Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 160

Thread: Gay/Transgender

  1. #41
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Why did you feel the need to include this?

    ---------- Post added at 07:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:09 PM ----------



    How do you feel about Psychology Today as a source?


    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ental-disorder


    .
    That source is fine and the reason I asked for a non-biased source is because I've had this debate before and the other person always forwards something from the likes of focus on family or some other site with a clear anti-gay agenda. So thank you for using a valid source and I apologize if I offended you at all with the request.

    But I don't see anything weird about the vote. It looks like that's how they decide whether to alter classifications - they vote. So following the exact same protocol that they always follow in making changes does not reveal that something was done incorrectly. And the notion that the decision was not based on a new and better understanding of homosexuality is not evidenced. It can be assumed that as time goes on, they gain a better understanding of something and are less likely to hold on to previous incorrect assumptions so those who voted to change the classification were indeed using better information than whoever determined the classification in the past.

    So yes, there was a vote but I don't see any evidence that the outcome of the vote was significantly effected by political concerns or bad science.

    And of course if one is to argue that the votes to change were politically based then it stands to reason that the votes to not change were politically based as well. If we want to argue that politics plays into how homosexuality is classified then that goes for both sides. But as now it is clear that homosexuality is not a mental disorder, however politics did factor into the decisions, it appears as time went on, the correct viewpoint won out which is a good thing.
    Last edited by mican333; October 28th, 2017 at 07:41 AM.

  2. #42
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    If one does not suffer from what's described above, then they do not have a disorder. And to argue that all transgendered people have a disorder means that there is no exception - they ALL have some kind of significant disturbance...etc. No exceptions. If even ONE transgendered person does not have a disorder, then it cannot be said that all transgendered people have a disorder and there it cannot be argued that transgenderism itself is a disorder.
    Then if a homosexual person did meet that criteria, he/she would have a disorder though wouldn't they?
    (I am not arguing "all homosexuals have a disorder")

    ---------- Post added at 03:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:42 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    That source is fine and the reason I asked for a non-biased source is because I've had this debate before and the other person always forwards something from the likes of focus on family or some other site with a clear anti-gay agenda. So thank you for using a valid source and I apologize if I offended you at all with the request.
    Ok, I kinda understand, though you and I have talked a fair amount and don't think you have had that issue with me.

    I appreciate the apology, graciously accept, and will not mention it again

    ---------- Post added at 03:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:49 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    That source is fine and the reason I asked for a non-biased source is because I've had this debate before and the other person always forwards something from the likes of focus on family or some other site with a clear anti-gay agenda. So thank you for using a valid source and I apologize if I offended you at all with the request.

    But I don't see anything weird about the vote. It looks like that's how they decide whether to alter classifications - they vote. So following the exact same protocol that they always follow in making changes does not reveal that something was done incorrectly. And the notion that the decision was not based on a new and better understanding of homosexuality is not evidenced. It can be assumed that as time goes on, they gain a better understanding of something and are less likely to hold on to previous incorrect assumptions so those who voted to change the classification were indeed using better information than whoever determined the classification in the past.

    So yes, there was a vote but I don't see any evidence that the outcome of the vote was significantly effected by political concerns or bad science.

    And of course if one is to argue that the votes to change were politically based then it stands to reason that the votes to not change were politically based as well. If we want to argue that politics plays into how homosexuality is classified then that goes for both sides. But as now it is clear that homosexuality is not a mental disorder, however politics did factor into the decisions, it appears as time went on, the correct viewpoint won out which is a good thing.

    I believe you are correct about "politics on both sides of this issue". It actually appears to be a very sad state of affairs indeed as evidenced by the fallowing. Again, my faith in this field of "medicine" is pretty shaky. DSM III or V just don't seem to pan out to what they aspire to be, "science like the medical profession".


    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...t-really-works

  3. #43
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Then if a homosexual person did meet that criteria, he/she would have a disorder though wouldn't they?
    Sure. And likewise if a heterosexual person met that criteria, he/she would have a disorder.

    But just be straight or being gay is not a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I believe you are correct about "politics on both sides of this issue". It actually appears to be a very sad state of affairs indeed as evidenced by the fallowing. Again, my faith in this field of "medicine" is pretty shaky. DSM III or V just don't seem to pan out to what they aspire to be, "science like the medical profession".
    Well, I'd trust their views above the average person's. One can be imperfect and still know more about their field than the layperson. And I would say that, at least in the past, it's pretty much impossible to deal with the issue of homosexuality on a large scale without it getting political - just like today one can't deal with the issue of abortion without it getting political. Controversial issues with strong differing opinions will be subject to politics.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...t-really-works[/QUOTE]

  4. #44
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Sure. And likewise if a heterosexual person met that criteria, he/she would have a disorder.

    But just be straight or being gay is not a disorder.
    Have you ever heard of a heterosexual person that met that criteria just because they were heterosexual? Just askin, not saying there isn't, just hadn't thought about it before

    ---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:36 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    And I would say that, at least in the past, it's pretty much impossible to deal with the issue of homosexuality on a large scale without it getting political - just like today one can't deal with the issue of abortion without it getting political.
    "can't" or won't!........???
    I don't think there was anything political about my last post in the abortion thread, probably why Future dropped out.....


    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...n-social-issue

  5. #45
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Have you ever heard of a heterosexual person that met that criteria just because they were heterosexual?
    No. And I never heard of a homosexual person who met the criteria just because they were homosexual (although people have, and some probably still do, mistakenly thought that just being gay is a disorder - a mistake that hasn't been made in regards to straight people).

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    "can't" or won't!........???
    I don't think there was anything political about my last post in the abortion thread, probably why Future dropped out.....
    I wasn't referring to any particular abortion debate on this thread or anywhere else. I'm just saying that any major controversial issue will be steeped in politics.

  6. #46
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post

    I wasn't referring to any particular abortion debate on this thread or anywhere else. I'm just saying that any major controversial issue will be steeped in politics.

    Yes, I know you weren't. It was just an example.
    My point was, generally, people make it political when they can not support their own point of view. Just like, as you mention, the "issue" of homosexuality shares......

  7. #47
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    So yes, there was a vote but I don't see any evidence that the outcome of the vote was significantly effected by political concerns or bad science.
    It doesn't appear to have been affected by science at all, good or bad. Changes to DSM are generally a fairly drown out process. Committees, studies, published papers and the like all come into play. The criteria between volumes has changed some.

    https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatr...ory-of-the-dsm


    Did you know that in DSM-5, if you prefer one of your parents over the other it is a disorder? "Parental alienation disorder". Again, I question DSM in the first place. Asperger's is an actual mental illness, until, oh now it's not. This is progress?
    Did you know, if your wife of 40yrs dies and you grieve for her, it is a disorder?

    (So why all the fuss if homosexuality is a disorder anyway? What is the big deal? Do "hetero's hold the lock on sanity?!?! I want to be part of that thread
    I would wager every single person reading this has a disorder of some sort according to DSM-5!!!)

    So "gender dysphoria" in a homosexual can be a disorder, depending on the particulars according to DSM. And the criteria changes with age categories.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...n_3385287.html


    As MT mentioned, the very high suicide rate seems to reflect this.

    ---------- Post added at 03:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:07 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Sure. And likewise if a heterosexual person met that criteria, he/she would have a disorder.
    [/QUOTE]


    Almost by definition, I just can't see a heterosexual person meeting that criteria??


    Having said all that:

    What is "normal" anyway???

  8. #48
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    It doesn't appear to have been affected by science at all, good or bad.
    If you are going to claim that science did not inform the decision to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders, you will need to support that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Did you know that in DSM-5, if you prefer one of your parents over the other it is a disorder? "Parental alienation disorder".
    No. Here is the definition of "Parental Alienation Disorder"/

    "The child engages in splitting, believing that one parent is entirely good and the other parent is entirely bad."

    So you got it wrong - it's not just a preference. Since your own understanding is rather faulty, I'd say you need to provide real support if you are going claim that the DSM is calling minor issues "disorders".


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Again, I question DSM in the first place. Asperger's is an actual mental illness, until, oh now it's not. This is progress?
    Probably. You do realize that in science, things change all of the time as new knowledge is attained.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Did you know, if your wife of 40yrs dies and you grieve for her, it is a disorder?
    Support or retract this assertion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    (So why all the fuss if homosexuality is a disorder anyway? What is the big deal?
    For one, a disorder is something that typically has a cure so declaring homosexuality a disorder would bolster those who advocate the notion that homosexually can be cured via conversion therapy. And this notion can be used in all kinds of ways to fight equal rights for gays. It would certainly damage the argument for legalizing gay marriage if one could argue that the reason that the two men want to marry each other is primarily due to them having a mental disorder. So it would very damaging to gays if homosexuality were officially labeled a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I would wager every single person reading this has a disorder of some sort according to DSM-5!!!
    I very much doubt that.

