It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Transgender Kids & LBGTQ Parents

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:12 AM
The term "chemically castrated" is popping up here ... is that the new PC talking point?

Interesting that only deals with MTF transitions ... is this really all about projected fears of emasculation? LOL.

My goodness.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:15 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's what happens when you take puberty blocking drugs and more and more often, allowing your very young child to transition and affirm their new gender isn't just about letting them look and act the new role, but it's also about putting them on puberty blockers. Those drugs will tend to actually prevent them from developing normally rendering them sterile for life whether we're talking about a boy or a girl, and then, of course, the appropriate opposite sex hormones are artificially introduced.

But even if the child late on decides they aren't actually that gender and wants to go back, even if there has been no surgical alteration, the damage is already done, and they will be sterile for life. So, yes, chemical castration is appropriate no matter the true biological sex.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:21 AM

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's what happens when you take puberty blocking drugs and more and more often, allowing your very young child to transition and affirm their new gender isn't just about letting them look and act the new role, but it's also about putting them on puberty blockers. Those drugs will tend to actually prevent them from developing normally rendering them sterile for life whether we're talking about a boy or a girl, and then, of course, the appropriate opposite sex hormones are artificially introduced.

But even if the child late on decides they aren't actually that gender and wants to go back, even if there has been no surgical alteration, the damage is already done, and they will be sterile for life. So, yes, chemical castration is appropriate no matter the true biological sex.

You neglect to mention that all this happens after professional diagnosis in treatment with a medical team.

You state here that puberty blockers are used. How often? When does that happen? Are you certain that all treatments "render them sterile"?

I absolutely disagree with you, castration is a very specific term, applied to male livestock most commonly. I'm not sure where you guys are picking that talking point up from, but it's pejorative not scientific.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:43 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

In regard to the topic at hand though, diagnosis and treatment are conducted by a team of medical and psychological professionals over a course of many years. The process is not whimsical nor under the parents' control as has been implied here.

Unfortunately, that's not always the case -- and increasingly, that is not always the case. Right now "gender affirmation" is the go-to approach. And the demands for self-ID -- for kids as well as adults -- would eliminate any medical or psychological evaluations, diagnosis, and recommended treatment.

And no one -- neither the kids nor their parents nor anyone -- is being fully informed of the consequences and potential consequences of these drugs. Especially the puberty blockers, but also the cross-sex hormones (aka HRT for "hormone replacement therapy", but that is incorrect clinically speaking.) The puberty blockers are not necessarily "reversible," as these parents and kids are told. There are too many variables to make such a statement. Nor do these puberty blockers simply "pause" puberty, but also other developing and maturing bodily functions, including the brain and cognitive development. These puberty blockers have never been tested -- much less approved -- for these purposes by the FDA.

I watched a video from a teenage girl who has transitioned. In a very misguided effort to mock those who warned her of increased breast cancer rates from testosterone, she pulled up her shirt to show her mastectomy scars -- this is a teenager!!! -- and basically said, "Ha ha -- I don't have breasts. I can't get breast cancer." She seems to honestly believe this. But yes, she can still get breast cancer. This poor kid has no idea.

Let me be clear though: I do not blame these kids. I do blame the adults who are making this happen -- not just letting it happen, but making it happen.

And I still believe that nothing is more cruel than to tell your child they aren't perfectly imperfect just the way they are. Let them dress and adorn themselves any way they choose. Let them embrace or reject any and all gender norms and stereotypes they choose. Let them be them. No medical alterations necessary or appropriate.

But leave their bodies healthy and whole. This is child abuse.
edit on 23-10-2019 by Boadicea because: formatting

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:18 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

I had no idea you were so uninformed.

Despite being relatively new, the treatment is becoming a standard in care for transgender adolescents. In 2009, the Endocrine Society published a best-practices guide for treating transgender teens that included the use of puberty suppressants. Last year, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a technical report on care for LGBTQ youth that gave its blessing to the Endocrine Society's best practices. And in September, the journal Pediatrics published a long-term study that found that gender-dysphoric teens who underwent puberty suppression, followed by hormone treatment and gender-reassignment surgery, could become well-functioning adults.

Oregon now offers it under their Medicaid plan.

Risks include infertility, osteoporosis and a bunch of other things.

That comes both from the blockers and from the cross sex hormones. Changes can be long-term and irreversible and this new generation is effectively a science experiment providing some of that research.

But, of course, we've gone on full steam ahead experimenting on children with this.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:18 AM

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Raggedyman

I guess god better hurry up and smite these sinners!

