simple insults. And I'm not surprised a man with masculine features and body wearing a dress is going to get insulted, especially in a country where public drunkenness is so common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes.  People caught for crimes face jail time.

Well that's what I meant.  I suppose I would expect equal treatment from the police as well, but I thought that was part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 Trans folks would agree with you that they didn't choose to feel how they are.

Maybe they did. Maybe a lot of them are simply responding to the popular cause du jour and adopting this new persona for attention.

The first places affected by the new concept of gender identity were clinics. Vaguer diagnostic criteria, and a move to “de-medicalize” trans identities, together with wider awareness, have meant a big expansion in patient numbers. The mix of patients has changed, too. Clinics used to see few children, almost all of them pre-pubescent boys; now teenage girls are turning up in droves. The number of girls seen by GIDS, Britain’s national gender-ID service for children, has risen from 40 in 2009-10 to 1,806 in 2017-18.

...

One consequence is a huge increase in the number of people who say they do not identify with their natal sex. In Britain, for example, since the GRA came into force, just 5,000 people have used its provisions. Now the government reckons that approximately 1% of the population is transgender—around 650,000 people.

https://quillette.com/2018/12/04/the-new-patriarchy-how-trans-radicalism-hurts-women-children-and-trans-people-themselves/

Last week in Psychology Today, I reported on Dr. Lisa Littman’s peer-reviewed study of Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD), which had caused an uproar among activists for suggesting that in some cases, coming out as trans could be a maladaptive coping strategy for confused adolescents and young adults with other underlying issues. Dr. Littman is an Assistant Professor of the Practice at Brown University School of Public Health and is trained as a public health physician. She extensively surveyed 250 parents whose children (predominantly girls with no prior history of gender dysphoria) had suddenly expressed a desire to come out. Of particular interest (given my areas of expertise) was one of the hypotheses raised by Dr. Littman: the potential role of peer imitation and social media exposure in inspiring youth to express their confusion through the idiom of transgenderism.

https://quillette.com/2018/12/09/a-surfeit-of-empathy-and-an-absence-of-compassion/

 

 

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to the above, and as a demonstration of the fury which is used to attack those who do not support the narative of transgender choice in all things.

On the day of its publication, pressure from activists prompted Brown University to remove a press release about the study, despite support for Dr. Littman from the academic community, including the former Dean of Harvard Medical school. Since that date, any mention of ROGD or calls for further study on the matter have been systematically attacked by activists.

Within one hour of airing my post, Psychology Today editors had already received complaints from activist groups. Soon thereafter, a wave of posts, tweets, and petitions seeking to defame my article and my character were spreading on the internet. My attempt to call for compassion for all sides of this debate in a further Psychology Today piece earned widespread support from parents and clinicians, but only made matters worse with activists. As my inbox was flooding with hate mail, blog posts that grossly misquoted my work were now painting me as a transphobe and misogynist. One commenter in Psychology Today suggested I should “go to prison” for “harming so many children,” while countless others accused Dr. Littman and me of promoting ideologically-driven pseudoscience. Yet, the sources cited by activists to discredit studies of ROGD invariably take one back to a self-referential loop of other blog posts and opinion pieces by activists. It is a strange world indeed when unscientific ideologues accuse scientists of being pseudoscientific ideologues.

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Canada, a psychiatrist has to sign off before SRS. The most dangerous point for someone (Typically in the teen years) is a lack of support. That is when they are most vunerable to suicide. 

Anyone who thinks gender dysphoria a fad should consider the consequences the individual faces. Often they experience family ostracism, social ostracism, and violence. 

The Menard Clinic requires a candidate for SRS to be approved by the Clarke institute and then they are resident in the Menard Clinic for a month before surgery, during which, they receive counselling. It is not a case of popping into your local mediclinic and getting a sex change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Argus said:

This is the UK. Even a minor insult based on being a member of an identity group constitutes a hate crime. .

http://transpulseproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Trans-PULSE-Statistics-Relevant-for-Human-Rights-Policy-June-2015.pdf

Quote

Violence

Trans people are the targets of specifically directed violence; 20% had been physically or sexually assaulted for being trans, and another 34% had been verbally threatened or harassed but not assaulted. 15 Many did not report these assaults to the police; in fact, 24% reported having been harassed by police.16 T

I don't think anyone can seriously doubt that life as a trans person involves being subjected to abuse.  People who decry special consideration often receive preferential treatment themselves.  As I have said, the mainstream seems to be fine with groups being singled out for profiling if it helps their security but gathers their political forces if the government merely makes a STATEMENT about protecting targeted groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

http://transpulseproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Trans-PULSE-Statistics-Relevant-for-Human-Rights-Policy-June-2015.pdf

I don't think anyone can seriously doubt that life as a trans person involves being subjected to abuse.  People who decry special consideration often receive preferential treatment themselves.  As I have said, the mainstream seems to be fine with groups being singled out for profiling if it helps their security but gathers their political forces if the government merely makes a STATEMENT about protecting targeted groups.

