banning puberty blockers for trans kids but allowing cis kids (who have been using them for like four decades without harm) on the start of pride is pretty absurd.
it also shows that it's not actually about protecting kids but about impose section 28.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason I know of for cis kids to use puberty blockers is as a measure against the condition precocious puberty, which basically means the body is going into puberty too soon.
If that's correct, then this isn't really a good argument, because using drugs to delay premature puberty until its 'normal time' is very different from delaying 'normal time' puberty to a future 'late time'--the latter moves the body into an abnormal state, while the former movies out out of one.
Isn't that kind of like arguing that because we've been using blood thinners successfully for a long time (leaving out that it's used primarily on people who are prone to blood clots to treat that condition), that there's definitely no harm in prescribing blood thinners to people with regular blood?
for cis kids they would take them to delay puberty until a time in the future at which point they come off the blockers and everything works fine, which defeats the main terf talking point of "irreversible changes" or being dangerous to children.
the only difference is that trans children would take them only until they can start taking hormones.
Oh, don’t worry; they definitely want to ban them for cis kids too (or at least girls). The one thing Conservatives the world over have in common is they like their women young.
This is evil. This will lead to deaths of children. Fuck everyone involved. I wish there was a hell for TERFs to go to.
Somehow I don’t think many Tories are TERFs
They are just plain useless pieces of worthless shit
Unless someone is against trans people existing, is there any merit to doing this? Why make a person go through puberty twice just because they're "too young" to decide?
Trans people have been chosen as the current boogeyman of the UK for them to expiate for their own failings as a country, and for the consecutive disasters provoked by the Tories. It's a sleight of hand that allows them to distract the public with a fear without basis on reality in order to avoid taking responsibility of their own failures.
Hey, I thought it was the people who come on boats!
Where I live, immigrants are the new boogeymen too. But the Conservatives have a big market in immigrants too, so when "other immigrants, not YOU immigrants" doesn't work, I guess that's what trans people are for! Lol
because they know starmer's labour will continue to go along with it.
You can't fathom a reason people might be concerned about children being given non-medicinal drugs that block puberty?
I mean there's having a discussion and then there's just dishonest refusal to even acknowledge an opposing view.
Edit: I think I've misread this comment chain, but putting my comment back now
These drugs have been used on cis children for non trans related conditions (such as precocious puberty in young children and some hormone-sensitive cancers in adults) for a long time and their effects are well known and fully reversible.
The use of puberty blockers in transgender youth is supported by twelve major medical associations, including the AMA. The people who take them are always, by established protocol, made aware of their major and side effects in relation to their own goals and self perceptions with regard to gender.
On the basis of the forgoing, trans healthcare is considered life saving by a vast consensus of medical professionals.
Now let's hear your side of this totally good faith discussion you've been talking about.
including the AMA
I agree with the previous poster. Medical evidence from a country with for-profit healthcare should be discounted until proven by non-money-motivated experts
Greed can't be trusted, and these are children we're talking about
All American medical science is inadmissible in your view? Ironically I was responding to someone else that was lamenting how people weren't engaging with the evidence in good faith. But hey, who needs to think critically when you can just twist it into a capitalism bad argument. With bathwater like that, who needs babies?
Yeah, I am all for criticizing capitalism but ffs that's not the problem here. It is not as if the US is the only place that puberty blockers are used. Other industrialized countries with universal healthcare do as well. The issue is transphobia, clear and simple.
The issue is extremely well educated medical professionals disagreeing with extremely well educated medical professionals who are motivated by money
If you think it's simply 100% transphobia, then that's why no professionals are asking your opinion
Tell us more about this expert opinion
Glad that professionals are asking for neither of our opinions, honestly.
Doctors in Spain, France, Netherlands, Poland, Norway and Denmark also prescribe hormone blockers to minors, just to say a few. Is that non-profit enough for you?
Yeah, again, I'm not trying to argue either way. I'm just saying you can't pretend to not understand why people are apprehensive, regardless of right or wrong. And it's not like the medical industry has never gotten anything wrong and we find out it's been hurting or killing people for decades.
I can't understand why people can't just mind their own business. Let me rise my children according to what science says, not what your feelings say. What parents want is to keep their children safe, and puberty blockers helps these children avoid hardships later in life.
You can't understand why people care about others? I guess we don't need child protective services. Just let people raise children however they want! No parent has ever abused children before! Mind your own business!