    And besides that, we don't really need to appeal to the DSM, anyway. Obviously a disease/disorder has some kind of clear negative effect on a person. As an example, while some heterosexuals have a disorder, it's clear that just being a heterosexual does not cause anyone a problem. And the same goes for homosexuals and transgendered people. Such people can have problems and perhaps even have more problems than straight/cisgendered people but unless one can show that all of them have a problem that is directly related to being gay/transgendered (and isn't caused by external circumstances such as people discriminating against them), then being gay or transgendered cannot be considered a disorder.




    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    So "gender dysphoria" in a homosexual can be a disorder, depending on the particulars according to DSM.
    And gender dysphoria in a heterosexual can be a disorder as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Almost by definition, I just can't see a heterosexual person meeting that criteria??
    A heterosexual with schizophrenia (which is officially a mental disorder) meets the criteria of having a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Having said all that:

    What is "normal" anyway???
    In the context of mental disorder, it would be not having a mental disorder.
    Last edited by mican333; October 30th, 2017 at 05:58 PM.

  9. #49
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Spokane
    Posts
    28
    Post Thanks / Like

    Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Transgender do experience a lot of emotional distress, so as to drive them to suicide at disproportionate rates. Thus it is a mental disorder. If you want to split hairs and say only for those that commit suicide that is fine.
    It is still at a rate of about 40% - 50% , which is ridiculously high.
    https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...port-Final.pdf

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...mpts/31626633/


    Still they are the definition of insane no?
    I hadn't thought about this though it's a very relevant point.
    Last edited by AKAJoker03; October 31st, 2017 at 10:21 AM.
    A divided minority will always beat a divided majority.

  10. Thanks MindTrap028 thanked for this post
  11. #50
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    If you are going to claim that science did not inform the decision to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders, you will need to support that.
    Here is a start. Sorry, don't have but a couple minutes tonight. I will try to respond to the rest of you post soon.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...t-really-works

    ---------- Post added at 06:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:52 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    For one, a disorder is something that typically has a cure so declaring homosexuality a disorder would bolster those who advocate the notion that homosexually can be cured via conversion therapy. And this notion can be used in all kinds of ways to fight equal rights for gays. It would certainly damage the argument for legalizing gay marriage if one could argue that the reason that the two men want to marry each other is primarily due to them having a mental disorder. So it would very damaging to gays if homosexuality were officially labeled a disorder.
    Yet, I thought we had agreed that homosexuality "can be a disorder", as in it can meet the criteria for a disorder (but isn't necessarily so), and the suicide rate is one indication of this? And a person in such a situation may need treatment and ought to be allowed to get it if they so choose.

  12. #51
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Here is a start. Sorry, don't have but a couple minutes tonight. I will try to respond to the rest of you post soon.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...t-really-works
    Just providing a link for support is technically against the rules (see linkwarz rules). I'm not going to take any "official" action but you will need to paste the part of the article that supports your position before I will offer a response.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Yet, I thought we had agreed that homosexuality "can be a disorder", as in it can meet the criteria for a disorder (but isn't necessarily so), and the suicide rate is one indication of this?
    No on all counts. I have stated clearly that homosexuality is NOT a disorder and have supported that. I agree that a homosexual can have a disorder - a gay schizophrenic will have the disorder of schizophrenia but then that applies to heterosexuals as well.

    And the argument that the suicide rate indicates that the community as a whole has a disorder has pretty much failed. You will not find any support for the notion that a suicide rate of whatever the rate actually is is considered a valid indicator of the whole community having a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    And a person in such a situation may need treatment and ought to be allowed to get it if they so choose.
    I agree that a suicidal homosexual needs treatment. But then so does a suicidal heterosexual. But then if someone, gay or straight, shows no signs of a disorder, then they don't need treatment.

  13. #52
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Even if that was the case, that was over forty years ago. There is no reason to think that today's professional assessment of homosexuality is based on anything other than what science shows.
    Actually, it is the opposite. If the conclusion was reached not on science but on political vote, then the evidence is currently that it was political.
    You would have to introduce some new evidence showing that it is in fact science.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor link
    The evolution of the status of homosexuality in the classifications of mental disorders highlights that concepts of mental disorder can be rapidly evolving social constructs that change as society changes.
    I use this to point out that when you say "science" it isn't science like those of physics where the results never change. It is science based on society which is ever changing.


    ------


    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And of course you are referring to the suicide rate amongst the transgendered. And I asked you to support or retract that.

    So SUPPORT OR RETRACT that a suicide rate that high amongst the transgendered, is in fact as strong of an expression of "signification distress or disability" of the transgendered community as is possible.
    O.k. when you challenge me on things in this way, and I really have no idea for the basis of the challenge, I guess I have to back up a bit, because it means you are not seeing a connection that I think is basic.
    Like saying the sky is blue, and you asking me to support it.

    So I'll give it a go.

    *Note* relevant quotes are numbered (poorly) but referenced at the beginning of each claim. Numbers may be repeated, and are.. I think referring to he same point. Not sure what I was thinking, but didn't continue to order it the same way sorry. Comments under them by me, are an attempt to clarify, not become a minefield for you to issue challenge after challenge. So no need to respond to them. **

    If you are going to call something a "disorder" you have to first have an "order". (8)Science and psychology don't have one, whatever is.. is. I however am working from a Christian perspective. (10)So, I do have one. This is not to say that because God, so much as to realize that we have a purpose, and when we are not following the design, we experience problems, in this case psychological problems.

    (6)So, the standard is obvious, boys are boys and girls are girls. (1)(11) So obvious the very concept of "transgender" is a complete novelty of our generation. Still more, we have good cause to think this "gender confusion" should be grown out of. (2)Specifically, that most people do. (3)(7)(9)This makes gender confusion, more like anorexia then a "normal" and "healthy" development. (4) Treating it as normal is leading to nothing short of sexual assault on children. (note the link is speaking family courts, not personal choice of an adult over self). As another comparison, this would be like if a person never grew out of thinking they had an invisible friend (mine was an elephant). You would have no problem saying I had something mentally wrong if I vehemently professed to still seeing and interacting with that invisible elephant, a self identified "imaginary friend". From all this, we should EXPECT suicidal behavior from people the further down this unhealthy path they have gone, with the highest rate being among those with no way to turn back, and especially among those who did not choose it for themselves (that is a theory prediction). (5)(9) It is a developmental issue of psychology, not biology, it is thus easy to see that it is abnormal development. Thus, it should be clear how suicide is the highest sign of expression of internal "stress", and that stress is directly caused by the transgender mindset. IE, the idea that gender doesn't align with reality. While you have pointed to external pressures such as bullying. It remains unqualified, and more weight should be given to the serious concerns of sexual abuse, and abnormal development. (AA) Rather most suicides are linked to mental illness, and in the case of transgender we know what that illness is. (AAA) (BBB)Further, there is evidence that passing for the other sex does not "fix" the suicide rate, which supports my point, and undermines yours. This is "evidence" against your unquantified claim, and quantifies the support for my side. Finally, there is an apparent international element to the study you site. (CCC) This link leads me to question to what extent the claim can be accepted for American suicide rate, because the discrimination is very different then in say india, where they have forced marriages, and refused education.


    (CCC)
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/
    Again, another link you may be interested in for your side. The link was broken to your support, so I couldn't research to what extent it relied on international data. Seems like a comparison is relevant, but I can't do it.

    (BBB)
    http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.ed...port-Final.pdf
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Importantly, our analyses suggest that the protective effect of non-recognition is especially significant for those on the trans feminine spectrum. For people on the trans masculine spectrum, however, our data suggest that this protective effect may not exist or, in some cases, may work in the opposite direction.
    This undermines that they are being bullied for being transgender, because they are simply not recognized as such, yet they are offing themselves.

    (AAA)
    https://4thwavenow.com/2015/08/03/th...y-journalists/
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    And now to one of the more interesting findings in the Williams Institute report: natal females (in contrast to natal males) who say other people generally don’t recognize them as trans or GNC have the same or higher suicide attempt rate as females who are more often recognized by others.
    I quote this one, because it is a hostile look at the study repeatedly sighted in this debate. Namely http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.ed...port-Final.pdf
    As a PS, this is probably a good link for you to read to seek support for your position.


    https://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Ment...itions/Suicide
    (AA)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Research has found that about 90% of individuals who die by suicide experience mental illness.

    https://www.eternitynews.com.au/in-d...n-says-expert/

    (1)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    John Whitehall, Professor of Paediatrics at Western Sydney University, says this is a dramatic contrast to the clinical experience of 28 of his colleagues, who had seen only ten cases, eight of which were associated with mental illness, in their entire careers.
    (2)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    The best approach to any child experiencing gender confusion is “watchful waiting,” he says, because by international consensus up to 90 per cent of children who question their sexual identity will orientate to their natal sex by puberty.
    (3)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    He draws a comparison between the management of gender dysphoria with that of anorexia nervosa, where there is also incongruity between bodily reality and mental perception (the body is thin but is imagined to be fat).
    (4)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Family Courts have been involved in authorising consent to a three-stage medical therapy known as the “Dutch protocols.” In stage one, puberty-blocking hormones known as gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) are given. Stage two involves administration of hormones of the opposite sex (testosterone and oestrogens). Stage three involves irreversible surgery.

    https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-s...ia-in-children

    (1)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Gender dysphoria (GD) of childhood describes a psychological condition in which children experience a marked incongruence between their experienced gender and the gender associated with their biological sex. When this occurs in the pre-pubertal child, GD resolves in the vast majority of patients by late adolescence.
    (4)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Currently there is a vigorous, albeit suppressed, debate among physicians, therapists, and academics regarding what is fast becoming the new treatment standard for GD in children. This new paradigm is rooted in the assumption that GD is innate, and involves pubertal suppression with gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists followed by the use of cross-sex hormones—a combination that results in the sterility of minors. A review of the current literature suggests that this protocol is founded upon an unscientific gender ideology, lacks an evidence base, and violates the long-standing ethical principle of “First do no harm.”
    (notice this link is directly and specificaly eccoing my sentement that this is "harm".

