Discussions on difficult subjects

[MadPooter]

It's genuinely concerning you don't consider any of that hate, conservatives do not care about logic and facts no matter how much you think they do

Matt Walsh just "asking questions" isn't trying to shine a light on anything except giving themselves a platform for their bigotry...you can deflect and try to circle around what is said here all you want but this is what's happening, I'm witnessing it right in front of my own eyes

You want laypeople to bow out of discussion on trans issues, yet when given sources that debunk much of what conservative pundits (who are also laypeople when it comes to trans issues), you refuse to believe it and would rather circumvent the idea

All this documentary provided was more fuel for hatred in this country, hatred based on false science, ideas, theories that would likely put more of our children in harms way than ANY trans person or drag queen could cause

Matt Walsh is not an expert on trans issues or protecting children any more than a Catholic priest is on trans issues and ESPECIALLY protecting children, and I pity you for falling for those traps

If you or they value children that much, why isn't anything being done about mass shootings, cuts to education, even book bans by the same people turning queer people into predators? THOSE issues are what concerns the general American, not a trans person just trying to exist in society without fearing for their lives

This is blatant transphobia whether you choose to accept it or not

It's ironic that you have a problem with simplistic characterizations of groups of people involving complex discussions, while simultaneously using the term "Conservative" and applying it to a definition of your choice in order to silence dissent.

Whether or not you choose to accept it, there are legitimate conversations the documentary brought up, and we should be able to discuss them, regardless of people's feelings.

[Stefan]

So, you formed your opinion on those "legitimate concerns" on a movie that mostly contains motivated misinformation? Have you ever though about why they made the choice to produce it that way? If there's any legitimate concerns, why not just report on that and leave out all the other crap?

[satur8]

We do differ on our understanding of hate, yes.

And apparently we place different values on being able to discuss pressing issues that directly affect our children.

This is not my conversation, but I am reading along.

I will ask this question. What exactly do you mean by "our children"? Do you have children? Do you have children who seem to be developing non-traditional traits and suspect they will have a more difficult life as a young person facing the typical American hate received by the LGTBQ+ community? Do you have a child who is asking questions about transition and/or going through this very difficult, confusing, and terrifying emotional experience?

Because if you don't, you really need to back off the "our" children angle. They are not your children, and if you don't see a "documentary" such as this motivated by a position of further discrimination and control, you certainly don't get to speak for the parents and kids going through this.

And one more thing. Somewhere you clutched your pearls at the thought of "conservative" being used with a negative connotation. Let me make something crystal clear. People have the right to be as kind or hateful, intelligent or misinformed, or as religious or secular as they want. I don't like the hateful, the misinformed, or those who would write law by religion, which is why I am in favor of policies that support education, counseling, single-payer healthcare, and general equity for all people to make their own choices. I have never supported rules that people shouldn't go to church or find religion or wear red hats...but that is exactly the type of lawmaking we see from the conservative side of the aisle: determinations on how people they don't like should live their lives.

Conservatives want their kids and other people to follow THEIR guidelines and live the lives the conservatives want them to have. Non-conservatives want people to make their own choices and live in a way that is best for them. That is not a hard difference to understand.

I am not going to argue your opinion on the documentary or some of the data going back and forth. But I am going to suggest you stop thinking of them as 'our' kids if they are not 'your' kids, and I'll suggest that as one of the most educated members in the group regarding how the law works, please stop patronizing us on the harmlessness of conservatism, its policies, and its persuasion tactics.

[Stefan]

@satur8: Thank you, that is incredibly well written

[sandelic]

Amazing how even this forum is like everywhere else on the net - unable to discuss anything remotely difficult without resorting to name calling.
Sad, people, sad. 

[Stefan]

I don't see any name calling here in this discussion?

I'm not sure if you know who Matt Walsh is, but if name calling bothers you, I'd recommend googling for some of his statements regarding queer and trans people. Maybe that will shine a light on why his claims of raising legitimate questions in good faith are dubious, to put it mildly. For what it's worth, he describes himself as a theocratic fascist (no name calling here, these are the actual ad verbatim words he uses).