I really think we're talking about different things.  I think we're all agreed that it's okay for the authorities to single out and profile individual groups if it makes sense.  This would apply to those who would target Trans people as much as it would apply to those who would target anyone else.  Once an act has transpired, and someone has to be punished, I want the person who assaulted me to be punished just as much as the person who assaulted the Trans person.  I don't think that's too much to ask.  I should make it clear, that given an existing difference,  I don't advocate making up any difference by punishing the Trans assaulter less.  Not at all.  I would do it by punishing the bcsapper assaulter more.  Win-Win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 7:43 PM, Truth Detector said:

Apparently this is what equality looks like.

E589A363-2E67-4990-B086-16E6D7E61CAA.jpeg

I just can't get my head around how it's okay to allow a biological male who far outweighs/out muscles the female competition fair, or a level playing field; at least in boxing they would be in their own weight class.   If you are born male,  you much more likely to be bigger, stronger with higher bone density, still male bodies and more strength even if taking testosterone blockers.  Male runners are usually faster than women 

Even  if you testosterone levels are correct there is a definite advantage to biological males as in weight lifting, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/apr/09/transgender-weightlifter-laurel-hubbards-eligibility-under-scrutiny  and in cycling biological males are dominating women's competitions.  https://www.telegraph.co.uk/weightlifting/2018/04/09/transgender-weightlifter-strain-laurel-hubbards-exit-may-blessing/    and Andraya Yearwood still has a bit of a moustache... https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgender-teens-outrun-track-field-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294       I'm not convinced that these athletes do not have an unfair advantage, testosterone or no.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

1. I think we're all agreed that it's okay for the authorities to single out and profile individual groups if it makes sense.  This would apply to those who would target Trans people as much as it would apply to those who would target anyone else. 

2. Once an act has transpired, and someone has to be punished, I want the person who assaulted me to be punished just as much as the person who assaulted the Trans person.  I don't think that's too much to ask.  

1. Well, I am, but we are not "all agreed".  There are plenty of protests on this.

2. Ok.  That doesn't say anything about what I was challenging from you - ie. govt. statements. But ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, scribblet said:

I just can't get my head around how it's okay to allow a biological male who far outweighs/out muscles the female competition fair, or a level playing field; at least in boxing they would be in their own weight class.    

Understood.  There's a dialogue happening around this now also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

http://transpulseproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Trans-PULSE-Statistics-Relevant-for-Human-Rights-Policy-June-2015.pdf

I don't think anyone can seriously doubt that life as a trans person involves being subjected to abuse.  People who decry special consideration often receive preferential treatment themselves.  As I have said, the mainstream seems to be fine with groups being singled out for profiling if it helps their security but gathers their political forces if the government merely makes a STATEMENT about protecting targeted groups.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue except that there's certainly no logic behind it.

If I punch you because you're bald and I don't like bald guys or because I'm drunk and showing off, or because I think you're a weirdo in a dress, I've still done the same thing - I've punched you, and I should get the same punishment. If the punishment is suitable for this crime then it is suitable in all cases. Comparing it to police focusing policing resources on communities which tend to commit a lot more crime is not logical. The actual comparison would be if we decided to punish, say, Black offenders more severely in order to discourage them more.

And before some liberal says we do that anyway; we don't. But we do have a 'justice' system which tends to give harsher penalties to repeat offenders, to people abusing drugs, and to people who have no jobs and no family and less hope of rehabilitation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Argus said:

1. If I punch you because you're bald and I don't like bald guys or because I'm drunk and showing off, or because I think you're a weirdo in a dress, I've still done the same thing -

2. I've punched you, and I should get the same punishment.

1. If bald people start getting targeted for assault then maybe we could do something about that, yes.

2. I don't think I have said anything about punishment.

The one thing I pointed out, that people haven't said much about and keep drifting from is that targeted groups deserve attention and protection as a group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...