    (1)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Prior to the 1950s, gender applied only to grammar not to persons.9,10 Latin based languages categorize nouns and their modifiers as masculine or feminine and for this reason are still referred to as having a gender. This changed during the 1950s and 1960s as sexologists realized that their sex reassignment agenda could not be sufficiently defended using the words sex and transsexual. From a purely scientific standpoint, human beings possess a biologically determined sex and innate sex differences. No sexologist could actually change a person’s genes through hormones and surgery. Sex change is objectively impossible. Their solution was to hijack the word gender and infuse it with a new meaning that applied to persons. John Money, PhD was among the most prominent of these sexologists who redefined gender to mean ‘the social performance indicative of an internal sexed identity.10 In essence, these sexologists invented the ideological foundation necessary to justify their treatment of transsexualism with sex reassignment surgery and called it gender. It is this man-made ideology of an ‘internal sexed identity’ that now dominates mainstream medicine, psychiatry and academia. This linguistic history makes it clear that gender is not and never has been a biological or scientific entity. Rather, gender is a socially and politically constructed concept.
    (note this portion shows that it is beyond a novelty and more of a social engineering ploy to change common language in order to push a political agenda. Here the political agenda of "sexologist".

    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Such a high discordance rate among identical twins proves that no one is born pre-determined to have gender dysphoria let alone pre-determined to identify as transgender or transsexual. This is consistent with the dramatic rates of resolution of gender dysphoria documented among children when they are not encouraged to impersonate the opposite sex. The low concordance rate also supports the theory that persistent GD is dues predominantly to the impact of non-shared environmental influences upon certain biologically vulnerable children. To be clear, twin studies alone establish that the “alternative perspective” of an “innate gender identity” arising from prenatally “feminized” or “masculinized” brains trapped in the wrong body is in fact an ideological belief that has no basis in rigorous science.
    (6)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    A teleological binary view of human sexuality, in contrast, is compatible with biological reality. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Sex chromosome pairs “XY” and “XX” are genetic determinants of sex, male and female, respectively. They are not genetic markers of a disordered body or birth defect. Human sexuality is binary by design with the purpose being the reproduction of our species. This principle is self-evident. Barring one of the rare disorders of sex development (DSD), no infant is “assigned” a sex or a gender at birth; rather birth sex declares itself anatomically in utero and is clearly evident and acknowledged at birth.
    (7)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    A large body of clinical literature documents that fathers of feminine boys report spending less time with their sons between the ages of two and five as compared with fathers of control boys. This is consistent with data that shows feminine boys feel closer to their mothers than to their fathers. In his clinical studies of boys with GD, Stoller observed that most had an overly close relationship with their mother and a distant, peripheral relationship with their father. He postulated that GD in boys was a “developmental arrest … in which an excessively close and gratifying mother-infant symbiosis, undisturbed by father’s presence, prevents a boy from adequately separating himself from his mother’s female body and feminine behavior.”21

    It has also been found that among children with GD, the rate of maternal psychopathology, particularly depression and bipolar disorder is “high by any standard.”
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Many youth were on the autism spectrum. These findings do not fit the commonly accepted image of a gender dysphoric child. The researchers conclude that treatment guidelines need to consider GD in minors in the context of severe psychopathology and developmental difficulties.23
    (8)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Psychology has increasingly rejected the concept of norms for mental health, focusing instead on emotional distress
    (9)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Psychology has increasingly rejected the concept of norms for mental health, focusing instead on emotional distress. The American Psychiatric Association (APA), for example, explains in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) that GD is listed therein not due to the discrepancy between the individual’s thoughts and physical reality, but due to the presence of emotional distress that hampers social functioning. The DSM-5 also notes that a diagnosis is required for insurance companies to pay for cross-sex hormones and sex reassignment surgery (SRS) to alleviate the emotional distress of GD. Once the distress is relieved, GD is no longer considered a disorder.2

    There are problems with this reasoning. Consider the following examples: a girl with anorexia nervosa has the persistent mistaken belief that she is obese; a person with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) harbors the erroneous conviction that she is ugly; a person with body integrity identity disorder (BIID) identifies as a disabled person and feels trapped in a fully functional body. Individuals with BIID are often so distressed by their fully capable bodies that they seek surgical amputation of healthy limbs or the surgical severing of their spinal cord.26 Dr. Anne Lawrence, who is transgender, has argued that BIID has many parallels with GD.27 The aforementioned false beliefs, like GD, are not merely emotionally distressing for the individuals but also life-threatening. In each case, surgery to “affirm” the false assumption (liposuction for anorexia, cosmetic surgery for BDD, amputation or surgically induced paraplegia for BIID, sex reassignment surgery for GD) may very well alleviate the patient’s emotional distress, but will do nothing to address the underlying psychological problem, and may result in the patient’s death. Completely removed from physical reality, the art of psychotherapy will diminish as the field of psychology increasingly devolves into a medical interventionist specialty, with devastating results for patients.
    (10)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Alternatively, a minimal standard could be sought. Normality has been defined as “that which functions according to its design.”28 One of the chief functions of the brain is to perceive physical reality. Thoughts that are in accordance with physical reality are normal. Thoughts that deviate from physical reality are abnormal—as well as potentially harmful to the individual or to others. This is true whether or not the individual who possesses the abnormal thoughts feels distress. A person’s belief that he is something or someone he is not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking; at worst, it is a delusion. Just because a person thinks or feels something does not make it so. This would be true even if abnormal thoughts were biologically “hardwired.”
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    The norm for human development is for an individual’s thoughts to align with physical reality; for an individual’s gender identity to align with biologic sex. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” or some other category do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women. GD is a problem that resides in the mind not in the body. Children with GD do not have a disordered body—even though they feel as if they do. Similarly, a child’s distress over developing secondary sex characteristics does not mean that puberty should be treated as a disease to be halted, because puberty is not, in fact, a disease. Likewise, although many men with GD express the belief that they are a “feminine essence” trapped in a male body, this belief has no scientific basis.
    (11)
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Until recently, the prevailing worldview with respect to childhood GD was that it reflected abnormal thinking or confusion on the part of the child that may or may not be transient. Consequently, the standard approach was either watchful waiting or pursuit of family and individual psychotherapy.1,2 The goals of therapy were to address familial pathology if it was present, treat any psychosocial morbidities in the child, and aid the child in aligning gender identity with biological sex.21,22 Experts on both sides of the pubertal suppression debate agree that within this context, 80 percent to 95 percent of children with GD accepted their biological sex by late adolescence.29 This worldview began to shift, however, as adult transgender activists increasingly promoted the “feminine essence” narrative to secure social acceptance.10 In 2007, the same year that Boston Children’s Hospital opened the nation’s first pediatric gender clinic, Dr. J. Michael Bailey wrote:

    Currently the predominant cultural understanding of male-to-female transsexualism is that all male-to-female (MtF) transsexuals are, essentially, women trapped in men’s bodies. This understanding has little scientific basis, however, and is inconsistent with clinical observations. Ray Blanchard has shown that there are two distinct subtypes of MtF transsexuals. Members of one subtype, homosexual transsexuals, are best understood as a type of homosexual male. The other subtype, autogynephilic transsexuals, are (sic) motivated by the erotic desire to become women. The persistence of the predominant cultural understanding, while explicable, is damaging to science and to many transsexuals.30
    Links of interest to you?
    https://lexiecannes.com/stats-on-tra...e-and-suicide/
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Findings indicate relationships between denial of access to bathrooms and gender-appropriate campus housing and increased risk for suicidality, even after controlling for interpersonal victimization in college. These results suggest that the set-up of a college campus connects to the well-being of trans* students, whether or not the campus has intended to actively deny this population access to campus spaces. . . .”
    My response to this is really? You can't use the bathroom you want so your at a higher risk of suicide? That smacks of mental instability more than a problem of discrimination. Like if minorities were offing themselves because they couldn't use the "white" bathroom. .. anyway.