No one has ever used "science" to justify crimes, right? Because as we all know, science has no room for debate and all scientists agree with each other.
I don't understand why you're replying to me with this, it's not relevant to what I was saying. I actually agree with you but you're sabotaging your own argument with shit logic.
Yes, I can. But this law is the opposite of caring about others. You're just able to twist anything and disguise it as empathy "for the children" and couldn't care the least what the children actually want.
Yes, I can.
Then we've answered your question about why people "can't just mind their own business".
You're just able to twist anything and disguise it as empathy "for the children" and couldn't care the least what the children actually want.
If you're just going to assume that anyone who disagrees with you does so on the basis that they're just a giant piece of shit out to hurt people for no reason, then there is no discussion to be had, and no progress to be made.
Maybe open your mind to the possibility that that's not true, and that people simply have legitimate concerns for children, much like yourself, even if they are misplaced. If you want to actually improve the situation you'll try to empathize and educate them rather than instantly lambast them and treat them like human garbage.
The difference is that a blanket ban, even a temporary one "just in case", is actively hurting children. In the UK, trans teenagers need several years of counseling and doctor visits and jumping through hoops before they can actively start transitioning. These drugs help at least halting puberty, otherwise total transition is much harder or impossible. I don't think these drugs should be easily accessible, but right now it's already so hard to get, that kids are getting them from the dark web in secret!
Sure, there are bad parents, and abusive parents. But you can't justify saving children by hurting other children. I'm not "assuming" anything. Defending this ban is literally hurting children.
Again, you are still trying to argue about why the OP topic is bad. I know. I agree. That is not the conversation I am trying to have.
But you can't justify saving children by hurting other children...Defending this ban is literally hurting children.
Other people disagree with you. That is the whole point. They would say the exact same thing about you. That doesn't make them bad people, it just makes them misinformed.
If they actually cared, they would take the time to understand the actual situation and realize that puberty blockers aren't experimental or dangerous.
You're missing the fact that you could easily replace "science" in their comment with "Facebook", because those are the "scientists" they're referring to
Being apprehensive about something you don't understand is perfectly acceptable and understandable. Taking away people's choice to make an informed decision for themselves with their doctor because of the apprehension is not acceptable (or it shouldn't be at least).
Every medical procedure has consequences, as does the forgoing of such procedure. The decision should be left for each individual to decide for themselves, not a government making medical decisions for all people while being ignorant of their situation.
Taking away people's choice to make an informed decision for themselves
These are children we're talking about. We don't allow them to make decisions for themselves, informed or otherwise, for lots of things. Parents often cannot be trusted to make the right decisions for their children either.
not a government making medical decisions for all people while being ignorant of their situation.
We also don't let doctors make many medical decisions. The medical industry is incredibly-highly regulated, regardless of what region we're talking about. Doctors and hospitals care about money more than anything, like most humans. They will do whatever you want for the right price.
The government makes rules to protect its' citizens from harm. You can argue that they made the wrong decision, but to argue that they shouldn't be allowed to make any decisions is nothing short of anarchy.
As an anarchist, yeah that'd pretty much be anarchy.
We couldn't have people make decisions for themselves I guess! We have to make sure those rich elites in control of the government are there to protect us from our total stupidity. /s
Of course there need to be regulations. The procedure needs to be tested to be safe on humans (which it has, to a higher degree than many other medicines), and the parents/guardians would need to reach a decision with their child and with a licensed medical professional.
Government officials aren't licensed medical professionals. They shouldn't be making that decision. They should lay out the groundwork for licensing and medical testing and leave the actual results and decisions to the professionals and the patients.
We couldn't have people make decisions for themselves I guess
Some people, sure. Lots of people, absolutely not.
We have to make sure those rich elites
LOL that's rich. How do you think those people became rich elites? By taking advantage of people who make poor decisions.
Of course there need to be regulations.
I'm getting A LOT of mixed signals here... You're an anarchist, in favor of regulations? How does that work?
Anarchism is not what you believe it to be. The Wikipedia page honestly isn't too bad for it:
Generally anarchists want regulations to protect people from being preyed upon. It doesn't want people telling them how to live their lives. People should have the liberty to choose how to live for themselves, as long as it doesn't negatively impact others. No one should have the power to control another person's life. We need to have regulations that protect people and to keep things ordered, but we don't need anybody ruling over others.
You mean what the dictionary says it is?