[hstn]

This is what gender criticals and "asking questions" are sparking...luckily nobody was hurt but who knows how many WILL be in the future

https://www.liberation.fr/societe/police-justice/attaque-a-lexplosif-contre-le-centre-lgbt-de-tours-un-catholique-integriste-de-17-ans-en-garde-a-vue-20230601_HGS5HK37RVFU7FETUAMPA577QE/

[MadPooter]

This is not my conversation, but I am reading along.

I will ask this question. What exactly do you mean by "our children"? Do you have children? Do you have children who seem to be developing non-traditional traits and suspect they will have a more difficult life as a young person facing the typical American hate received by the LGTBQ+ community? Do you have a child who is asking questions about transition and/or going through this very difficult, confusing, and terrifying emotional experience?

Because if you don't, you really need to back of the "our" children angle. They are not your children, and if you don't see a "documentary" such as this motivated by a position of further discrimination and control, you certainly don't get to speak for the parents and kids going through this.

And one more thing. Somewhere you clutched your pearls at the thought of "conservative" being used with a negative connotation. Let me make something crystal clear. People have the right to be as kind or hateful, intelligent or misinformed, or as religious or secular as they want. I don't like the hateful, the misinformed, or those who would write law by religion, which is why I am in favor of policies that support education, counseling, single-payer healthcare, and general equity for all people to make their own choices. I have never supported rules that people shouldn't go to church or find religion or wear red hats...but that is exactly the type of lawmaking we see from the conservative side of the aisle: determinations on how people they don't like should live their lives.

Conservatives want their kids and other people to follow THEIR guidelines and live the lives the conservatives want them to have. Non-conservatives want people to make their own choices and live in a way that is best for them. That is not a hard difference to understand.

I am not going to argue your opinion on the documentary or some of the data going back and forth. But I am going to suggest you stop thinking of them as 'our' kids if they are not 'your' kids, and I'll suggest that as one of the most educated members in the group regarding how the law works, please stop patronizing us on the harmlessness of conservatism, its policies, and its persuasion tactics.

This is really fucking simple.

Let's allow full discussion of trans issues so we don't end up giving children drugs that will give them cancer in 10 years, or osteoporosis, or *some other unknown side effect* because the drugs that are used for the purpose of chemical castration may not be the most suitable for dealing with gender dysphoria,  and have not been properly studied.

Let's allow discussion of this so that we don't unnecessarily cause harm to our children because they're having an incredibly difficult adolescence.

Let's make sure parents (I'm one, by the way), who just want to support their children, don't get talked into making permanent, life-altering decisions for their children because someone mistakenly tells them that nothing will happen.

And let's allow this discussion to happen regardless of whether or not people understand the discussion as "transphobic."

You're not reading along--you're ignoring what suits you.

Europe has reversed its position on using puberty-blockers in children for gender-affirming care; American medical associations, such as this one, do not endorse treatment of gender dysphoria in children or adolescents; and professionals in the gender-affirming-care industry have come out with horror stories and warnings about an agenda being pushed on children that supports the industry.

And just as you continue to irrationally fixate on the possible idea of hate toward a minor questioning their gender, I'll continue to endorse discussion of the reality of the actual procedures and treatments children may seek because people on the Internet tell them that it's salvation for their maladies of identity.

[Stefan]

And let's allow this discussion to happen regardless of whether or not people understand the discussion as "transphobic."

No. You started this conversation by bringing up a pseudo-documentary about trans healthcare made by someone who makes no secret of his hatred for trans people. That is absolutely relevant to any information presented there.

You're not reading along--you're ignoring what suits you.