    ==============================
    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I didn't say that it was quantified. I just supported that it is a factor in the increase in suicide. NEITHER OF US has quantified how significant a factor that it is and therefore you have no basis to argue that it's not a significant factor.

    You can't argue that discrimination is not a significant factor in the high suicide rate without supporting that it's insignificant.
    Burden shifting mican. You have the burden to support that is the cause. I don't have to disprove it. It's an unsupported claim until you support it.
    So Challenge to support a claim.
    Support or retract that bullying is the source of the vast majority of suicides in the transgender community.
    You will note that I have laid out an extensively sourced case for why the most reasonable explanation is the mental disorder they are suffering from. Much like the anorexic may feel "bullied" for being too fat, or not pretty enough, the ultimate problem and cause is their mental problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    But then I've supported in an earlier post that the external problems that transgendered face is different, and more significant, than what a kid might face on the playground. Here it is again.
    Not in a quantifiable way so as to be relevant or explanatory.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    So beyond schoolyard bullying (which is likely worse for transgendered kids than those who are bullied for other reasons( we have rejection from family, discrimination at work, harassment and even violence from law enforcement, homelessness, and doctors refusing to treat them. If you want to discount all of these things, you will need to support that they are not particularly significant.

    Until you do succeed in showing that all of the forms of discrimination listed above do not significantly factor into the high suicide rate, it remains possible that that discrimination is the primary reason for the high suicide rate. To say it is is indeed guesswork but then to say that it's not is likewise guesswork and therefore your argument is based on guesswork as opposed to valid support.
    Saying that it is possible, is not a rebuttal to the argument that I have offered.
    The only other group that they compare to is that of jews in Nazi Germany, and they are not nearly as persecuted as the Jews were.. so no, it is not explanatory.
    Beyond that, suppose it is, it is still possible that they are more mentally susceptible because of their failed mental health. So as long as you are offering only "logically possible" reasoning, there is the counter.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    But either way, this is amounting to nothing more than a semantic argument. You have not shown that the transgendered are delusional about any aspect of physical reality but just that they may use a word differently than others do. Being incorrect on a semantic level is not a sign of a disorder.
    See above quotes of sources. (9) (10)

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Because I assumed you know what the term means. I don't offer the definition of terms if I assume they are understood. Regardless, my argument was not contradictory.

    And what I mean by "well adjusted" is that they don't suffer from what is clinically determined to be a mental disorder.
    That is circular reasoning.
    Please see my support for the standard I use, that it is not circular.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Then can you offer support that those transgendered who do not attempt suicide suffer from a disorder?
    Done above. See the definition of "normal" being used, and the support and description of how the trans gender fail, as well as why.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I agree that the group has a problem with society in general discriminating against them. And I don't agree that the problem is that the group as a whole is suffering from a mental disorder.

    I'm not actually specifying the cause of the high suicide rate but if you are going to argue that ONE particular reason is the cause, then you not only need to show that there's a problem but that the problem is caused by that one reason. And since you have specified the reason is because transgendered people have a mental disorder, I ask that you SUPPORT OR RETRACT that they do.
    Again done above. see definitions of disorder being used, and how the trans gender fail.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I'll go with an expert opinion, yes. You making up criteria that happens to suit your argument falls far short of that and is rejected for that reason.
    See links American College of Pediatricians as "professional" source. So it's not just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    No, I'm saying that if X is a mental disorder than every single person who suffers from X will have symptoms that qualify them as having a mental disorder. And a mental disorder is "a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning." ALL schizophrenics have what's described above and therefore schizophrenia qualifies as a mental disorder.

    The position that all transgendered people have a "syndrome" as described above has not been supported and therefore the notion that transgenderism is a mental disorder is not supported.

    Once you show that to be transgendered is to have a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning is when you have supported that transgenderism is a mental disorder.
    See my response and support regarding the definitions, also note the papers explanation of the failures and shortcoming of the definition you are using, especially in how it applies to recognized problems such as anorexia.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    But since there are numerous possible ways that something could be wrong (such as facing discrimination) just showing that something is wrong does not qualify as support that they suffer from a mental disorder.
    I feel that I have gone beyond just that simple proof in this response. I hope you will find the support satisfactory, even if you do not agree, I hope to see some recognition that I have in fact offered qualified support for each of my claims. If suicide rates are not sufficient, then I hope that you find that actual evidence in regards to early development, as well as the deeper professional debate at work in regards to definitions are at play.

    It is very easy to get caught up in pointing to the "professional" opinion or definition, but in the world of Psycology this is really shaky ground, because there is much idiology and politics at play. Paying special attention to the last link I provided, should reveal that there are significant problems with the prevailing "professional" position that you are appealing to. (if it can even be called that). Bottom line, it isn't so cut and dry as you may be hoping, and my position is much more professional than you have thus far given it credit for. (fair enough up to this point).

    Sorry, I couldn't respond sooner a lot of reading and time on this post.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  14. #53
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Actually, it is the opposite. If the conclusion was reached not on science but on political vote, then the evidence is currently that it was political.
    You would have to introduce some new evidence showing that it is in fact science.
    Since the vote was amongst psychological experts and followed the same procedure they always followed in deterring a change to such things, it cannot accurately be called a political vote. And since the claim is yours that the change was based on politics instead of science, the burden is yours to show that the vote was more politically based than scientifically based.

    And please do not use anti-gay sites like Focus on Family for your support.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I use this to point out that when you say "science" it isn't science like those of physics where the results never change. It is science based on society which is ever changing.
    Science is ever changing. Even physics has changed drastically over the pasts several decades. And while I do agree that the science of the mind is a bit less solid than the hard science, I am sticking to the current scientific understanding as correct.

    I mean if you are going to just do away with all expertise regarding the science of the mind, then all concepts become nebulous and we have no basis to label transgendered anything in particular. We might as make up our own terms and then agree to disagree and end the debate there.

    So I'm going to stick with the science as best as it exists. If you don't want to do that, then we aren't going to get anywhere.




    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    O.k. when you challenge me on things in this way, and I really have no idea for the basis of the challenge, I guess I have to back up a bit, because it means you are not seeing a connection that I think is basic.
    Like saying the sky is blue, and you asking me to support it.
    Well, I doubt I challenged you on anything that is plainly true.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    If you are going to call something a "disorder" you have to first have an "order". (8)Science and psychology don't have one, whatever is.. is
    The science of psychology absolutely does have a standard of order and disorder. First a mental disorder, by definition, is:

    "a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning."

    And going by that "order" is not suffering from a disorder.




    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    So, the standard is obvious, boys are boys and girls are girls.
    As I assume you mean it, I disagree. I think some people are "in-between" and while one can point to their birth genitalia and say "that means that this person is a boy and that's that", I have no obligation to agree with this assessment.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    So obvious the very concept of "transgender" is a complete novelty of our generation.
    It's not anything new, actually. It's just not hidden anymore. So it's a novelty to us because we are less ignorant about it than prior generation.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Still more, we have good cause to think this "gender confusion" should be grown out of. (2)Specifically, that most people do. (3)(7)(9)This makes gender confusion, more like anorexia then a "normal" and "healthy" development. (4) Treating it as normal is leading to nothing short of sexual assault on children. (note the link is speaking family courts, not personal choice of an adult over self). As another comparison, this would be like if a person never grew out of thinking they had an invisible friend (mine was an elephant). You would have no problem saying I had something mentally wrong if I vehemently professed to still seeing and interacting with that invisible elephant, a self identified "imaginary friend". From all this, we should EXPECT suicidal behavior from people the further down this unhealthy path they have gone, with the highest rate being among those with no way to turn back, and especially among those who did not choose it for themselves (that is a theory prediction). (5)(9) It is a developmental issue of psychology, not biology, it is thus easy to see that it is abnormal development. Thus, it should be clear how suicide is the highest sign of expression of internal "stress", and that stress is directly caused by the transgender mindset. IE, the idea that gender doesn't align with reality. While you have pointed to external pressures such as bullying. It remains unqualified, and more weight should be given to the serious concerns of sexual abuse, and abnormal development. (AA) Rather most suicides are linked to mental illness, and in the case of transgender we know what that illness is. (AAA) (BBB)Further, there is evidence that passing for the other sex does not "fix" the suicide rate, which supports my point, and undermines yours. This is "evidence" against your unquantified claim, and quantifies the support for my side. Finally, there is an apparent international element to the study you site. (CCC) This link leads me to question to what extent the claim can be accepted for American suicide rate, because the discrimination is very different then in say india, where they have forced marriages, and refused education.
    The problem with this is that it seems that almost all of your support comes from sites that have a clear anti-trans and/or anti-LGBT bias.



    https://4thwavenow.com/2015/08/03/th...zy-journalists

    4th Wave now's front page says "A community of parents & friends skeptical of the "transgender child/teen" trend" which indicates that it's against transgendered.


    https://www.eternitynews.com.au/in-d...n-says-expert/

    Eternity News - Clearly a Christian site.


    https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-s...ia-in-children

    American College of Pediatricts - anti-LGBT group

    "Did you read this headline and think I was accusing The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) of opposing the LGBT community? That’s the problem. A small anti-LGBT group called the “American College of Pediatricians (ACP)” created a name that is easily confused with the AAP, the largest pediatrics organization in the country."