Some definitions, sure. Not all of them. Not lawlessness and chaos, which is how it's normally portrayed in the media. Ordered liberty without hierarchy is what it is.
Your average person may feel apprehensive about puberty blockers and hormone treatment because conservative/right wing news propaganda has been lying to people and misinforming them for over a decade on this issue. Your average person may not know better because misinformation is rampant.
But the people in positions of power, such as Victoria Mary Atkins? It's part of their job to be properly informed, and she is, and she doesn't care. She still had the gall to cite the Dr. Cass review when pushing through this harmful rule that's going to irreparably harm trans children.
Dr. Hilary Cass knows better too. The people in power on the right love that review because it gives an appearance of legitimacy to their cruelty against trans people, and lawmakers and judges know they can use it to push though their anti-trans agendas.
I mean there's having a discussion and then there's just dishonest refusal to even acknowledge an opposing view.
Lol what does "having a discussion" look like to you? Maybe asking questions like "Why...?", literally presenting an opportunity for someone to answer the question? Because maybe you need to re-read my initial comment.
You can't fathom a reason people might be concerned about children being given non-medicinal drugs that block puberty?
Puberty blockers are being offered in a medical context, generally after extensive work with the patient. These aren't hormones being bought over the dark web and taken (or administered) in secret.
There's also a difference between being "concerned" (which the Doctors ARE...hence why these aren't over-the-counter substances), and wanting it made illegal.
All this time everyone thought we loved tea, turns out it was actually just TE
What does TERF mean?
Trans-exclusionary radical feminist.
They generally refer to themselves as "gender-critical feminists".
The first part "trans-exclusionary" is pretty self-explanatory. "Radical" meaning they believe the whole system needs an overhaul, and mostly comes from the branch of feminism that TERFs/gender-criticals grew out of.
I prefer the term Feminist Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe (FART)
I prefer Trans Exclusionary Radical Dipshit (TERD).
Trans exclusionary rad fem. It’s a radical feminist that basically believes that your gender assigned at birth is fixed and cannot change
Not quite - they believe gender is a social construct, to the point that it literally doesn't exist, and the material reality of your biological sex is all there is. Historically, sociology followed biology, and sexual dimorphism is therefore the root of inequality between the sexes (particularly the fact that only females bear children). It's a compelling argument, particularly to a Marxist.
People can dress how they want though, none of my business.
banning puberty blockers for trans kids but allowing cis kids (who have been using them for like four decades without harm) on the start of pride is pretty absurd.
it also shows that it's not actually about protecting kids but about impose section 28.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason I know of for cis kids to use puberty blockers is as a measure against the condition precocious puberty, which basically means the body is going into puberty too soon.
If that's correct, then this isn't really a good argument, because using drugs to delay premature puberty until its 'normal time' is very different from delaying 'normal time' puberty to a future 'late time'--the latter moves the body into an abnormal state, while the former movies out out of one.
Isn't that kind of like arguing that because we've been using blood thinners successfully for a long time (leaving out that it's used primarily on people who are prone to blood clots to treat that condition), that there's definitely no harm in prescribing blood thinners to people with regular blood?
for cis kids they would take them to delay puberty until a time in the future at which point they come off the blockers and everything works fine, which defeats the main terf talking point of "irreversible changes" or being dangerous to children.
the only difference is that trans children would take them only until they can start taking hormones.
Oh, don’t worry; they definitely want to ban them for cis kids too (or at least girls). The one thing Conservatives the world over have in common is they like their women young.
This is evil. This will lead to deaths of children. Fuck everyone involved. I wish there was a hell for TERFs to go to.
Somehow I don’t think many Tories are TERFs
They are just plain useless pieces of worthless shit
Unless someone is against trans people existing, is there any merit to doing this? Why make a person go through puberty twice just because they're "too young" to decide?
Trans people have been chosen as the current boogeyman of the UK for them to expiate for their own failings as a country, and for the consecutive disasters provoked by the Tories. It's a sleight of hand that allows them to distract the public with a fear without basis on reality in order to avoid taking responsibility of their own failures.
Hey, I thought it was the people who come on boats!
Where I live, immigrants are the new boogeymen too. But the Conservatives have a big market in immigrants too, so when "other immigrants, not YOU immigrants" doesn't work, I guess that's what trans people are for! Lol
because they know starmer's labour will continue to go along with it.
You can't fathom a reason people might be concerned about children being given non-medicinal drugs that block puberty?