Oh, you mean like when you focused on one statement from one organization, but choose to ignored the statements from all the other 29 organizations from the link I posted?
Speaking of this statement, from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, those guidelines linked to are from 2012.
Here's a much more recent statement (2019) from this very same medical organization, which couldn't be more stronger in its words:
https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Latest_News/AACAP_Statement_Responding_to_Efforts-to_ban_Evidence-Based_Care_for_Transgender_and_Gender_Diverse.aspx

The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) supports the use of current evidence-based clinical care with minors. AACAP strongly opposes any efforts – legal, legislative, and otherwise – to block access to these recognized interventions. Blocking access to timely care has been shown to increase youths' risk for suicidal ideation and other negative mental health outcomes. Consistent with AACAP's policy against conversion therapy (2), AACAP recommends that youth and their families formulate an individualized treatment plan with their clinician that addresses the youth's unique mental health needs under the premise that all gender identities and expressions are not inherently pathological.

Europe has reversed its position on using puberty-blockers in children for gender-affirming care

No, Wrong. Europe does not have a position on gender-affirming care, because it's a continent. There is no European statement that could be reversed. What the article talks about is that some countries in Europe are currently in the process of revising their guidelines. The article also highlights the starc contrast to the situation in the US:

No legal prohibitions have been put in place in Europe, as they have been in more than a dozen U.S. states, where physicians risk losing their medical license or facing criminal sanctions for prescribing certain forms of gender-affirming care.

The researchers consulted by the journalist have this to say:

But the trend toward more conservative application of the Dutch protocol is likely to have real effects in European countries, in terms of which kids get treatment, and of what kind. Louise Frisén, an associate professor at Karolinska Institute and a pediatric psychiatrist at the child and adolescent mental-health clinic in Stockholm, Sweden, told me she worries that under her country's new guidelines, many of her teenage patients will find it harder to access medical care. The benefits of treatment are clear, she said, and she further claimed that the policy change has caused anguish for some patients who are panicking at the looming prospect of puberty.

As for de Vries, when I spoke with her a few weeks before the article in de Volkskrant was published, she agreed that clinicians should be cautious, but not to the point where treatment becomes inaccessible. Outcomes for those with later-onset dysphoria do need to be investigated further, she acknowledged, but "if we are going to wait 'til the highest-standard medical evidence provides us the answers, we will have to stop altogether." In that sense, Europe's brewing disagreement over treatment could turn into paralysis. "That's what worries me," she said. "You will always have to work with uncertainties in this field."

professionals in the gender-affirming-care industry

You might want to read follow-ups to this case.

warnings about an agenda being pushed on children that supports the industry.

In the last paragraph, the doctor alleged that there's no evidence that gender-affirming care has beneficial effects on mental health.
That is not true, not remotely. There is a very robust body of evidence to support beneficial mental health effects of gender-affirming care. There is even an extensive systematic review which comes to the following conclusion:

This search found a robust international consensus in the peer-reviewed literature that gender transition, including medical treatments such as hormone therapy and surgeries, improves the overall well-being of transgender individuals. The literature also indicates that greater availability of medical and social support for gender transition contributes to better quality of life for those who identify as transgender.

If this medical professional is omiting this research, which is directly relevant to the topic he's talking about, he's either grossly negligent/incompetent or outright lying. Either way, not somebody who should be trusted.

[MadPooter]

No. You started this conversation by bringing up a pseudo-documentary about trans healthcare made by someone who makes no secret of his hatred for trans people. That is absolutely relevant to any information presented there.

Oh, you mean like when you focused on one statement from one organization, but choose to ignored the statements from all the other 29 organizations from the link I posted?
Speaking of this statement, from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, those guidelines linked to are from 2012.
Here's a much more recent statement (2019) from this very same medical organization, which couldn't be more stronger in its words:
https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Latest_News/AACAP_Statement_Responding_to_Efforts-to_ban_Evidence-Based_Care_for_Transgender_and_Gender_Diverse.aspxNo, Wrong. Europe does not have a position on gender-affirming care, because it's a continent. There is no European statement that could be reversed. What the article talks about is that some countries in Europe are currently in the process of revising their guidelines. The article also highlights the starc contrast to the situation in the US:The researchers consulted by the journalist have this to say:
You might want to read follow-ups to this case.
In the last paragraph, the doctor alleged that there's no evidence that gender-affirming care has beneficial effects on mental health.
That is not true, not remotely. There is a very robust body of evidence to support beneficial mental health effects of gender-affirming care. There is even an extensive systematic review which comes to the following conclusion:
If this medical professional is omiting this research, which is directly relevant to the topic he's talking about, he's either grossly negligent or outright lying. Either way, not somebody who should be trusted.

