I’m a Pediatrician Trans Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: CurlySue

The apostle Paul wrote

This is where you lost all credibility.....doctor(?).

Still doesnt negate anything said previously..........you can pick and choose whatever you want to be offended by out of what she said......but that doesnt make it any less true......

You cant sit there and say someone lost credibility because they used faith to back up their claims, when clearly science says they are accurate.....YES maybe shes religious, but that doesnt meant the rest of it wasnt on point.....

And they call conservatives science deniers

originally posted by: Domo1
I'm amused how many people think OP is a pediatrician. I suppose the article could be about her, but I doubt it.

C'mon now... think kind thoughts 😏

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Mousygretchen
a reply to: Abysha

No Dear you see certain parents may be a bit TOO liberal.

Just remember that children are malleable and nebulous. I wouldn't support the supporting of transgender feelings in a person until about 14 or so. Anyway, I'm just trying to defend the conservative side. I'm a trans girl and I used to be very liberal.

Does that mean you would misgender your child until they were 14?

And whats the harm in waiting till a child is 18 and is more developed and an adult to make those decisions?
We do that with a lot of things, and SCIENCE says that peoples brains and personality continue to evolve as they get older.....

Making permanent decisions like hormone therapy on younger children and adolescence , while they are still developing who they are is a horrible thing to do......

Im not saying dont let them experiment and try different things and such.....kids like what they like, but that continues to evolve.....

I just dont advocate doing the more hard line things that young

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Domo1
I'm amused how many people think OP is a pediatrician. I suppose the article could be about her, but I doubt it.

C'mon now... think kind thoughts 😏

She may or may not be.......that doesnt negate anything said......

Im amused that you can claim she isnt when you dont know.......2 sides of the same coin

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Domo1
I'm amused how many people think OP is a pediatrician. I suppose the article could be about her, but I doubt it.

C'mon now... think kind thoughts 😏

She may or may not be.......that doesnt negate anything said......

Im amused that you can claim she isnt when you dont know.......2 sides of the same coin

You are misconstruing my post 😕

I DO believe she is a doctor .. it was domo who ridiculed those that may believe ...so I quoted his sig to him.

a reply to: Sheye

Not ridiculing anyone for believing, just think that since the title of the thread is the same as the article people are getting confused and assuming OP is the pediatrician.

Nothing unkind about it.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

What science supports the OP? Certainly any of the misrepresented fluff and buff presented in the OP.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Sheye

Not ridiculing anyone for believing, just think that since the title of the thread is the same as the article people are getting confused and assuming OP is the pediatrician.

Nothing unkind about it.

My deepest apologies . You are correct that some of us made that assumption that it meant her... and so it was not unkind of you to point that out. Feel bad domo.. so sorry I misconstrued what you meant as well as thread title 😕.. curlysue doesn't need that sort of confusion.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Sheye

Not ridiculing anyone for believing, just think that since the title of the thread is the same as the article people are getting confused and assuming OP is the pediatrician.

Nothing unkind about it.

It does make it appear that way. Unless there had been quotation marks in thread title. The recent join date as well might make it appear this 'paediatrician' was busting to get this out of her system.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Mousygretchen
a reply to: Abysha

No Dear you see certain parents may be a bit TOO liberal.

Just remember that children are malleable and nebulous. I wouldn't support the supporting of transgender feelings in a person until about 14 or so. Anyway, I'm just trying to defend the conservative side. I'm a trans girl and I used to be very liberal.

Does that mean you would misgender your child until they were 14?

And whats the harm in waiting till a child is 18 and is more developed and an adult to make those decisions?
We do that with a lot of things, and SCIENCE says that peoples brains and personality continue to evolve as they get older.....

Making permanent decisions like hormone therapy on younger children and adolescence , while they are still developing who they are is a horrible thing to do......

Im not saying dont let them experiment and try different things and such.....kids like what they like, but that continues to evolve.....

I just dont advocate doing the more hard line things that young

She's a member of a conservative advocacy group for about 500 pediatrics. The real authority is the American Academy of Pediatrics (64,000 pediatrician members) who disagree with just about all of her "science".

You can choose to believe the one less objectively likely to be knowledgeable on the subject or you can just use occams razor and go with the obvious credible orginization. But if you stick with the religious doctor in the OP, ask yourself why you give her more credence when she's obviously in a tiny minority of pediatrics?

a reply to: Sheye

My deepest apologies

No need. It was my initial impression too.

so sorry I misconstrued what you meant as well as thread title

Don't be. I changed my sig line for you because I thought this exchange was funny! It's easy to misinterpret online.

a reply to: Domo1

😂 .. thanks for the chuckle.. did my heart good..( yes my heart feels laughter ...ask my doc )

a reply to: Abysha
That Doctor wrote a response to just the kind of attacks you are leveling against her and her organization.

It reads in part:

If you don’t like the message, you can always shoot the messenger

Labels, such as hate group, extremist, right wing, miniscule, Christian fundamentalist, and deceptively named, reveal desperate attempts to deflect attention away from facts that undermine a desired agenda.