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...nti-lgbt-group

    I'm sorry but I'm only going to accept support from sites that are strictly professional or mainstream.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    No. It has a clear pro-trans bias. Just like I won't accept support from sites that are biased against trans, I won't be using links with a clear pro-trans bias myself.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    My response to this is really? You can't use the bathroom you want so your at a higher risk of suicide? That smacks of mental instability more than a problem of discrimination. Like if minorities were offing themselves because they couldn't use the "white" bathroom. .. anyway.
    Well, you did a good job tearing down that straw man. That's no argument of mine.

    ==============================

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Burden shifting mican. You have the burden to support that is the cause.
    I only have to support the claims that I make. I claim that it is A cause in the increase in suicide and I supported it. I never claimed that it contributed any specific amount of suicides and therefore do not need to support any particular number.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    So Challenge to support a claim.
    Support or retract that bullying is the source of the vast majority of suicides in the transgender community.
    Show me where I said that bullying is the source of the vast majority of suicides in the transgender community and then I will concern myself with supporting that claim. Again, I didn't make that claim so I'm not going to support it.

    Now I'm going to make MY argument regarding the quantity. I'm saying that NEITHER OF US have determined how significant discrimination is in the percentage of suicides. Given that, WE DON'T KNOW how significant discrimination is (so I guess even thought I never claimed that bullying accounted for the vast majority, you may consider that claim retracted). Since you don't know how significant discrimination is, you have no basis to say that it's not a significant factor.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Not in a quantifiable way so as to be relevant or explanatory.
    But nonetheless is it more than just bullying so you can't compare the discrimination to mere bullying.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Saying that it is possible, is not a rebuttal to the argument that I have offered.
    I said more than "possible". I said it comes down to guesswork. Your position comes down to guesswork. You have no solid data to show how significant or insignificant the other factors are. Maybe they account for all the increases in suicide. Maybe they account for none. Maybe they account for half. Who knows? You don't seem to know so you have no valid basis to say that discrimination is not a significant factor. You can only guess that it is and guesswork is not a valid basis for support.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Beyond that, suppose it is, it is still possible that they are more mentally susceptible because of their failed mental health. So as long as you are offering only "logically possible" reasoning, there is the counter.
    And it's possible that you are completely right. But you will need to support that you are right.

    So let me put it this way

    SUPPORT OR RETRACT that discrimination against transgendered people is not a particularly significant factor in their increase is suicide.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    That is circular reasoning.
    Please see my support for the standard I use, that it is not circular.

    Done above. See the definition of "normal" being used, and the support and description of how the trans gender fail, as well as why.

    Again done above. see definitions of disorder being used, and how the trans gender fail.

    See links American College of Pediatricians as "professional" source. So it's not just me

    See my response and support regarding the definitions, also note the papers explanation of the failures and shortcoming of the definition you are using, especially in how it applies to recognized problems such as anorexia.
    Again, all from



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I feel that I have gone beyond just that simple proof in this response. I hope you will find the support satisfactory, even if you do not agree, I hope to see some recognition that I have in fact offered qualified support for each of my claims. If suicide rates are not sufficient, then I hope that you find that actual evidence in regards to early development, as well as the deeper professional debate at work in regards to definitions are at play.
    I do really credit you for doing your work. Unfortunately, almost all of the support comes from invalid sources - sites that have a clear bias and therefore cannot be trusted to be using impartial factual science.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    It is very easy to get caught up in pointing to the "professional" opinion or definition, but in the world of Psycology this is really shaky ground, because there is much idiology and politics at play. Paying special attention to the last link I provided, should reveal that there are significant problems with the prevailing "professional" position that you are appealing to. (if it can even be called that). Bottom line, it isn't so cut and dry as you may be hoping, and my position is much more professional than you have thus far given it credit for. (fair enough up to this point).
    I agree. But we really have no choice but to go with the best professional information we can get. Going to religious sources is definitely not doing that.

  15. #54
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Science is ever changing. Even physics has changed drastically over the pasts several decades. And while I do agree that the science of the mind is a bit less solid than the hard science, I am sticking to the current scientific understanding as correct.

    I mean if you are going to just do away with all expertise regarding the science of the mind, then all concepts become nebulous and we have no basis to label transgendered anything in particular. We might as make up our own terms and then agree to disagree and end the debate there.

    So I'm going to stick with the science as best as it exists. If you don't want to do that, then we aren't going to get anywhere.
    Is/ought fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Well, I doubt I challenged you on anything that is plainly true.
    I was being charitable and offering my thought process.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    The science of psychology absolutely does have a standard of order and disorder. First a mental disorder, by definition, is:

    "a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning."

    And going by that "order" is not suffering from a disorder.
    Circular reasoning.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    As I assume you mean it, I disagree. I think some people are "in-between" and while one can point to their birth genitalia and say "that means that this person is a boy and that's that", I have no obligation to agree with this assessment.
    Challenge
    Support that there is a third "sex".

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    It's not anything new, actually. It's just not hidden anymore. So it's a novelty to us because we are less ignorant about it than prior generation.
    Challenge
    support that transgender has always existed at current rates.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I'm sorry but I'm only going to accept support from sites that are strictly professional or mainstream.
    Adhom fallacy
    I hope you don't use any athiest sites when you attempt to support your position.

    You ability to "accept" has nothing to do with my having supported my position.
    my position stands supported


    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Well, you did a good job tearing down that straw man. That's no argument of mine.
    Never said it was.. yay us!

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Show me where I said that bullying is the source of the vast majority of suicides in the transgender community and then I will concern myself with supporting that claim. Again, I didn't make that claim so I'm not going to support it.

    Now I'm going to make MY argument regarding the quantity. I'm saying that NEITHER OF US have determined how significant discrimination is in the percentage of suicides. Given that, WE DON'T KNOW how significant discrimination is (so I guess even thought I never claimed that bullying accounted for the vast majority, you may consider that claim retracted). Since you don't know how significant discrimination is, you have no basis to say that it's not a significant factor.
    Your comment is then irrelevant if it is not being offered as explanitory of the rates.

    Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    But nonetheless is it more than just bullying so you can't compare the discrimination to mere bullying.
    Discrimnation and bullying is no longer relevant to the discussion as it is not being offered as explaining anything in particular.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And it's possible that you are completely right. But you will need to support that you are right.

    So let me put it this way

    SUPPORT OR RETRACT that discrimination against transgendered people is not a particularly significant factor in their increase is suicide.
    I have supported my position extensivly. And You are burden shifiting here.


    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I agree. But we really have no choice but to go with the best professional information we can get. Going to religious sources is definitely not doing that.
    Thanks for the discussion.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  16. #55
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Is/ought fallacy.
    No. It's appeal to expertise. I'm using what the psychological experts use to define a disorder. If you disagree with this, then tell me what I should be using instead.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Circular reasoning.
    No. Appeal to expertise + logic. If you are going to call it circular reasoning, you will need to support that by showing how the reasoning is circular



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Challenge
    Support that there is a third "sex".
    I didn't claim there was a third sex.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Challenge
    support that transgender has always existed at current rates.
    I didn't say that it's always existed at its current rate. But there is no evidence that suggests that transgendered people are a new phenomena so it can be reasonably assumed that they've always existed.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Adhom fallacy
    I hope you don't use any athiest sites when you attempt to support your position.
    No, it's not an ad hom fallacy. An Ad hom fallacy is if I were to reject YOUR argument based on YOUR characteristics. I'm reject your sources because they are clearly not unbiased scientific sources. Unbiased scientific sources are the only acceptable source in a debate over things that are scientific, such as mental disorders.

    And if I were to do the opposite, I would skip the science sites for my support and find sites with a clear pro-trans bias and use those. In fact, you offered me such a site and I will not use it for that reason.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Your comment is then irrelevant if it is not being offered as explanitory of the rates.
    And you likewise have no made an argument saying that it's not explanatory of the rates.

    In other words, you can't argue that the high right is not due to discrimination until you support that it's not due to discrimination.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Discrimnation and bullying is no longer relevant to the discussion as it is not being offered as explaining anything in particular.
    Nope. I have supported that it increases the rate of suicide. What has not been supported BY EITHER OF US is how much of a increase can be accounted for due to discrimination.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I have supported my position extensivly. And You are burden shifiting here.
    Claims of support being offered previously is not support. So now I will offer a formal challenge.

    Challenge to support a claim. SUPPORT OR RETRACT that discrimination against transgendered people is not a particularly significant factor in their increase is suicide.

  17. #56
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    263
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Just providing a link for support is technically against the rules (see linkwarz rules). I'm not going to take any "official" action but you will need to paste the part of the article that supports your position before I will offer a response.
    My apologies, as I said I was way short on time to post at all that night and maybe I should have just waited, but the article was so self explanatory.