So why would He need to do that?
Is tat what you want?
Would that make you happy?

That’s a very strange thing for anyone to say, maybe you should self reflect a bit there. Transgender have some psychological issues but I don’t think they deserve to die.
why do you think that?

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:45 AM

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Raggedyman

Eventually fringe groups become the populace, sadly

The minority become the majority? Dreadful.
Cro-magnon rules! Dude. Neanderthal drools.

Evolution in action.

So humanity is evolving into a bunch of chemically castrated beings that will more or less see themselves extinct within a few generations?

I guess we can call that progress. Progressives destroy whatever they touch.

Although if minorities become majorities, I'll be waiting for the day when albino animals rule the earth! It is, apparently, inevitable, no?

For, as Plato, Montesquie, Marx, Madison, Hamilton, and others knew too well, a government like a Democracy can be corrupted by extreme equality and extreme inequality and collapse into a tyrannical government just as easily as an aristocracy can become an oligarchy (see also: how inequality corrupts democracy).

I think the idea of evolution into transgenderism is a Phageism, a grasp.
Trying to argue the absurd to gain a few stars and flags
I never suggested evolution, that was his Phageism.

My point, all democracies turn into dictatorships if those who are trusted with guarding it take it for granted. Exactly what we are seeing in the US right now, extremism on both sides

The minority gain power and the majority fight to take it back. Sound familiar?
It’s not hard to work out or even see happening today

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:57 AM
a reply to: ketsuko

LOL ... I'm not uninformed. I didn't ask you what puberty blockers are, although, thanks for actually adding factual material to the discussion. I asked you how often they're used, because in reading your post, it sounds like they're handing them out at the corner drug store.

I notice you didn't answer my question, which probably means you don't know that answer.

From your PBS link:

One of the more recent medical developments is the use of puberty blockers to treat children who are transgender or gender non-conforming. The medications, which suppress the body’s production of estrogen or testosterone, essentially pause the changes that would occur during puberty. “That’s really what these pubertal blockers do,” Dr. Rob Garofalo told FRONTLINE. Garofalo is the director of the Lurie Children’s Hospital’s Gender and Sex Development Program. “They allow these families the opportunity to hit a pause button, to prevent natal puberty … until we know that that’s either the right or the wrong direction for their particular child.”

Hmmm ... that doesn't exactly sound like CASTRATION does it? (Emphasis mine.)

Puberty blockers have been tested and used for children who start puberty very young — if their bodies start to change before the age of eight or nine. Dr. Courtney Finlayson, a pediatric endocrinologist at Lurie Children’s Hospital, said, “We have a lot of experience in pediatric endocrinology using pubertal blockers. And from all the evidence we have they are generally a very safe medication.”

What??? Wait, didn't you say these drugs always cause CASTRATION and STERILIZATION???

Your source clearly states otherwise. (Emphasis mine.)

“I wouldn’t use [puberty blockers] if I didn’t think that they were safe, or that the benefits didn’t outweigh the potential risks,” Finlayson said. “But we always have this conversation with families before we start.”

Gosh Ketsuko ... did you post the right link? (Emphasis mine.)

Your link to the Atlantic article provides an even better case for what I'm saying here ...
edit on 23-10-2019 by Gryphon66 because: Noted

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:12 AM

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: solve
a reply to: Edumakated

We need a reset.
Start over again.
Square one.

Reset to what? The 50's? Sharia law?

Where in the (SNIP) did you get your sharia law suggestion?

Mainly was saying that i had it with our collective psychosis.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:24 AM
by using puberty blockers aren't the doctors and parents denying their child a normal human experience , whether its the one they believe they should be having or not
Isn't this experimenting on children just as child behavioural psychologists have done in the past with detrimental results ?

Funny it seems we spend far more time on the ethics of how virtual reality will impact children and what content they can and cant see in a mixed reality world (minecraft earth) , but it seems we haven't spent much time on the ethics of correcting natural human processes in children ?

Or have we ?
Puberty blocking drugs, the difficulties of conducting ethical research

Gender Dysphoria ; Bio ethical aspects of medical treatment

the second link has a good amount of info o the studies of youth (GAS)
and the ethics of giving puberty blockers to adolescents.

its a good paper and has some really good info on the procedures etc

worth a read as its relevant to the topic !

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:31 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

Your purposefully obtuse question betrays your own feigned ignorance.

