Trans[gender] Fact Checker: The Reality Behind the Myths

originally posted by: TzarChasm
So there are no transgender folk on this forum? That's a shame, I feel like we need someone who is living it to talk about their experience to really understand how it works.

There were several at one point but we get bully mobbed and dismissed no matter what data and/or personal experience we share. There’s no point in talking about it here anymore unless you want to bash Trans people for easy stars and “attaboy’s”.

a reply to: Boadicea

New Transgender curriculum.

But nonsense is what the activists at Gender Spectrum are peddling in their new publication, entitled “Principles of Gender-Inclusive Puberty and Health Education (‘Gender-Inclusive Puberty’).” It’s fake science, designed to further the LGBTQ agenda of Gender Spectrum and the six activist organizations behind the document: Planned Parenthood, Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), Advocates for Youth, Answer, GLSEN, and the Human Rights Campaign.

This has five principles of gender and sexuality education that the above groups want teachers to teach in schools as a means of making sex ed on puberty "more inclusive".

They want gender literacy for all kids, bodies follow patterns, puberty happens to body parts without sex, there are many pathways to adult bodies (including drugs and surgery), and embracing the full array of family building options including sterilizing teen bodies.

It's all about talking about bodies without using sex which explains how the man above lost his baby.

originally posted by: RainbowPhoenix

originally posted by: TzarChasm
So there are no transgender folk on this forum? That's a shame, I feel like we need someone who is living it to talk about their experience to really understand how it works.

There were several at one point but we get bully mobbed and dismissed no matter what data and/or personal experience we share. There’s no point in talking about it here anymore unless you want to bash Trans people for easy stars and “attaboy’s”.

We? Do you have any personal insights on this movement?

I guess my general feeling on it is, who cares? I got no issues with some dude who wants to live as a chick. I don't. I suppose there are legitimate reasons for why you wouldn't want a dude in a women's restroom but wouldn't that be pretty much the same thing as a gay woman in a women's restroom? You think gay women are not gonna perv on other women in the restroom?

a reply to: ketsuko

Thank you for the link -- that's quite a read.

It makes no sense to focus on "gender" and to completely ignore sex. Especially because our sex is being reduced to bits and parts, rather than the intricate system that it is. A woman is not just a vagina, but multiple organs and such interconnected and working together for various purposes and functions. Likewise, a man is not just a penis. There is sooooooo much more to our bodies! They really are amazing machines.

Another gross disservice being done to our kids...

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
I guess my general feeling on it is, who cares?

I guess you didn't read the OP. I know you didn't address the OP topic.

I got no issues with some dude who wants to live as a chick. I don't. I suppose there are legitimate reasons for why you wouldn't want a dude in a women's restroom but wouldn't that be pretty much the same thing as a gay woman in a women's restroom?

Especially because of their disproportionately high rates of violence against women, especially sexual violence.

You think gay women are not gonna perv on other women in the restroom?

LOL! Nice try, but no. In all my years, I have been openly "perved on" by men anywhere and everywhere... I have NEVER been "perved on" by a woman -- in a bathroom or elsewhere. And I have known lesbians my entire life. So while it might seem to be a relevant analogy, it's not.

Also important, quite a few things are handled in the ladies' room, which have everything to do with our specific body -- the female body -- and for which we need privacy and dignity to take care of. And which men do not want to be part of, including those men who claim to be women. (Despite the hype to the contrary, being a woman ain't for sissies...)

Most important of all, women do not have the same predatory tendencies that men do. But IF that happened,, then women have a much better chance defending themselves from any woman that did try to assault them. Not so much with most men that would assault them.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
I guess my general feeling on it is, who cares? I got no issues with some dude who wants to live as a chick. I don't. I suppose there are legitimate reasons for why you wouldn't want a dude in a women's restroom but wouldn't that be pretty much the same thing as a gay woman in a women's restroom? You think gay women are not gonna perv on other women in the restroom?

I've been hit on by a woman before. It's not the same as being hit on by a guy, is not the same as a guy who won't take no for an answer.

Lesbians generally act like women act, and women generally aren't as persistent as men can be. I say generally because I've seen those idiots who will hound a man, but even then, they aren't generally physically coercive on the level of threatening to physically overpower the guy like a man will be to a woman. And that's what women don't want from men in our locker rooms. That's what we mean by "perving on".

A man might have to get physical to make a point to an overly persistent women, but usually, he's in no danger of her overpowering him to get her way.

Pertinent to the Discussion , someone who has been there done that .... maybe a couple lessons to learn here for some

Enjoy !

a reply to: MetalThunder

What he seems to be saying is that psychotherapy needs a complete overhaul and should be the first line of help, but from what I have been reading, effective psychotherapy specifically for children, teens and adults is not there yet. The problem is exacerbated by societal stigma and discrimination, perhaps we all need to think about that too.