    The Title: "The DSM system : How it really Works"
    The first sentences: "You have to laugh. "

    It then goes on to detail the some of the issues with how DSM is arrived at.

    "DSM is a consensus document. This means horse trading. I’ll give you your diagnosis if you give me mine"

    Sounds "scientific" to me.......??


    ---------- Post added at 05:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:07 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    No on all counts. I have stated clearly that homosexuality is NOT a disorder and have supported that. I agree that a homosexual can have a disorder - a gay schizophrenic will have the disorder of schizophrenia but then that applies to heterosexuals as well.
    This seems to go against your post #43. Also, DSM does state homosexuality can be a disorder if it meets the criteria.

    ---------- Post added at 05:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:10 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I agree that a suicidal homosexual needs treatment. But then so does a suicidal heterosexual. But then if someone, gay or straight, shows no signs of a disorder, then they don't need treatment.

    Can you forward a case when a heterosexual wanted to commit suicide "because" they where heterosexual? It seems counterintuitive to happen ever, let alone with any sort of frequency?
    With homosexuals it does seem somewhat more common?

    ---------- Post added at 05:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:14 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    If you are going to claim that science did not inform the decision to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders, you will need to support that.
    Again, the criteria for making changes to DSM are extensive. Committees, published peer reviewed papers, studies, etc.


    https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatr...sked-questions.

    Yet on reclassifying homosexuality, just a simple vote it seems, 5854 to remove it, 3810 to retain it.
    The fallowing quote kinda sums it up


    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ental-disorder

    "The evolution of the status of homosexuality in the classifications of mental disorders highlights that concepts of mental disorder can be rapidly evolving social constructs that change as society changes. Today, the standard of psychotherapy in the U.S. and Europe is gay affirmative psychotherapy, which encourages gay people to accept their sexual orientation."

  18. #57
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    My apologies, as I said I was way short on time to post at all that night and maybe I should have just waited, but the article was so self explanatory.

    The Title: "The DSM system : How it really Works"
    The first sentences: "You have to laugh. "

    It then goes on to detail the some of the issues with how DSM is arrived at.
    Again, you will have to paste whatever you are talking about into your post along with the link before it will be considered support

    Sounds "scientific" to me.......??[/quote]

    If you want to say that DSM is complete hogwash, then of course you have to be consistent and discount EVERYTHING they have done, including having homosexuality as a disorder in the first place.

    So going by that, the fact that homosexuality used to be considered a disorder does not support the notion that it is a disorder because you've invalidated the organization that said it was a disorder in the first place.

    So we can skip whatever the DSM says if you want and just ignore what they say about homosexuality being a disorder. So basically you cannot use what the psychiatric community says to support that homosexuality is a disorder and therefore must use some other criteria if you are going to argue that it's a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    This seems to go against your post #43. Also, DSM does state homosexuality can be a disorder if it meets the criteria.
    If we are ignoring the DSM entirely, it doesn't matter what it says.

    But assuming you are going to use them as support, I agree that homosexuality can be a disorder if it meets the criteria. But since it doesn't meet the criteria, it's not a disorder. And this does not contradiction what I said in post 43.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Can you forward a case when a heterosexual wanted to commit suicide "because" they where heterosexual? It seems counterintuitive to happen ever, let alone with any sort of frequency?
    With homosexuals it does seem somewhat more common?
    Well, I'm sure I could find a case where a heterosexual wanted to commit suicide because the woman that he loved left him or died so that would be a case where his sexual orientation played a factor in his pain (he wouldn't have been in love with her if he wasn't straight). But then that would not be a case where he wanted to kill himself just because he was straight so that wouldn't count. So no, I cannot find a case where a straight guy wanted to kill himself for no other reason than he was straight. And likewise I cannot find a case where a gay person wanted to kill himself just because he was gay. Can you?



    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Again, the criteria for making changes to DSM are extensive. Committees, published peer reviewed papers, studies, etc.

    https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatr...sked-questions.

    Yet on reclassifying homosexuality, just a simple vote it seems, 5854 to remove it, 3810 to retain it.
    Support or retract, with text from the article, that they broke standard protocol when they voted to reclassify.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    "The evolution of the status of homosexuality in the classifications of mental disorders highlights that concepts of mental disorder can be rapidly evolving social constructs that change as society changes. Today, the standard of psychotherapy in the U.S. and Europe is gay affirmative psychotherapy, which encourages gay people to accept their sexual orientation."
    That in no way suggests that the current status is incorrect or invalid. Yes, understandings change over time. But in general, the changes are due to being better informed and in the case of homosexuality, less reliant on bigotry against gays. So even if you think the original reclassification is fishy, we are now almost 50 years beyond that and there is a consensus amongst the professional psychological community that it's not a disorder. If you want to argue that they are wrong NOW, you will need to either provide support or argue that the whole thing is malarky and in that case, we cannot accept any expert opinion and therefore you will have to argue that it's a disorder using your own information on the issue.

  19. #58
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    No. It's appeal to expertise. I'm using what the psychological experts use to define a disorder. If you disagree with this, then tell me what I should be using instead.
    Quote Originally Posted by MT POST 52
    (3)(7)(9)This makes gender confusion, more like anorexia then a "normal" and "healthy" development.
    Done
    Based on (3)(7)(9) we should be using accuracy about external reality as the standard. Not simply stresses, and anxiety levels.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    No. Appeal to expertise + logic. If you are going to call it circular reasoning, you will need to support that by showing how the reasoning is circular
    First I showed it's flaw, but it requires you to read those yukky sources and support.
    Quote Originally Posted by MT POST 52
    (5)(9) It is a developmental issue of psychology, not biology, it is thus easy to see that it is abnormal development.
    As for how it is circular for your use, and the "is ought" fallacy, is because we are partly discussing what SHOULD be on the list.

    So your response amounts to It's not on the list, so it shouldn't be on the list. (Is ought)
    Or it isn't on the list thus it doesn't fulfill the definition. (circular)

    Both are wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I didn't say that it's always existed at its current rate. But there is no evidence that suggests that transgendered people are a new phenomena so it can be reasonably assumed that they've always existed.
    Well, I was referring to the rate, and my support evidenced that point.
    (1) So novelty as I used it was in reference to the increased occurrence, which is artificially created by a culture willing to chemically castrate underage children in the name of transgender tolerance.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    No, it's not an ad hom fallacy. An Ad hom fallacy is if I were to reject YOUR argument based on YOUR characteristics. I'm reject your sources because they are clearly not unbiased scientific sources. Unbiased scientific sources are the only acceptable source in a debate over things that are scientific, such as mental disorders.
    Then support that they are unbiased so as to not have a valid professional opinion.
    Challenge to support a claim.
    Be sure to use unbiased and professional sources

    You may dismiss whatever you like, but you can't go making the claim that a position wasn't supported.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And if I were to do the opposite, I would skip the science sites for my support and find sites with a clear pro-trans bias and use those. In fact, you offered me such a site and I will not use it for that reason.
    I am pointing to science, even if some of the access to that science is through blogs (some of which you said were hostile to my position).
    The fact that some are "christian" is not a valid rebuttal, or an indictment on their character to have a valid professional opinion.

    Look mican, I'm going to try and be real nice when I say this. I just have no interest in this discussion given your unwarranted dismissal of my support, and then you acting like I haven't offered any. You not accepting something =/= it never happening. Your just throwing out support you don't like as far as I'm concerned, and I'm not going to spend any more time on it.

    Accept it, or don't my position stands unattributed and supported.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And you likewise have no made an argument saying that it's not explanatory of the rates.

    In other words, you can't argue that the high right is not due to discrimination until you support that it's not due to discrimination.
    Shifting the burden mican. I don't have to show that at all.
    I argued for what the cause was, and supported it.

    It is your burden to show that some other element is relevant.
    As it stands, bullying rates are not shown to be relevant.. so, if you think they are
    I Challenge to support a claim. you to support it. (relevant here means to explain the increased number, or the general disparity)

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Nope. I have supported that it increases the rate of suicide. What has not been supported BY EITHER OF US is how much of a increase can be accounted for due to discrimination.
    Right, you have the burden to show that it increases it in a way that has explanatory power.
    Also note the concern about your support, I'm interested in that aspect as well. (IE that it may have included international numbers)
    That concern was sourced as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Claims of support being offered previously is not support. So now I will offer a formal challenge.
    It is not my burden to disprove YOUR argument before you make it and support it.
    You have as yet to show it is a relevant factor in what is being discussed.

    Plainly, it is one thing to say that bullying generally increases suicide rates.
    It is another thing to say that bullying(et all) is responsible for the 40% rate increase over the normal population.
    The latter is the only thing relevant to this argument, as I have offered argumentation and support as to why the explanation is the mental disorder(defined and supported) of transexuality.

    Here is how the argument stands.
    MT = Trans suffer super high suicide rates due to their mental illness + support
    Mican = What about bullying?
    MT = What about it?
    Mican = Bullying increases suicide rates.
    MT = Are you saying bullying is responsible for the 40% - 50% suicide rate?
    Mican = No of course not.
    MT =Then it isn't relevant to this discussion or my argument.
    Mican = Challenge support that it isn't!