It is true that we are relatively smaller than other medical organizations; we have 500 members and counting. Ultimately, however, this is irrelevant to the veracity of our statements; sound science and ethics are not determined by majority vote.

Then again, most of our detractors have never bothered to give our website, position statements, let alone any of the hundreds of scientific references there, a careful read. Were they to do so, they would realize how easily their alternative facts would be refuted, particularly those regarding Gender Dysphoria in Children.

Affirming pre-pubertal gender dysphoric children as transgender potentially translates into a significant percentage of LGB adults being sterilized. Consequently, some members of the LGB community stand with the ACPeds against this “transgendering of children” which they view as nothing less than the single greatest form of homophobic hatred, namely, eugenics.

Contrary to popular belief, there is no evidence that the elevated rates of mental illness and suicide among transgender-identified youth and adults are due solely, or even predominately, to societal prejudice or discrimination. At least one 2008 study by LGBT-affirming researchers, noted in our Gender dysphoriaposition statement, found these factors not to be causative.

The whole rebuttal is here, not that you will read it...

www.mercatornet.com...

originally posted by: soccermom
a reply to: Abysha
That Doctor wrote a response to just the kind of attacks you are leveling against her and her organization.

It reads in part:

If you don’t like the message, you can always shoot the messenger

Labels, such as hate group, extremist, right wing, miniscule, Christian fundamentalist, and deceptively named, reveal desperate attempts to deflect attention away from facts that undermine a desired agenda.


It is true that we are relatively smaller than other medical organizations; we have 500 members and counting. Ultimately, however, this is irrelevant to the veracity of our statements; sound science and ethics are not determined by majority vote.

Then again, most of our detractors have never bothered to give our website, position statements, let alone any of the hundreds of scientific references there, a careful read. Were they to do so, they would realize how easily their alternative facts would be refuted, particularly those regarding Gender Dysphoria in Children.

Affirming pre-pubertal gender dysphoric children as transgender potentially translates into a significant percentage of LGB adults being sterilized. Consequently, some members of the LGB community stand with the ACPeds against this “transgendering of children” which they view as nothing less than the single greatest form of homophobic hatred, namely, eugenics.

Contrary to popular belief, there is no evidence that the elevated rates of mental illness and suicide among transgender-identified youth and adults are due solely, or even predominately, to societal prejudice or discrimination. At least one 2008 study by LGBT-affirming researchers, noted in our Gender dysphoriaposition statement, found these factors not to be causative.

The whole rebuttal is here, not that you will read it...

www.mercatornet.com...

Yes. But that's not the issue. Her obviously biased and motivated background is only a red flag. The problem is that her paper is wrong. And her science is wrong. There is already one post on here detailing enough reasons to make anybody but the most die-hard conservative question her expertise.

I brought up the differences between the two boards to point out that hers is not a medical board. It's only named to make it sound like the real one with 64,000 pediatricians who disagree with her.

It's not the messager; it's the entire message. It's not backed by anything.

All of this is silly, your born a boy or a girl, simple, dick or vagina

I want off this ride.

Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
"Gender Dysphoria in Children and
Suppression of Debate"

Ok if you think this is a hate group you have lost your mind in your on little world of cognitive dissonance, yes they have come up with things I personally disagree with, but they are not a hate group.

I have to agree with this statement from the article "protocol is rooted in an unscientific
gender ideology, lacks an evidence base, and violates the longstanding
ethical principle of “First do no harm.”.

It is common sense that before adolescent hormones begin to flow nobody should be adding drugs to the child to suppress or increase whatever they are mixed up about, as the OP stated, that would be like letting a 10 year old drive on a busy interstate highway for the first time, the chance for a fatal accident would be high.

The problem is the advocates of this ideology are so wrapped up in protecting and advancing it that they really don't care if some children become roadkill along the way.

Shame on them.

What do you call a group of people that are trying to protect all children from a very harmful ideology......I know it isn't trans-phobic.
Once they are adults they can do whatever they want, do whatever makes them happy, I don't care....BUT leave the children alone.

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

What science supports the OP? Certainly any of the misrepresented fluff and buff presented in the OP.

The science that determines your gender at birth?

I.E. chromosomes? Do I really have to map that out?

a reply to: Abysha

Well unlike others clearly bias about the religious aspect, which I completely dismissed , I took into account actual science that determines our sex at birth

That being said I don't discriminate on anyone

I do however believe she is right , the hard line methods people are taking w their children in regards to things such as hormone therapy at such a young age are destructive to kids who are still trying to figure out their own identity and beliefs, much less sexual orientation

Well leaving religion out of this.....

Is it child abuse if you :
1. Physically beat a child
2. Sexually molest a child
3. Verbally torture a child
4. Psychologically torture a child

If yes to the above, allowing a child (anyone under 16 or 17 depending on the state you live in - and the state of denial doesn't count) to pursue this, it meets the criteria for child abuse.

Also, being a stickler for "studies" I must ask you for the peer reviewed journal articles and studies that show gender identify and gender fluidity doesn't exist. You state they are flawed. Present them or that should be removed from your post.

Personally- I don't give a darn on this topic. Just don't shove it in my face. We should spend more time and energy helping proven actual child abuse victims and child trafficking victim.