Social anxiety disorder leads to impairment in day-to-day functioning, as well as a lower quality of life.3,24 People with gender dysphoria, including children and adolescents, have higher rates of social anxiety disorder than the general population.15–17 CBT has been found to be an effective treatment of social anxiety disorder.7,26–28 However, research shows that when working with marginalized groups, modifying the CBT to individual patients potentially makes it even more effective.9 Thus, it is imperative to tailor treatments for social anxiety to children and adolescents who also meet criteria for gender dysphoria; and, as there is no literature assessing whether CBT for TGNC youth is effective, it is important to study the efficacy of these adaptations. Unfortunately, tenants proposed by the professional community have not been studied through systematic research. This lack of empirical support does not provide mental health practitioners grounds to argue for an empirically supported treatment when working with children, adolescents, and their families.

While some studies have assessed the efficacy of CBT for sexual minorities, we do not know if these data apply to transgender youth who meet criteria for social anxiety disorder or transgender youth who meet criteria for social anxiety disorder and gender dysphoria. We recommend that researchers develop studies to determine whether CBT is efficacious for transgender youth who meet criteria for social anxiety or social anxiety and gender dysphoria. This research would further guide recommendations for the professional community.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

It's IDAHOBIT day today.

a reply to: MetalThunder

Wow. Thanks for the video -- much appreciated.

I give Walt Heyer much credit... he's taken so much grief and abuse for using his experience and hard-gained knowledge of gender dysphoria and transitioning/detransitioning to help others in the same/similar positions; and yet despite all the abuse, he continues to do so with so much compassion and patience and empathy.

Remember, right now, they're debating HR 5 in the House which would make it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity meaning that all sex specific spaces and activities would be more or less abolished among other things.

Now, in some ways, feminists have brought this on themselves because they've worked so hard to abolish men and boy only spaces like the Boy Scouts, and if you check my post history, you know I argued in favor of the Boy Scouts staying like they were. I recognize that some girls would prefer the Boy Scouts, but I think there needs to be a girl only space for that sort of thing - a sister org if you will. I know it because I was one of those girls who would have liked it. Girl Scouts were always a bit too Suzy Homemaker for me.

However, this bill would flat out make women's spaces and activities illegal in favor of gender identity. Categories based on biological sex would become a thing of the past.

Right now, you are seeing a broad coalition united by one thing -- women, not political ideology -- standing in opposition to this.

a reply to: ketsuko

And it just passed:

The House just passed a sweeping LGBTQ rights bill

I'm assuming it passed on party lines, but can't find a vote count.

ETA: Found it!

The measure passed a vote of 236 yeas to 173 nays with eight Republicans joining Democrats in support of the bill.

CBS

a reply to: Boadicea

I don't think it will make it through the Senate, but these are dangerous times for women and girls.

It's worth noting that HR 5 also has abortion language in it which might also be why you see so many bills coming through various states right now. If the representatives in the Federal legislature won't take steps to protect and change the landscape against bills like these, then states certainly will, and we won't always like the results.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
So there are no transgender folk on this forum? That's a shame, I feel like we need someone who is living it to talk about their experience to really understand how it works.

I am not, but I've had two closer friends that either are, or maybe. I've also read a lot of posts and stories from people that are. In the cases of my friends, they have been to therapy, and nothing was forced on them, in fact in the probably hundreds of people I've read discussing it on social media I cant recall any of them saying it was pressed on them that they should do it for sure by any therapists. Im sure it does happen, and in those cases I think its wrong to be flat out told you are trans and should change yourself because that is a huge undertaking and there is absolutely no guarantee to work. I think this is a topic that we are nowhere near fully close to understanding yet, I think a lot of the stuff in this thread is BS though.

In the case of both of my friends they have chosen to not do any transitioning, they've talked to me very deeply about this, and at no time have they ever had anything forced on them, for the most part these were feelings they had for years but never were able to put the way to describe what they were feeling into the right words, much less open up about exactly how they were feeling. In the case of my friends, neither are sure what they should do, and to me it seems like being stuck in the middle and having no idea what you'd be happiest with is a horrific spot to be in. I personally think they'd both be happiest not doing any transitioning based on what they've told me, because neither are sure what they feel is best for them. There should be zero surprise that when someone goes to a therapist that is open to someone being transgender that when someone goes in feeling like they may be transgender and the therapist tells them its possible that they could be that they say they are after...Because its quite likely they feel a little bit more comfortable about what they are feeling and less lonely about it, thats just how it works so I understand the big deal about that Canadian case brought up earlier.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

I don't think it will make it through the Senate, but these are dangerous times for women and girls.

Agreed -- at least not this session. But I'm a little worried about the next session. Like you said, this is dangerous for women and girls; this isn't about ideology, but safety and fairness, and pretty much the only ones fighting this are women -- Democrat women and Republican women and liberal women and conservative women and libertarian women and green women... women of all sizes, shapes and colors. All we have in common is our biology... well, and the threat against all of us that this bill poses.