You know very well children are being exposed to this. You know very well there are laws on the books now enforcing preferred pronouns be used in places like NY and worse laws still passed in Canada and the UK. These places will enforce even those pronouns that would directly conflict with natural language like people who choose "they/them" as singular pronouns. Why should normal people acquiesce to this nonsense?

Trannies are taking over women's spaces and claiming them as their own. The mantra of "trans women are women" flies in the face of reality and logic but we are still called bigots for refusing to swallow that nonsense.

Thankfully, Jessica Yaniv lost its case against the women it accused of human rights abuses for not waxing it's balls. But that case illustrates yet another example of trans rights activists trying to impose their sickness on normal people via abuse of these law. In this case, in order to force real women into handling it's genitals. Yaniv also has a history of pedophilia and sexual harassment of children.

Which brings me to drag queen story hour and the multitude of pedophiles that have gained access to children via these events. Not the same as trannies but close enough for discomfort.

Now we have a court allowing a delusional mother ruin her son's life by forcing transition ontohim at age 7.

Where do we draw the line? I already drew mine. Your arguments are invalid and I will not suffer idiocy on this issue. Too much is at stake.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:33 AM
a reply to: Raggedyman

Hi mate

so not evolving into transgenderism because that wouldnt pass on any genetic information so wouldnt be relevant to the evolution

but to transhumanism ? shedding of biology all together

I think its more possible

I think we will see a movement soon when some scientists figures out how to use CRISPR to help people with gender dysphoria

they have already carried out a study to try and indentify any gene variants of those who identify as transgender
Understanding the genetic basis of transgender identity

We identified genetic variants in 20 genes that may play a role in transgender identity. The most promising of these include variants of genes involved in neurologic development and sex hormone pathways. We will continue to enroll transgender patients and their families. We will also perform functional analysis to assess the extent that selected variants affect their respective pathways.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:46 AM
a reply to: projectvxn

LOL ... and opening your post with a pointless ad hom demonstrates that you don't have an argument.

Children are being "exposed"? Good lord, are you aware that there are literally TEAMS of medical professionals involved in EVERY transition? Your post doesn't indicate that. Are you certain I'm the ignorant one here?

Yep, regarding the pronoun "laws" in NYC I'm on the record here as being totally against it. So, nothing "feigned" here on this side of the screen.

I think from your post, you may be obsessing just a tad over the issue of pronoun use. I don't like it either, not because I don't think transfolk have the same rights as I do, but because I'll be damned if I'll let any government tell me how to talk.

"Trannies"? Classy. Really supports your argument.

What percentage of the population do you think transwomen are? Let's use the usual talking point here and say it's less than 1%. Are you really suggesting that there are ... what ... hordes of transwomen occupying public bathrooms?

Are you sensitive and let what other people call you hurt you? Someone called you a bigot? That's probably unpleasant.

Are you a normal person? I'm sorry, that must be very boring.

Care to pull up the actual facts regarding the court case you're complaining about? Shall we see if the kid's mom is FORCING them? Because I can tell you without even looking that's a lie. That's not how the process works.

Draw your line, just don't cross mine or anyone else's and we're all good.

edit on 23-10-2019 by Gryphon66 because: Noted

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:48 AM

... Dee points put that the decision had nothing to do with gender roles...

WTF?! Can you be more deluded? It has nothing to do with anything but stereotypes. And the "treatment" they plan for her is no matter how liberal you look at it mutilation, how to make a perfectly healthy body disabled.
And for what? To confirm #ing gender roles.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 09:56 AM
a reply to: Edumakated

Unadulterated BS.

I hated everything femine when I was a child. I even at two years declared to the world that I would never get married and I would never have children.

I hated dolls, cooking, and cleaning, and even went through a stage from around 6 to about 13 where I thought boys were yucky and were my competitors.

I played ball, ran track, was tall, flat chested, and looked like Olive Oyl.

I am so damn glad I was born when I was, because around 14 years of age, I tripped over a bad boy's foot on the school bus and the battle begun.

We didn't realize until several years later that in the animal kingdom, the mating ritual often looks like battle. Well again, I was lucky enough to have parents that were very aware of what young attraction looks like, so we never got into trouble.

All of this to say that it is beyond idiotic for anyone to believe that a child knows beyond a shadow of a doubt what gender they are going to attracted to as an adult.