    (clear burden shifting)
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

  20. #59
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    We seem to be spending a bit of time arguing over whether such-and-such is valid support or not. Now, I think we should have some kind of standard for valid external support. I mean if we have no standard at all, then I can just write an e-mail to myself, post the content and use it for support for my position. Obviously, that would be ridiculous so we need to have some kind of standard.

    And the standard for professional medical support is that it comes exclusively from medical professionals or from professional medical sites. Obviously any valid medical knowledge will be available from such sources so either of us, assuming we are forward scientifically valid arguments, should be able to find support on these sites. And of course if we can't find our information on these sites, then we are likely not forwarding something that is supported by the medical profession.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Done
    Based on (3)(7)(9) we should be using accuracy about external reality as the standard. Not simply stresses, and anxiety levels.
    Again, your links are generally from unreliable sources.

    I'm appealing to psychiatric experts and you are generally appealing to non-expert sites that have a bias against transgendered/LBQT.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    First I showed it's flaw, but it requires you to read those yukky sources and support.
    If information that one finds in those "yukky" sources is at all valid, those sources should be present in professional psychological sites as well. So just provide the same information but from a professional site. If you can't find the information being forwarded by psychiatric professionals, then odds are it is not based on any professional studies.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    As for how it is circular for your use, and the "is ought" fallacy, is because we are partly discussing what SHOULD be on the list.

    So your response amounts to It's not on the list, so it shouldn't be on the list. (Is ought)
    Or it isn't on the list thus it doesn't fulfill the definition. (circular)

    Both are wrong.
    No. I'm not arguing Ought. I'm not arguing that transgenderism "ought" not be a disorder. I'm saying it IS not a disorder. There is a definition of what qualifies as a disorder and it's a FACT that transgenderism does not fit the definition (my argument says that, that is).

    So saying that I'm engaging in an "ought" argument is to misrepresent my argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Well, I was referring to the rate, and my support evidenced that point.
    (1) So novelty as I used it was in reference to the increased occurrence, which is artificially created by a culture willing to chemically castrate underage children in the name of transgender tolerance.
    And I ask that you SUPPORT OR RETRACT this assertion.

    I should note that I don't think that this particular argument is really an important point in your overall argument so I'm fine if we just agree to disagree on this issue. So if you want to just drop this point, I will not consider it to be a concession that it's not true. But if you want to continue to forward it in the debate, then I am challenging it and you need to support it. But again, I think agreeing to disagree is a better option as this seems to be a side-point.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Then support that they are unbiased so as to not have a valid professional opinion.
    Challenge to support a claim.
    Be sure to use unbiased and professional sources

    You may dismiss whatever you like, but you can't go making the claim that a position wasn't supported.
    Yes I can. If your support is based on invalid sources, then it can justifiably be rejected.

    None of the sites are associated with a professional medical association which is support that they are not valid sources for professional viewpoints.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I am pointing to science, even if some of the access to that science is through blogs (some of which you said were hostile to my position).
    The fact that some are "christian" is not a valid rebuttal, or an indictment on their character to have a valid professional opinion.
    The fact that they aren't professionals is a valid reason to hold that they are not necessarily forwarding a valid professional opinion. The fact that they are Christian is reason to suspect that they might pick and choose the information that backs up their viewpoint or perhaps even misinterpret the data (nonprofessionals can make such mistakes). Likewise one can take accurate scientific information and draw the wrong conclusion if they aren't as scientifically literate as an actual expert.

    IF what they are forwarding is indeed scientifically valid, then it surely will exist on a professional scientific website and you should be able to link to that site. If you don't think the standard of using exclusively medical expert sites for medical expert opinions is a reasonable line for accepting or rejecting support and likewise don't think we should have no standards at all, then what standard do you suggest?

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Look mican, I'm going to try and be real nice when I say this. I just have no interest in this discussion given your unwarranted dismissal of my support, and then you acting like I haven't offered any. You not accepting something =/= it never happening. Your just throwing out support you don't like as far as I'm concerned, and I'm not going to spend any more time on it.

    Accept it, or don't my position stands unattributed and supported.
    My dismissal is not unwarranted at all. EXPERT support needs to be provided by EXPERTS. I am not holding you to higher standard than I use myself.

    Let me put it this way. I have a friend who is transgendered - was born with girl parts and now lives as a man and has gender reassignment surgery. He is also a pretty smart guy and likely knows a lot about transgenderism. So if this person wrote a blog and I provided a link to his blog as support, would you accept whatever he happens to write as valid support? I am guessing you wouldn't. And the reasons you wouldn't (such as this person's bias on the issue and the fact that he's not actually an expert) is pretty much the same reasoning that I am rejecting your support from non-professional sites that have a bias. So unless you would accept my friends blog as support, you have no real basis to claim that I am being unreasonable in rejecting your support that is also based on non-professionals who are biased.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Shifting the burden mican. I don't have to show that at all.
    I argued for what the cause was, and supported it.
    No. You assumed it. You said "they have a higher rate" and provided NO evidence that the reason was anything in particular. You just said it was due to a disorder.

    So I Challenge to support a claim. you to SUPPORT OR RETRACT that the higher suicide rate is primarily due to a mental disorder as opposed to some other reason(s).

    And for the time being, I'm going to retract all arguments that bullying or anything else in particular plays a factor in the increase in suicides. And by "retract", I mean I am not currently going to continue forwarding such argument. It does NOT mean that I concede that such arguments are false - just that I'm not going to continue arguing them right now (but I have the option of bringing them up again later and if I do, THEN I may have a burden to support them but we will cross that bridge when we come to it).

    So there we go, I've retract all of my arguments regarding bullying and discrimination and therefore I have no burden to support such arguments and likewise I am currently abiding by the support or retract rule since I've retracted these arguments.

    So now the burden is all yours.

    So again, SUPPORT OR RETRACT that the higher suicide rate is primarily due to a mental disorder as opposed to some other reason(s).


    And I have not shifted the burden as you have misinterpreted my argument - the asterisk is where you got my argument wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Here is how the argument stands.
    MT = Trans suffer super high suicide rates due to their mental illness + support
    Mican = What about bullying?
    MT = What about it?
    Mican = Bullying increases suicide rates.
    MT = Are you saying bullying is responsible for the 40% - 50% suicide rate?
    *Mican = No of course not.
    MT =Then it isn't relevant to this discussion or my argument.
    Mican = Challenge support that it isn't!

    (clear burden shifting)
    While I am not saying that the suicide rate accounts for 40%, I am not saying that it doesn't either. I have made it abundantly clear that neither of us have shown to what extent discrimination (again, my argument was about discrimination which is a much bigger issue than just bullying) effects the suicide rate. Therefore you have no basis to claim that it's irrelevant since you don't seem to know how relevant it is. And therefore I have every right to challenge you on your claim that it's not relevant.

    And this is the third time in three posts that I've challenged you to support or retract this rule.

    SO AGAIN. Challenge to support a claim. SUPPORT OR RETRACT that discrimination against transgendered people is not a particularly significant factor in their increase is suicide.

    While I have retracted my argument regarding the factor of discrimination, I still challenge your argument regarding discrimination. And as you have been amply challenged to support your claim that discrimination is not relevant, you cannot claim that it's not relevant without providing support or else you are in violation of the S&R rule.
    Last edited by mican333; November 2nd, 2017 at 01:31 PM.

  21. #60
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Yes I can. If your support is based on invalid sources, then it can justifiably be rejected.

    None of the sites are associated with a professional medical association which is support that they are not valid sources for professional viewpoints.
    False

    https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-s...ia-in-children
    One of the main sources I used.
    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    Primary author: Michelle Cretella, MD
    August 2016
    Updated June 2017
    Updated September 2017

    The American College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of licensed physicians and healthcare professionals who specialize in the care of infants, children, and adolescents. The mission of the College is to enable all children to reach their optimal, physical and emotional health and well-being.
    Further, the linked and quoted source is itself sourced

    Quote Originally Posted by LINK
    1. Shechner T. Gender identity disorder: a literature review from a developmental perspective. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 2010;47:132-138.

    2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed; 2013:451-459.

    3. Cohen-Kettenis PT, Owen A, Kaijser VG, Bradley SJ, Zucker KJ. Demographic characteristics, social competence, and behavior problems in children with gender identity disorder: a cross-national, cross-clinic comparative analysis. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2003;31:41–53.

    4. Singal J. How the fight over transgender kids got a leading sex researcher fired. New York Magazine, Feb 7, 2016. Available at: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/02...her-fired.html. Accessed May 15, 2016.

    5. Bancroft J, Blanchard R, Brotto L, et al. Open Letter to the Board of Trustees of CAMH; Jan 11, 2016. Available at: ipetitions.com/petition/boardoftrustees-CAMH. Accessed May 125, 2016.