I mean there's having a discussion and then there's just dishonest refusal to even acknowledge an opposing view.
Edit: I think I've misread this comment chain, but putting my comment back now
These drugs have been used on cis children for non trans related conditions (such as precocious puberty in young children and some hormone-sensitive cancers in adults) for a long time and their effects are well known and fully reversible.
The use of puberty blockers in transgender youth is supported by twelve major medical associations, including the AMA. The people who take them are always, by established protocol, made aware of their major and side effects in relation to their own goals and self perceptions with regard to gender.
On the basis of the forgoing, trans healthcare is considered life saving by a vast consensus of medical professionals.
Now let's hear your side of this totally good faith discussion you've been talking about.
I agree with the previous poster. Medical evidence from a country with for-profit healthcare should be discounted until proven by non-money-motivated experts
Greed can't be trusted, and these are children we're talking about
All American medical science is inadmissible in your view? Ironically I was responding to someone else that was lamenting how people weren't engaging with the evidence in good faith. But hey, who needs to think critically when you can just twist it into a capitalism bad argument. With bathwater like that, who needs babies?
Yeah, I am all for criticizing capitalism but ffs that's not the problem here. It is not as if the US is the only place that puberty blockers are used. Other industrialized countries with universal healthcare do as well. The issue is transphobia, clear and simple.
The issue is extremely well educated medical professionals disagreeing with extremely well educated medical professionals who are motivated by money
If you think it's simply 100% transphobia, then that's why no professionals are asking your opinion
Tell us more about this expert opinion
Glad that professionals are asking for neither of our opinions, honestly.
Doctors in Spain, France, Netherlands, Poland, Norway and Denmark also prescribe hormone blockers to minors, just to say a few. Is that non-profit enough for you?
Yeah, again, I'm not trying to argue either way. I'm just saying you can't pretend to not understand why people are apprehensive, regardless of right or wrong. And it's not like the medical industry has never gotten anything wrong and we find out it's been hurting or killing people for decades.
I can't understand why people can't just mind their own business. Let me rise my children according to what science says, not what your feelings say. What parents want is to keep their children safe, and puberty blockers helps these children avoid hardships later in life.
You can't understand why people care about others? I guess we don't need child protective services. Just let people raise children however they want! No parent has ever abused children before! Mind your own business!
No one has ever used "science" to justify crimes, right? Because as we all know, science has no room for debate and all scientists agree with each other.
I don't understand why you're replying to me with this, it's not relevant to what I was saying. I actually agree with you but you're sabotaging your own argument with shit logic.
Yes, I can. But this law is the opposite of caring about others. You're just able to twist anything and disguise it as empathy "for the children" and couldn't care the least what the children actually want.
Then we've answered your question about why people "can't just mind their own business".
If you're just going to assume that anyone who disagrees with you does so on the basis that they're just a giant piece of shit out to hurt people for no reason, then there is no discussion to be had, and no progress to be made.
Maybe open your mind to the possibility that that's not true, and that people simply have legitimate concerns for children, much like yourself, even if they are misplaced. If you want to actually improve the situation you'll try to empathize and educate them rather than instantly lambast them and treat them like human garbage.
The difference is that a blanket ban, even a temporary one "just in case", is actively hurting children. In the UK, trans teenagers need several years of counseling and doctor visits and jumping through hoops before they can actively start transitioning. These drugs help at least halting puberty, otherwise total transition is much harder or impossible. I don't think these drugs should be easily accessible, but right now it's already so hard to get, that kids are getting them from the dark web in secret!
Sure, there are bad parents, and abusive parents. But you can't justify saving children by hurting other children. I'm not "assuming" anything. Defending this ban is literally hurting children.
Again, you are still trying to argue about why the OP topic is bad. I know. I agree. That is not the conversation I am trying to have.
Other people disagree with you. That is the whole point. They would say the exact same thing about you. That doesn't make them bad people, it just makes them misinformed.
If they actually cared, they would take the time to understand the actual situation and realize that puberty blockers aren't experimental or dangerous.
You're missing the fact that you could easily replace "science" in their comment with "Facebook", because those are the "scientists" they're referring to
I know exactly why people are apprehensive
Being apprehensive about something you don't understand is perfectly acceptable and understandable. Taking away people's choice to make an informed decision for themselves with their doctor because of the apprehension is not acceptable (or it shouldn't be at least).
