No, the puberty that is right for a person is the puberty of the gender identity they have. Sometimes synthetic hormones and surgery really are better than what the body naturally does. Nature is pretty terrible a lot of the time, and it's the job of medical science to do better than it.
It's not delusional to understand that people have …
No, the puberty that is right for a person is the puberty of the gender identity they have. Sometimes synthetic hormones and surgery really are better than what the body naturally does. Nature is pretty terrible a lot of the time, and it's the job of medical science to do better than it.
It's not delusional to understand that people have a mental image of what kind of body they have, and that they should be able to make their actual body more like their self image. If someone wants more muscles than they naturally have you tell them to lift weights, not to get therapy to accept their natural scrawniness!
Imagine that in the future some mad scientist invents a way to transplant brains, and then swaps the brains of a man and woman without their consent. Now imagine that there is a way to reverse the operation, but it's risky and could have some negative side effects. Both victims think the procedure is worth the risks. Would you really advise the mad scientist's victims that they should instead just accept their new bodies and come to terms with their "distress?" It's not that big of a leap to imagine that there might be some people who feel the same way about the body they were born with as the mad scientist's victims feel about their new bodies.
I'm sorry, but these comparisons are ridiculous. To the point I almost didn't want to even respond. Brilliantly Oblivious already touched on my first counter, but here we go.
If someone wants to lift weights to build muscle mass, then he/she should do so. Lean muscle is healthy, and it is not 'unnatural' as you suggest. If that same person wanted to start dosing with HGH, creatin, or other synthetic supplements to enhance his image beyond what his body could do on its own from just weight training, then I would say that it is a very bad idea.
A person who desires *excessive* quantities of cosmetic surgery to look like a Barbie doll or whatever should also be referred to a psychiatrist. In my opinion, it is unethical for surgeons to allow a person's mental distress to dictate invasive medical procedures. It is particularly at issue in the gender debate because it involves children who have underdeveloped brains and emotional regulation.
The activists want GID diagnosis at 18 months and hormones/surgery by age ten. And they don't care if ten year olds are ready for decisions like that; all they care about is expanding their audience.
There are certainly people for whom the distress of being in body of the opposite sex they see themselves as, is so overwhelming, that surgery and a life on drugs is still a better alternative than living in their existing body.
To allow young people to make that decision presupposes they really do understand their condition and the choice they are making.
Perhaps these kids are prescient. I do remember my teen-age years. I had no idea who I was (although I thought I knew everything). Even as an older adult, I still struggle with understanding myself.
It should not be surprising that people question transgender health care, especially when one expert says "“Therapy is not a requirement in this approach because being trans is not a pathology"
I'm sorry, this is just inaccurate, even if you believe that gender identity controls medical care. Gender dysphoric youth do not go through the puberty of their preferred "gender identity" they go through a hormone regimen completely different than their preferred identity that likely makes them infertile and often incapable of achieving orgasm. Your theoretical only shows how little we know about care of this population.
Thank you for further pointing that out. The idea that you can “choose a puberty” as if from a buffet of pills is just... beyond.
A girl can never actually go through male puberty because she’s female! At best she will develop excess acne, body and facial hair, and sweat a lot. She will not develop denser bones (quite the opposite in fact), she will not develop male lung capacity and blood flow, her hips will not narrow to match a male physique. She will, however, probably end up with vaginal atrophy and osteoarthritis by her late 20s, never achieve an orgasm, and experience thinning hair on her scalp.
And her immune system will be so weakened she will be frequently hospitalized for infections that other people could fight off, and she will likely be dead before 50.
The "trans" activists like to point out that both sexes have some measure of both estrogen and testosterone, so administering the stuff isn't consequential. Except that the evidence that is *is* consequential is overwhelming. Female bodies are not prepared for elevated levels of testosterone and while, yes, their bodies react to it in ways the women with GID find pleasing (beards, musculature, etc.), these are superficialities compared to the harm.
Nature did a pretty poor job with the appendix, tonsils, and religion.
Not so bad in the transgender department, where only one in 65,000 actually have GID.
That is not a typo; one in 65.000. That's 0.0015% of the population.
And guess what: the real ones find the "trans" cult embarrassing.
Oh, I lift weights. And eat healthy and don't smoke or drink EtOH. I have this funny conviction about people being able to manage their own lives. Not get poisoned and sliced to get extra attention.
This post is objectionable on so many levels. You speak of the congruent and the transgender as some sort of symmetry, the same totally-wrong grasp of numbers that leads some especially dim people to use "cis" for the 99.9985% whose "body image" matches their sex.
There is no symmetry.
Gender Identity Disorder is not a simple variation like homosexuality or lefthandedness, it is a developmental defect whose afflicted need significant counseling and for whom surgeries to match "body image" (I must say, that sounds as stupid as "fat shaming") should be an absolute last resort.
I remind you that actual GID is extremely rare, one in 30,000 male births and 100,000 female births (2017); the current "trans" thing is almost certainly without any GID foundation. Stop talking as though the world is half GID.