It's worth noting that HR 5 also has abortion language in it which might also be why you see so many bills coming through various states right now. If the representatives in the Federal legislature won't take steps to protect and change the landscape against bills like these, then states certainly will, and we won't always like the results.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm going to have to take a look at the bill again.

I don't like how this is playing out with the abortion bills and the elections next year. The current Republican Senate won't pass HR5, but if Democrats take control of the Senate (and keep the House) in 2020, then it could very well pass in the next session. And the women who are against HR5 and might otherwise vote against Dems who support HR5 in 2020 will be pressured to vote for them in order to protect abortion rights. I'm not liking this one bit...

a reply to: Boadicea

It basically makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex.

Among other concerns, Waddell explained that the Equality Act could force health care providers to perform abortions, and may force taxpayers to fund abortion. Federal civil rights law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, but the Equality Act would expand the definition of "sex discrimination" to include discrimination on the basis of "pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition," including abortion.

It also rolls back protections for conscientious objection in medical practitioners.

Basically, the whole thing is an attack on the 1st Amendment (top to bottom) masquerading as Civil Rights law.

Make abortion illegal or severely restrict it and that might be one way to protect your health care practitioners from having to go against their conscience and to protect your tax payers who sincerely object to this.

a reply to: ketsuko

It also rolls back protections for conscientious objection in medical practitioners.

If you refuse to medically treat someone because of your "conscience" then you have a pretty s@#tty conscience and do not deserve to be in the medical industry. If you lack the moral compassion to help a dying human being because of some theological sense of superiority then you are a trash human being.

a reply to: RainbowPhoenix

You were asked for your perspective on the subject of trans identity, and I note that none of us responded to that question ... likely out of respect for you and your perspective or that of the other poster who dropped in long enough to throw insults.

I see you have returned long enough not to answer the poster in question but to throw more insults.

Perhaps now you see why we tend to have stopped listening.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
I guess my general feeling on it is, who cares?

I guess you didn't read the OP. I know you didn't address the OP topic.

I got no issues with some dude who wants to live as a chick. I don't. I suppose there are legitimate reasons for why you wouldn't want a dude in a women's restroom but wouldn't that be pretty much the same thing as a gay woman in a women's restroom?

Especially because of their disproportionately high rates of violence against women, especially sexual violence.

You think gay women are not gonna perv on other women in the restroom?

LOL! Nice try, but no. In all my years, I have been openly "perved on" by men anywhere and everywhere... I have NEVER been "perved on" by a woman -- in a bathroom or elsewhere. And I have known lesbians my entire life. So while it might seem to be a relevant analogy, it's not.

Also important, quite a few things are handled in the ladies' room, which have everything to do with our specific body -- the female body -- and for which we need privacy and dignity to take care of. And which men do not want to be part of, including those men who claim to be women. (Despite the hype to the contrary, being a woman ain't for sissies...)

Most important of all, women do not have the same predatory tendencies that men do. But IF that happened,, then women have a much better chance defending themselves from any woman that did try to assault them. Not so much with most men that would assault them.

Well, I have known gay women who talk all the time about having sexual thoughts and attraction to straight women who obviously would not be thrilled about it if they knew they were sitting on a toilet right next to them.

Just because they're not actually doing anything about it doesn't mean they're not thinking anything.

So I suppose the whole thing is about actions and at that point, I would have to say that your comparison actually just supports my feelings on it even more. You're probably way more likely to be perved on by a 100% straight dude in a bar than you are in a bathroom by a TG who might still be attracted to women. Unless (perhaps) it's the bathroom at the bar. Where stranger things happen routinely because people are probably intoxicated and people in general get stupid when they're intoxicated. And people who like to get intoxicated are already inclined to do dumb things because getting intoxicated in a serious social setting like a bar where people are looking for dates and sex is dumb in the first place.

Of course there is always the possibility that a straight man would intentionally do the crossdressing thing just to perv in the women's restroom. But strictly for the purposes of this debate, we should keep the thing specifically focussed on trans people who are not just pretending to be trans. I don't think they'd be inclined to be badly behaved for the simple reason that it is not in their best interests to do so.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Hmmmm... let's define terms. "Perv'd on" indicates perversion, not just attraction. That's a big difference. People will think what they will, and as long as they keep it to themselves and keep it to thoughts (not actions), it's not a problem.

So, yes, chances are that lesbians will find themselves admiring other women in the bathroom and other private spaces. It is what it is and isn't a problem unless and until they get pervvy and make it a problem. Statistically (and criminally) speaking, that's a guy thing... not a lady thing.

And, again, at least women have a fighting chance with another women. If worse comes to absolute worst, then a woman's chances are much better defending herself against another woman, lesbian or not.

I will also note though that violence by women who identify as trans and take testosterone may very well increasingly become a bigger problem. At least one study (I believe it focused on transgender prisoners in England) found that violent and sexual crimes increased among women prisoners who identify as transgender.