    6. Youth Trans Critical Professionals. Professionals Thinking Critically about the Youth Transgender Narrative. Available at: https://youthtranscriticalprofessionals.org/about/. Accessed June 15, 2016.

    7. Skipping the puberty blockers: American “transgender children” doctors are going rogue; Nov 4, 2014. Available at: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/...e-going-rogue/. Accessed May 15, 2016.

    8. Brennan, W. Dehumanizing the Vulnerable: When word games take lives. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1995.

    9. Kuby, G. The Global Sexual Revolution: Destruction of freedom in the name of freedom. Kettering, OH: Angelico Press, 2015.

    10. Jeffeys, S. Gender Hurts: A feminist analysis of the politics of transgendersim. NY: Routledge, 2014 (p. 27).

    11. Forcier M, Olson-Kennedy J. Overview of gender development and gender nonconformity in children and adolescents. UpToDate; 2016. Available at: http://www.uptodate.com/contents/ove...=2percent7E150. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    12. Rametti G, Carrillo B, Gomez-Gil E, et al. White matter microstructure in female to male transsexuals before cross-sex hormonal treatment. A diffusion tensor imaging study. J Psychiatr Res 2011;45:199-204.

    13. Kranz GS, Hahn A, Kaufmann U, et al. White matter microstructure in transsexuals and controls investigated b diffusion tensor imaging. J Neurosci 2014;34(46):15466-15475.

    14. Gu J, Kanai R. What contributes to individual differences in brain structure? Front Hum Neurosci 2014;8:262.

    15. Reyes FI, Winter JS, Faiman C. Studies on human sexual development fetal gonadal and adrenal sex steroids. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1973;37(1):74-78.

    16. Lombardo M. Fetal testosterone influences sexually dimorphic gray matter in the human brain. J Neurosci 2012;32:674-680.

    17. Campano A. [ed]. Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Human Sexual Differentiation; 2016. Available at: http://www.gfmer.ch/Books/Reproducti...entiation.html. Accessed May 11, 2016.

    18. Shenk, D. The Genius in All of Us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong. (2010) New York, NY: Doubleday; p. 18.

    19. Diamond, M. “Transsexuality Among Twins: identity concordance, transition, rearing, and orientation.” International Journal of Transgenderism, 14(1), 24–38. (Note: the abstract of this article erroneously states that the concordance rate from MZ twins is 20 percent. Dr. Cretella, the author of this paper, “Gender Dysphoria in Children,” has therefore refernced Dr. Diamond’s data directly to demonstrate that the actual concordance rate is slightly higher at 28 percent.)

    20. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development. Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development in Childhood. Intersex Society of North America; 2006. Available at: www.dsdguidelines.org/files/clinical.pdf. Accessed Mar 20, 2016.

    21. Zucker KJ, Bradley SJ. Gender Identity and Psychosexual Disorders. FOCUS 2005;3(4):598-617.

    22. Zucker KJ, Bradley SJ, Ben-Dat DN, et al. Psychopathology in the parents of boys with gender identity disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2003;42:2-4.

    23. Kaltiala-Heino et al. Two years of gender identity service for minors: overrepresentation of natal girls with severe problems in adolescent development. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health (2015) 9:9.

    24. Zucker KJ, Spitzer RL. Was the Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood Diagnosis Introduced into DSM-III as a Backdoor Maneurver to Replace Homosexuality? Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy. 2005;31:31-42.

    25. Roberts A. Considering alternative explanations for the associations among childhood adversity, childhood abuse, and adult sexual orientation: reply to Bailey and Bailey (2013) and Rind (2013). Arch Sexual Behav 2014;43:191-196.

    26. Blom RM, Hennekam RC, Denys D. Body integrity identity disorder. PLoS One 2012;7(4).

    27. Lawrence A. Clinical and theoretical parallels between desire for limb amputation and gender identity disorder. Arch Sexual Behavior 2006;35:263-278.

    28. King CD. The meaning of normal. Yale J Biol Med 1945;18:493-501.

    29. Cohen-Kettenis PT, Delemarre-van de Waal HA, Gooren LJ. The treatment of adolescent transsexuals: changing insights. J Sexual Med 2008;5:1892–1897.

    30. Bailey MJ, Triea K. What many transsexual activists don’t want you to know and why you should know it anyway. Perspect Biol Med 2007;50:521-534. Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17951886. Accessed May 11, 2016.

    31. Sadjadi S. The endocrinologist’s office–puberty suppression: saving children from a natural disaster? Med Humanit 2013;34:255-260.

    32. Bertolote JM, Fleischmann A. Suicide and psychiatric diagnosis: a worldwide perspective. World Psychiatry 2002;1(3):181–185.

    33. Eyler AE, Pang SC, Clark A. LGBT assisted reproduction: current practice and future possibilities. LGBT Health 2014;1(3):151-156.

    34. Schmidt L, Levine R. Psychological outcomes and reproductive issues among gender dysphoric individuals. Endocrinol Metab Clin N Am 2015;44:773-785.

    35. Jeffreys, S. The transgendering of children: gender eugenics. Women’s Studies International Forum 2012;35:384-393.

    36. Johnson SB, Blum RW, Giedd JN. Adolescent maturity and the brain: the promise and pitfalls of neuroscience research in adolescent health policy. J Adolesc Health 2009;45(3):216-221.

    37. US Department of Health and Human Services. Nuremberg Code; 2015. Available at: http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/people/tsia...mberg-code.pdf. Accessed 5/15/16.

    38. World Health Organization. Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization. Interagency Statement; 2014. Available at: http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/...ization_en.pdf. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    39. Hayes, Inc. Sex reassignment surgery for the treatment of gender dysphoria. Hayes Medical Technology Directory. Lansdale, Pa.: Winifred Hayes; May 15, 2014.

    40. Hayes, Inc. Hormone therapy for the treatment of gender dysphoria. Hayes Medical Technology Directory. Lansdale, Pa: Winifred Hayes; May 19, 2014.

    41. Kennedy P. Q & A with Norman Spack: a doctor helps children change their gender. Boston Globe, Mar 30, 2008. Available at http://archive.boston.com/bostonglob..._norman_spack/. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    42. Hembree WC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Delemarre-van de Wall HA, et al. Endocrine treatment of transsexual persons: An Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009;94:3132-3154.

    43. Reardon S. Transgender youth study kicks off: scientists will track psychological and medical outcomes of controversial therapies to help transgender teens to transition. Nature 2016;531:560. Available at: http://www.nature.com/news/largest-e...ck-off-1.19637. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    44. Keleman M. What do transgender children need? Houstonian Magazine, Nov 3, 2014. Available at: http://www.houstoniamag.com/articles...-november-2014. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    45. Farwell S. Free to be themselves: Children’s Medical Center Dallas opens clinic for transgender children and teenagers, the only pediatric center of its type in the Southwest. Dallas Morning News, Jun 4, 2015. Available at: http://interactives.dallasnews.com/2015/gender/. Accessed May 16, 2016.

    46. De Vries ALC, Steensma TD, Doreleijers TAH, Cohen-Kettenis, PT. Puberty suppression in adolescents with gender identity disorder: a prospective follow-up study. J Sex Med 2011;8:2276-2283.

    47. Feldman J, Brown GR, Deutsch MB, et al. Priorities for transgender medical and healthcare research. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2016;23:180-187.

    48. Tangpricha V. Treatment of transsexualism. UpToDate Available at: http://www.uptodate.com/contents/tre...search_result& search=treatment+of+transsexualism&selectedTitle=1percent7E8. Accessed May 14, 2016.

    49. Moore E, Wisniewski A, Dobs A. Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: a review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003;88:3467-3473.

    50. Dhejne, C, et.al. “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.” PLoS ONE, 2011; 6(2). Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Accessed 7.11.16 from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0016885.

    51. Clements-Nolle, K., et al. HIV prevalence, risk behaviors, health care use and mental health status of transgender persons: implications for public health intervention. Am J Public Health 2001;91(6):915-21.

    52. Kuhn, A., et al. Quality of Life 15 years after sex reassignment surgery for transsexualism. Fertility and Sterility 2009;92(5):1685-89.

    53. Burgess D, Lee R, Tran A, van Ryn M. Effects of Perceived Discrimination on Mental Health and Mental Health Services Utilization Among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Persons. Journal of LGBT Health Research 2008;3(4): 1-14.
    Beyond that one, I was generally quoting portions of the other links that referenced actual studies.

    So your objection is completely unfounded.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    While I am not saying that the suicide rate accounts for 40%, I am not saying that it doesn't either.
    Then it isn't an issue on the table then.
    There is nothing for me to counter or address, and my arguments stands until you want to actually address it.

    you can find it in post 52.


    Anyway, respectfully, I have no further interest in discussing this topic with you.
    Thanks for your time.
    I apologize to anyone waiting on a response from me. I am experiencing a time warp, suddenly their are not enough hours in a day. As soon as I find a replacement part to my flux capacitor regulator, time should resume it's normal flow.

 

 
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •