It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

American College of Pediatricians Says Reject Transgenderism

page: 27
75
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2016 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: ketsuko

They know that gender is solely in the brain, and therefore, it is 100% subjective.


Not true. Sex represents gender. The people with gender dysphoria are uncomfortable in their bodies and believe they should be the opposite SEX.

99.9% of the human race has either the MALE or FEMALE chromosome which is in nucleus of every single cell in their entire body. Never a mixture of the two unless on very very rare occasions in which a person is intersex.

There is no difference between species dysphoria and gender dypshoria. There is absolutely no difference between a boy who thinks he should be a male chimp, and a a boy who thinks he should be a girl.


I'd ask you for sources, but I'll just save time and state that you're either mistaken or intentionally being dishonest and leave it at that.

There is considerable evidence in this very thread that refutes 99.99% of your spurious claims here.

[ X ]
edit on 18-5-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Can't let it go




posted on May, 18 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: ketsuko

I find it amusing how as this fake debate rages on, the potential society upending threat has been winnowed down to men walking into women's locker rooms.

It's like conservatives are stuck on the plot of some campy 80's movie.

What laws were on the books this time last year that prevented men from entering women's locker rooms that have been circumvented by this "giant loophole" you speak of? I'm pretty sure that loopholes require laws to exist in the first place. How would these laws even be enforced?

Are we going to have frantic calls to 911 about suspected interlopers?

"She says her name is Anne Coulter and that she's a female but I just... I just can't be sure. Her hands are huge. Please send help quickly! Society is in immediate danger of being upended."


What a Transgender thinks.

*Drops Mic*



Were you totally surprised to find a trans* person who espouses standard right-wing rhetoric?

LOL.

You might also be surprised that there are also Americans who are gay, Black, Latino, lower and middle income White and Women who also support politics that are not in their own best interests.

Every demographic has outliers.

*puts mic back on stand*


Nope, just found a Transgender who points out the actual issue. But sure, its "standard right-wing rhetoric".....You really are the problem LOL.


"No, you're the problem. Nyah."

Trans* folks constitute, on a low estimate about 1% of the population, give or take.

So your claim is that 1/3.3 M is "significant"?

Again, 856,784th verse same as the first: Confirmation bias



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: ketsuko

I find it amusing how as this fake debate rages on, the potential society upending threat has been winnowed down to men walking into women's locker rooms.

It's like conservatives are stuck on the plot of some campy 80's movie.

What laws were on the books this time last year that prevented men from entering women's locker rooms that have been circumvented by this "giant loophole" you speak of? I'm pretty sure that loopholes require laws to exist in the first place. How would these laws even be enforced?

Are we going to have frantic calls to 911 about suspected interlopers?

"She says her name is Anne Coulter and that she's a female but I just... I just can't be sure. Her hands are huge. Please send help quickly! Society is in immediate danger of being upended."


What a Transgender thinks.

*Drops Mic*



Were you totally surprised to find a trans* person who espouses standard right-wing rhetoric?

LOL.

You might also be surprised that there are also Americans who are gay, Black, Latino, lower and middle income White and Women who also support politics that are not in their own best interests.

Every demographic has outliers.

*puts mic back on stand*


Nope, just found a Transgender who points out the actual issue. But sure, its "standard right-wing rhetoric".....You really are the problem LOL.


"No, you're the problem. Nyah."

Trans* folks constitute, on a low estimate about 1% of the population, give or take.

So your claim is that 1/3.3 M is "significant"?

Again, 856,784th verse same as the first: Confirmation bias


More like 0.3% as of 2011, so lets be generous and say 0.7% give or take.

Havent had my morning coffee yet so..Wat?




856,784th verse same as the first


And that can't be grammatically correct.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

LOL ... you've done surveys then? Care to link 'em?

Ah, nevermind, we'll cooperate and

Let's round it off to 0.75% and have done, eh?

According to the census.gov record, at the time of this posting there are 323,484,554 Americans (with one being born every 8 seconds).

Taking that into account, our combined estimate for Trans* Americans is 2,426,134 people.

So, given that your total is 1/2,426,134 or about 0.00000041 for Trans* folks who agree with your "position.'

Grammar? Nope, just a riff on an old song ... (if you're in a hurry, 0:28 or thereabouts)


edit on 18-5-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
youtube: Gay science is all fake, how gays control psychology
youtu.be...

Gay activist are very fond of throwing science into the face of all that disagree with them. The only problem is--that "science" is FAKE. Dr. Nicholas Andrew Cummings explains in great detail how gay activist got into control of American psychology in the 1970's and manipulated it from then on for political gain, making sure that being gay was never actually studied and thereby no actual scientific results were ever produced.

THIS IS IMPORTANT! This isn't just any old doctor, THIS IS THE MAN that made the resolution that declassified homosexuality as a mental illness, WHICH IS THE REASON SO MANY PEOPLE IN AMERICA THINK THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING GAY, AND THAT ANYONE WHO DOES IS A CAVE MAN. When Dr. Cummings, as president of the American Psychological Association (APA) made the resolution it was stipulated that honest and open unbiased research would be done on the subject to make sure that this change was accurate scientifically. THAT RESEARCH WAS NEVER DONE.

In those days the American Psychological Association had a rule called "The Leona Tyler Principle," that stated that all findings would be based on "scientific data and demonstrable professional experience." After the decision to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness was made, gay activist and their allies gained control of the APA and from then on all findings were cherry picked in favor of what these people wanted the information to say to serve their political needs. The Leona Tyler Principle not only ceased to be followed, it was wiped from the annals of the APA, and with that, dedication to reason and logic stopped. Political stances overrode scientific results, and as time progressed it became about building the case for homosexuality as a civil rights issue, instead of about studying homosexuality scientifically.

Its important to realize that this doctor is not an extremist. He is not even against gay marriage. He is just dedicated to science and thinks that results that are purported as scientific ought to actually be scientific.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: mouthfullofkefirgrains
youtube: Gay science is all fake, how gays control psychology
youtu.be...

Gay activist are very fond of throwing science into the face of all that disagree with them. The only problem is--that "science" is FAKE. Dr. Nicholas Andrew Cummings explains in great detail how gay activist got into control of American psychology in the 1970's and manipulated it from then on for political gain, making sure that being gay was never actually studied and thereby no actual scientific results were ever produced.

THIS IS IMPORTANT! This isn't just any old doctor, THIS IS THE MAN that made the resolution that declassified homosexuality as a mental illness, WHICH IS THE REASON SO MANY PEOPLE IN AMERICA THINK THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING GAY, AND THAT ANYONE WHO DOES IS A CAVE MAN. When Dr. Cummings, as president of the American Psychological Association (APA) made the resolution it was stipulated that honest and open unbiased research would be done on the subject to make sure that this change was accurate scientifically. THAT RESEARCH WAS NEVER DONE.

In those days the American Psychological Association had a rule called "The Leona Tyler Principle," that stated that all findings would be based on "scientific data and demonstrable professional experience." After the decision to declassify homosexuality as a mental illness was made, gay activist and their allies gained control of the APA and from then on all findings were cherry picked in favor of what these people wanted the information to say to serve their political needs. The Leona Tyler Principle not only ceased to be followed, it was wiped from the annals of the APA, and with that, dedication to reason and logic stopped. Political stances overrode scientific results, and as time progressed it became about building the case for homosexuality as a civil rights issue, instead of about studying homosexuality scientifically.

Its important to realize that this doctor is not an extremist. He is not even against gay marriage. He is just dedicated to science and thinks that results that are purported as scientific ought to actually be scientific.


I have something for you and all your natural law belivers. If being Gay is just choice EXPLAIN why ANIMALS GO GAY.

My sound sliek its found in Nature so it cant be Un natural correct? A bit of a contradiction maybe?

Also being transgender doe snot mean we all want to screw a guy. were not all into Guys or girls. Legally I would still be a male even if i transistioned biologically so how would i be gay then if i persued a woman?. People need to look beyond the books cover.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I love when Christians get all hatey about gays and transsexuals because of Leviticus but never consider stoning someone to death for working on Sunday. Or how they get divorced. Or how they don't take communion because they're Protestant even though Jesus himself said there's life for those that take it and death for those that don't. Or how thou shall make no graven image.

All those things can be conveniently ignored, but it's the gays and transsexuals that are part of the evil satanic conspiracy.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

Oh yeah we're getting tired of the far right Fundamental Christians making issues up like this. They are sore losers in the gay marriage and they've decided to attack the transgender people because it's election year.


You mean like you and a few others in here claiming that conservatives have been in favor of slavery, when it was the left that wanted to keep slaves?...

The actual social reform movement was hijacked by socialists who to this day have been brainwashing people like you into believing that "socialism made everyone free" when "socialism has always enforced the will of the government on everyone"...

You think all these policies Obama, and his socialist administration are implementing are to help you or your movement? They are just using your idealism so that they can impose more and more government control over people's lives, and you are too blind and too brainwashed to realize it.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 09:17 PM
link   
The fact that this thread exists and there are so many close minded people is sad.

Anyone who calls this a matter of "feelings" people "feel like the opposite gender" haven't ACTUALLY researched the topic with a sympathetic heart. This is a REALITY for people. A cold hard reality that they themselves have a hard time accepting let alone a large percentage of the world that calls them freaks for wanting to find happiness. Comparing Trans people with furries who any day can just quit wearing a tail and call it a day? Saying it's the same thing as someone calling themself a cat and wanting an oversized litterbox to a Trans person who may want to go to college get married eventually have kids see the world and die like anyone else? # absolute #. Just because it isn't YOUR reality doesn't mean it isn't OTHER PEOPLES which is honestly something so trivial it's a wonder people don't understand that concept. Hey I may not be transgender but that doesn't mean people that are are crazy. Alternatively the phrase "walk in someone elses shoes" does that ring a bell?