Every medical procedure has consequences, as does the forgoing of such procedure. The decision should be left for each individual to decide for themselves, not a government making medical decisions for all people while being ignorant of their situation.
These are children we're talking about. We don't allow them to make decisions for themselves, informed or otherwise, for lots of things. Parents often cannot be trusted to make the right decisions for their children either.
We also don't let doctors make many medical decisions. The medical industry is incredibly-highly regulated, regardless of what region we're talking about. Doctors and hospitals care about money more than anything, like most humans. They will do whatever you want for the right price.
The government makes rules to protect its' citizens from harm. You can argue that they made the wrong decision, but to argue that they shouldn't be allowed to make any decisions is nothing short of anarchy.
As an anarchist, yeah that'd pretty much be anarchy.
We couldn't have people make decisions for themselves I guess! We have to make sure those rich elites in control of the government are there to protect us from our total stupidity. /s
Of course there need to be regulations. The procedure needs to be tested to be safe on humans (which it has, to a higher degree than many other medicines), and the parents/guardians would need to reach a decision with their child and with a licensed medical professional.
Government officials aren't licensed medical professionals. They shouldn't be making that decision. They should lay out the groundwork for licensing and medical testing and leave the actual results and decisions to the professionals and the patients.
Some people, sure. Lots of people, absolutely not.
LOL that's rich. How do you think those people became rich elites? By taking advantage of people who make poor decisions.
I'm getting A LOT of mixed signals here... You're an anarchist, in favor of regulations? How does that work?
Anarchism is not what you believe it to be. The Wikipedia page honestly isn't too bad for it:
Generally anarchists want regulations to protect people from being preyed upon. It doesn't want people telling them how to live their lives. People should have the liberty to choose how to live for themselves, as long as it doesn't negatively impact others. No one should have the power to control another person's life. We need to have regulations that protect people and to keep things ordered, but we don't need anybody ruling over others.
You mean what the dictionary says it is?
Some definitions, sure. Not all of them. Not lawlessness and chaos, which is how it's normally portrayed in the media. Ordered liberty without hierarchy is what it is.
Can you direct me to the "correct" definition?
Your average person may feel apprehensive about puberty blockers and hormone treatment because conservative/right wing
newspropaganda has been lying to people and misinforming them for over a decade on this issue. Your average person may not know better because misinformation is rampant.But the people in positions of power, such as Victoria Mary Atkins? It's part of their job to be properly informed, and she is, and she doesn't care. She still had the gall to cite the Dr. Cass review when pushing through this harmful rule that's going to irreparably harm trans children.
Dr. Hilary Cass knows better too. The people in power on the right love that review because it gives an appearance of legitimacy to their cruelty against trans people, and lawmakers and judges know they can use it to push though their anti-trans agendas.
Okay but, we're not talking about those people...
Lol what does "having a discussion" look like to you? Maybe asking questions like "Why...?", literally presenting an opportunity for someone to answer the question? Because maybe you need to re-read my initial comment.
Puberty blockers are being offered in a medical context, generally after extensive work with the patient. These aren't hormones being bought over the dark web and taken (or administered) in secret.
There's also a difference between being "concerned" (which the Doctors ARE...hence why these aren't over-the-counter substances), and wanting it made illegal.
Remember when they said they werent coming for our kids? I remember. Ill remember for next time too.
WTAF is happening right now.
Sir? SIR! Stop the train, I demand to get off at once!
TERF island is at it again, huh?
All this time everyone thought we loved tea, turns out it was actually just TE
What does TERF mean?
Trans-exclusionary radical feminist.
They generally refer to themselves as "gender-critical feminists".
The first part "trans-exclusionary" is pretty self-explanatory. "Radical" meaning they believe the whole system needs an overhaul, and mostly comes from the branch of feminism that TERFs/gender-criticals grew out of.
I prefer the term Feminist Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe (FART)
I prefer Trans Exclusionary Radical Dipshit (TERD).
Trans exclusionary rad fem. It’s a radical feminist that basically believes that your gender assigned at birth is fixed and cannot change
Not quite - they believe gender is a social construct, to the point that it literally doesn't exist, and the material reality of your biological sex is all there is. Historically, sociology followed biology, and sexual dimorphism is therefore the root of inequality between the sexes (particularly the fact that only females bear children). It's a compelling argument, particularly to a Marxist.
People can dress how they want though, none of my business.
Terf island strikes again.