No, the puberty that is right for a person is the puberty of the gender identity they have. Sometimes synthetic hormones and surgery really are better than what the body naturally does. Nature is pretty terrible a lot of the time, and it's the job of medical science to do better than it.
It's not delusional to understand that people have a mental image of what kind of body they have, and that they should be able to make their actual body more like their self image. If someone wants more muscles than they naturally have you tell them to lift weights, not to get therapy to accept their natural scrawniness!
Imagine that in the future some mad scientist invents a way to transplant brains, and then swaps the brains of a man and woman without their consent. Now imagine that there is a way to reverse the operation, but it's risky and could have some negative side effects. Both victims think the procedure is worth the risks. Would you really advise the mad scientist's victims that they should instead just accept their new bodies and come to terms with their "distress?" It's not that big of a leap to imagine that there might be some people who feel the same way about the body they were born with as the mad scientist's victims feel about their new bodies.
I'm sorry, but these comparisons are ridiculous. To the point I almost didn't want to even respond. Brilliantly Oblivious already touched on my first counter, but here we go.
If someone wants to lift weights to build muscle mass, then he/she should do so. Lean muscle is healthy, and it is not 'unnatural' as you suggest. If that same person wanted to start dosing with HGH, creatin, or other synthetic supplements to enhance his image beyond what his body could do on its own from just weight training, then I would say that it is a very bad idea.
A person who desires *excessive* quantities of cosmetic surgery to look like a Barbie doll or whatever should also be referred to a psychiatrist. In my opinion, it is unethical for surgeons to allow a person's mental distress to dictate invasive medical procedures. It is particularly at issue in the gender debate because it involves children who have underdeveloped brains and emotional regulation.
As for the mad scientist thing- just.... what??
The activists want GID diagnosis at 18 months and hormones/surgery by age ten. And they don't care if ten year olds are ready for decisions like that; all they care about is expanding their audience.
There are certainly people for whom the distress of being in body of the opposite sex they see themselves as, is so overwhelming, that surgery and a life on drugs is still a better alternative than living in their existing body.
To allow young people to make that decision presupposes they really do understand their condition and the choice they are making.
Perhaps these kids are prescient. I do remember my teen-age years. I had no idea who I was (although I thought I knew everything). Even as an older adult, I still struggle with understanding myself.
It should not be surprising that people question transgender health care, especially when one expert says "“Therapy is not a requirement in this approach because being trans is not a pathology"
“Gender identity” is a bullshit neologism. It’s as scientific as “soul” and you should stop saying it and thinking it. Same goes for “gender.”
There are two sexes, and if there are such things as genders, there are eight billion of them.
I'm sorry, this is just inaccurate, even if you believe that gender identity controls medical care. Gender dysphoric youth do not go through the puberty of their preferred "gender identity" they go through a hormone regimen completely different than their preferred identity that likely makes them infertile and often incapable of achieving orgasm. Your theoretical only shows how little we know about care of this population.
Thank you for further pointing that out. The idea that you can “choose a puberty” as if from a buffet of pills is just... beyond.
A girl can never actually go through male puberty because she’s female! At best she will develop excess acne, body and facial hair, and sweat a lot. She will not develop denser bones (quite the opposite in fact), she will not develop male lung capacity and blood flow, her hips will not narrow to match a male physique. She will, however, probably end up with vaginal atrophy and osteoarthritis by her late 20s, never achieve an orgasm, and experience thinning hair on her scalp.
And her immune system will be so weakened she will be frequently hospitalized for infections that other people could fight off, and she will likely be dead before 50.
The "trans" activists like to point out that both sexes have some measure of both estrogen and testosterone, so administering the stuff isn't consequential. Except that the evidence that is *is* consequential is overwhelming. Female bodies are not prepared for elevated levels of testosterone and while, yes, their bodies react to it in ways the women with GID find pleasing (beards, musculature, etc.), these are superficialities compared to the harm.
The magical thinking is insane.
Nature did a pretty poor job with the appendix, tonsils, and religion.
Not so bad in the transgender department, where only one in 65,000 actually have GID.
That is not a typo; one in 65.000. That's 0.0015% of the population.
And guess what: the real ones find the "trans" cult embarrassing.
Oh, I lift weights. And eat healthy and don't smoke or drink EtOH. I have this funny conviction about people being able to manage their own lives. Not get poisoned and sliced to get extra attention.
This post is objectionable on so many levels. You speak of the congruent and the transgender as some sort of symmetry, the same totally-wrong grasp of numbers that leads some especially dim people to use "cis" for the 99.9985% whose "body image" matches their sex.
There is no symmetry.
Gender Identity Disorder is not a simple variation like homosexuality or lefthandedness, it is a developmental defect whose afflicted need significant counseling and for whom surgeries to match "body image" (I must say, that sounds as stupid as "fat shaming") should be an absolute last resort.
I remind you that actual GID is extremely rare, one in 30,000 male births and 100,000 female births (2017); the current "trans" thing is almost certainly without any GID foundation. Stop talking as though the world is half GID.