See a lot of trans people have to accept what their lives are going to be even despite all the things they want. This might be a bit too hard to understand for some people but the things people take for granted because they are happy in the body they were born with can be things trans people have to live knowing they will never have. It isn't a man wanting to put on a dress fool straight men and call it a day. It's wanting the experience. It's wanting to know what periods are and getting asked out for the first time and finding the right size bra and that dress for that special occasion or having biological kids of their own that they can never do. There's such an internal battle going on inside of trans people no matter what bull# research from whatever you call a credible source you pull up if you can't sympathize with what they go through you don't know squat about it point period and you Are wrong. There is no opinion on the topic you either accept that these people are people like you and me that want the same things you and me do or well shun a whole group of people just cause you want to.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
So while Obama and the rest of the nut cases have no problem committing child abuse (using the words from this article), the American College of Pediatricians says to "reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex.".

So who to believe...a liar or Pediatricians? Not too difficult.

Some of the covered subjects:

A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking.

According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.

Here is the article: ACPEDS.org


I think that the source, the information etc. basically ends any argument. What do YOU think? And you might want to keep in mind that these people are educated Doctors, not emotional and potentially emotionally impaired.


Excellent. Voices of reason. Common sense is dead among the brainwashed Left-wingers. They're incapable of independent thinking. They follow whatever cause they're told to follow -- especially if the "kewl" celebs follow it.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: AuranVector

SOrry Ive always believed this since i was a teenager and thats was about 25 yrs ago. before this crap hit the fan. I go whatever way i want and do not believe everything celebrities say. Global warming for example. its BS. So before you go lumping us all together research a bit.

Ops wrong and has been debunked. topics done.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: jimbo999

Do you belief religious people have the right to be religious? Or is it a psychological problem that should not be catered to?

I didn't say social engineering was kooky. I said the idea of the government trying to bring down western democracies was kooky.


I don't see religious people demanding special privileges in public places. Where are the demands for pulpits in the stores? Sunday School lessons in locker rooms? What? There aren't any? Your little attempt failed.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
8snip*

Well then, let's go after the real danger to children, eh? One substantiated over decades?

There is overwhelming evidence that some priests, pastors and others in religious authority regularly molest children of all sexes.

Shouldn't we close the churches because of this very prevalent and long-standing trend? "For the children?"

What rank absurdity! Of course not.

The source of all this hysteria is that some fundamentalists and some conservatives have been utterly devastated that civil rights and equal rights are being legally achieved by Americans who they consider deviant, perverted and vile. Period.


Yes, that is absurd. First off, it's inflammatory to pretend that most religious people are pedophiles, and you know it. Second, that sort of thing doesn't happen in churches that have standards for conduct. Meaning, those with children work in pairs, and doors cannot be closed, or view blocked into the rooms, bathroom trips are likewise handled, and there are not made opportunities for such abuses. Now that your deflection from the actual topic has been addressed care to address the very real cases of people taking advantage of these new directives, and why such directives should, in your opinion, be allowed, even in the face of the obvious issues?



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Where was the outrage over "family style" bathrooms? These started appearing regularly in public over a decade ago?

Where were the horror stories of men (who could enter these areas freely as well as women and childre) lying in wait for predation?

Was it basically silent?

Is it still basically silent among the hysterical reactions noted here?

Why is that?


Family bathrooms had individual LOCKS on the doors, meaning, when you went in with your kids, no one else could enter till you were done. These could be quite handy for families with small children. I or the hubby could push a stroller in, change diapers, use the can, and so forth, with NO ONE ELSE entering, till we unlocked the door and exited. That's far different from a free-for-all system where anyone can go into whichever restroom they want.

It's already being abused, as many posted links have shown. Do you want some pervert in the changing room with your kids, watching them change? I don't, and neither do my kids. With laws like this, one would need to catch them filming to even be allowed to complain. So, they simply watch, and all is well? NO. Not happening when it comes to MY kids.



posted on May, 19 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
NARTH? That's being dredged up again?





Part I – A “Fraudulent Healthcare System”

“If you’re going to challenge the archdiocese in its attempts to introduce what I consider to be a ‘fraudulent healthcare service,’” said Gonsiorek, “then you need to become educated about what the behavioral sciences say about sexual orientation. That has to be the base from which you operate as opposed to reacting to the ‘flakiness’ of organizations like NARTH.”