I posted about the documentary What Is A Woman because Twitter was heavily restricting it. I'm mostly interested in speech issues, especially when it involves suppression of speech surrounding an important topic.

This clearly triggered you. Get the fuck over it.

With regard to Europe--you're correct. Should have read "countries in Europe reversed course on gender-affirming care."

Now let's the both of us with our no medical degrees stop debating the particulars. I was literally using a source you provided and you're saying "no not that source!"

Thank you for discussing this.

[Stefan]

Now let's the both of us with our no medical degrees stop debating the particulars. I was literally using a source you provided and you're saying "no not that source!"

No, I did not say that. I said that you choose one source out of 30 provided, and that that very same medical organization published a much more recent statement.

[hstn]

If this doesn't make it any more evident how Matt Walsh and co.'s pseudoscience is bringing harm to the lives of queer people I don't know what will...we're in a state of emergency, but no gotta hear both sides and pretend to care about the children

https://www.hrc.org/campaigns/national-state-of-emergency-for-lgbtq-americans
https://twitter.com/brenonade/status/1666254423096455168

[sandelic]

Is that the same school? 

[hstn]

Is that the same school?

and what's your point? setting aside this has nothing to do with what i just posted...

students weren't the aggressors, the anti-LGBTQ extremists and cops were...

[sandelic]

No point, just a question. 
Should I refrain from asking them, since you so obviously don't like them? 

[Csar]

@sandelic, you asked a question that seemed unrelated to anything discussed here.

I would also like to ask all of you to keep it civil in here and try to not simply make rhetorical, provocative,confrontational statements. If there's no way of having a healthy discussion, I'm either forced to close this topic or leave this place.

[sandelic]

I googled that school and video I posted came up.
Since it's 5 years old video and I know USA have many schools with same name but not in the same place, I was genuinely curious if that was the same school. 

I'm sorry if my post upset anyone. 

[MadPooter]

@sandelic, you asked a question that seemed unrelated to anything discussed here.

I would also like to ask all of you to keep it civil in here and try to not simply make rhetorical, provocative,confrontational statements. If there's no way of having a healthy discussion, I'm either forced to close this topic or leave this place.

Are you fucking kidding me?

Sandelic asked whether a video depicting violence among high school students was related to the video hstn posted.

It was not an irrelevant line of inquiry, and this could help to inform context of the conflict going on in Glendale.

For what it's worth, some of my family is actually a part of Glendale Unified School District, and there have been huge issues with very vocal, right-leaning, potentially violent parents.

It was surprising to me to hear but seeing these videos it starts to make sense. There are apparently large minority groups in Glendale that sometimes are at odds with one another, and talking about context is certainly important.

With all due respect, Csar, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Someone asking a question is not a basis to even *consider* prohibiting someone from posting here, and absolutely not a basis to shut down all political discussion.

Get the fuck over yourself.

[Csar]

I googled that school and video I posted came up.
Since it's 5 years old video and I know USA have many schools with same name but not in the same place, I was genuinely curious if that was the same school.

I'm sorry if my post upset anyone.

Sorry, I wasn't aware this was related as it wasn't apparent to me immediately. I have to apologize.

[hstn]

I googled that school and video I posted came up.
Since it's 5 years old video and I know USA have many schools with same name but not in the same place, I was genuinely curious if that was the same school.

I'm sorry if my post upset anyone.

In that case yeah it is the same place, I just wasn't sure why specifically that event was called back to, felt iffy given the displays of aggression from what I posted

My bad if I jumped the gun a bit, too many people tend to be quick to portray protestors on the left as  aggressors