The Origins of NARTH

Dr. Gonsiorek then proceeded to provide some insightful background information on the origins of NARTH – origins inseparable from the wider cultural debate on homosexuality and, specifically, the American Psychiatric Association's 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from its official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders (followed two years later by the passage of a similar resolution of the American Psychological Association).

This change in the diagnosis of homosexuality was the result of the wealth of research data gathered since the early 1950s that showed no difference between homosexual and heterosexual populations in terms of “adjustment.”

Gonsiorek also noted that a significant “sea change” took place in the early 1970s when biological psychiatry began taking over the field of behavioral science from the psychoanalytical establishment. Indeed, the change in the diagnosis of homosexuality, says Gonsiorek, was “essentially a run-up of a long-standing fight” between these two groups, and was an important moment for the biological psychiatrists, “not only because they had a strong data base to support such a change, but because the psychoanalysts had always considered human sexuality to be their domain.”

In time, the psychoanalytical establishment also changed in its understanding of homosexuality; it now has the same sets of policies and principles about sexual orientation as the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association. Yet there were “old guard” psychoanalysts who were disgruntled about being displaced and seeing their organization change its views on homosexuality. This disaffected group of psychoanalysts formed an alliance with conservatively- and religiously-oriented psychotherapists. It was from this alliance that NARTH was established.thewildreed.blogspot.com...




posted on May, 19 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
SnF! I agree with the American College of Pediatricians. Of coarse, the misguided will always disagree.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Violater1
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
SnF! I agree with the American College of Pediatricians. Of coarse, the misguided will always disagree.


To bad they arent a accredited unbiased source. Sorry Ill take 60,000 doctors agreeing over 200 or so. The ones you say you believe also say Being Gay is a choice,but if thats true then why do we see it in nature? quite a coincidence huh?



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Of course every Family Restroom was exactly similar to the one you and the hubby frequented.

... and unisex restrooms? Remember, the (supposed) problem here is possible exposure of women and girls to men in the same restroom.

##SNIPPED##

Ah yes the famously repeated loaded question "Do we want perverts in the restrooms?" Nope.

Allowing trans* folks to use the correct restroom does nothing to increase that risk, as has been posted many times as well.

The LAWS in question are the ones trying to police the bathrooms! Your kids are in no more danger from Trans* folk now than they were yesterday. The genitals of the person using a stall next to you (or your kids) is NOT YOUR BUSINESS!

A "pervert" (by which we will assume you mean a heterosexual male predator rather than someone of alternate gender identity or sexual preference) is not going to be stopped by these laws! Predators are going to do what they've always done.

All these laws are doing is providing a perfect example of the core authoritarianism at the heart of the "right wing zealots" who are far more interested in government intrusion into our most private lives than any so-called "leftist liberal progressive."

People have a right to privacy. Their "genital status" is none of your damned business. If you're so frightened that something might happen to your kids in public, go guard them, or let them go at home.

Don't try to invade other people's lives on an absurdly manufactured BS government overreach that thinly masquerades as an assault on LGBT rights.
edit on 20-5-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted

edit on Sat May 21 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66
8snip*

Well then, let's go after the real danger to children, eh? One substantiated over decades?

There is overwhelming evidence that some priests, pastors and others in religious authority regularly molest children of all sexes.

Shouldn't we close the churches because of this very prevalent and long-standing trend? "For the children?"

What rank absurdity! Of course not.

The source of all this hysteria is that some fundamentalists and some conservatives have been utterly devastated that civil rights and equal rights are being legally achieved by Americans who they consider deviant, perverted and vile. Period.


Yes, that is absurd. First off, it's inflammatory to pretend that most religious people are pedophiles, and you know it. Second, that sort of thing doesn't happen in churches that have standards for conduct. Meaning, those with children work in pairs, and doors cannot be closed, or view blocked into the rooms, bathroom trips are likewise handled, and there are not made opportunities for such abuses. Now that your deflection from the actual topic has been addressed care to address the very real cases of people taking advantage of these new directives, and why such directives should, in your opinion, be allowed, even in the face of the obvious issues?


Inflamatory? Oh, now that's rich! But you have no problem implying that all LGBT folks are mentally ill?

Well, Mrs. Teapot ... Mr. Kettle says hello.

There is an obvious statistical danger for sexual predation by those in religious authority and YOU KNOW THAT.

There is far, orders of magnitude more actual data, actual occurrences of religious authorities committing these sorts of crimes. "That sort of thing doesn't happen" you're just lying there and YOU KNOW THAT.

So, explain to us why, we should let priests, pastors and so forth use public facilities. There's actual evidence that these authorities have a much higher incidence of sexual predation than Trans* folks (or the imaginary "man in a dress").

It's not a deflection, it's a far more valid concern directly related to the utter nonsense being presented here.

Address it or move on from attempting conversation with me, as you're proving yourself to be more and more dishonest with each post.




top topics



 
75
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join