I think it is criminal to push any of this insanity onto a child. Let them be children for as long as they can, the harshness of adulthood will come crashing into their lives soon enough.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 10:03 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

From the research article I posted up there

Finally, the decision about implementing GnRH treatment is very difficult and cannot be made without ethical dilemmas. Both opponents and advocates of pubertal suppression are guided by the same ethical principles, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and autonomy, but have different views on where these principles lead. A unique and clear overview is necessary, and, to this day, it has not yet been elaborated. Considering that GnRH treatment is relatively new and controversial, additional qualitative research and empirical studies are necessary for appropriate bioethical definitions.

So they admit that it requires further study but they carry on ahead with treatments without even assessing the impact

In both studies, the authors indicated that this cross-sex hormonal therapy is safe for transgender youth over a period of approximately two years. However, the strongest argument against cross-sex therapy lies in the lack of knowledge of its long-term effects, which means that more studies and follow-up information are necessary. One of the questions is a possibility for cross-sex hormonal therapy in individuals below 16 years of age. The authors of the latest guidelines of the Endocrine Society recognized this possibility but only on a “case by case” principle, meaning that age does not always accurately reflect one's readiness for medical interventions.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 10:11 AM
Here are some recent concerns and issues raised about puberty blockers and the fast-tracking of kids (especially and increasingly young girls already diagnosed on the autism spectrum) into "gender affirmation" treatment in England:

An open letter to Dr Polly Carmichael from a former GIDS clinician

I am writing to you as a former clinician from the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) in Leeds. I wish to outline the concerns I had at the time of working there and the concerns that have either grown or developed since I left...

I think it is a problem that GIDS clinicians are making decisions that will have a major impact on children and young people’s bodies and on their lives, potentially the rest of their lives, without a robust evidence base. GIDS clinicians tell children and families that puberty blockers/hormone blocks are “fully reversible” but the reality is no one knows what the impacts are on children’s brains so how is it possible to make this claim? It is also a problem that GIDS clinicians are afraid of raising their concerns for fear of being labelled transphobic by colleagues.

Therapist raised alert at troubling practices at Tavistock clinic

Sue Evans worked at the Tavistock clinic for years but grew so concerned that she became a whistleblower.

She was a mental health nurse and psychotherapist in the centre’s gender identity development service between 2003 and 2007 and found the pace at which children were assessed and referred for hormone blocking therapy was much faster than in other areas of children’s mental health.

Her husband, Marcus Evans, was a psychoanalyst in the Tavistock’s adult service and later became a governor of the trust but quit over its response to a complaint raised by another governor.

David Bell, who sat on the Tavistock’s board, wrote a report saying it was not fit for purpose and not taking into account other factors that may be behind a child’s wish to transition.

Another former employee, Kirsty Entwhistle, who worked as a psychologist at the centre’s service in Leeds, wrote an open letter in July saying that staff were too quick to assess a young person and that clinicians who disagreed were branded “transphobic”.

Politicised trans groups put children at risk, says expert

Evans resigned as a governor of the trust in February in protest at its response to criticism from a former member of its council of governors, David Bell, who had raised concerns from 10 members of staff. “They reported inadequate assessments, patients pushed through for early medical interventions and an inability to stand up to pressure from trans lobbies,” Evans said.

“We Really Really Tried.” A 2017 Letter from GIDS Clinicians Ignored by The Guardian

It has been a great disappointment to many on the Left that the Guardian has been largely silent on this issue. But two former GIDS clinicians sent a letter to the Guardian back in 2017 to alert them to serious concerns about what was going on within GIDS. One of the authors of the submission to the Guardian commented to us “we really really tried.” However, rather than jumping to publish such a devastating testimony – the kind of exclusive most journalists would give their right arm for – the Guardian chose to ignore it.

We are very happy to publish that letter here. We are very grateful to the GIDS clinicians for writing such a powerful and honest testimony and for allowing us to publish it. The rest of this post is in their own words:

Many professionals have had concerns for some time, but their concerns -- and further research -- have been stifled with cries of "transphobia" and "bigot" and "TERF!"

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 10:17 AM
a reply to: sapien82

How can you argue that a statement encouraging further study is a refusal to assess the impact? That's absurd, sorry.

As to the second quote, the strongest argument is that we don't know? An argument from ignorance?

Okie dokie.

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 10:30 AM

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 10:42 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

well they havent clearly researched it well enough yet as they are still figuring it out
I didn't say that they refuse to assess at all, by posting articles which show they are researching is an admission from me that they are !.

There is the risk that this could cause further damage to these people who suffer GD and its all about reducing suffering in medicine right
Yet they continue with the trials and experiments on kids without knowing the full effects
that doesn't concern you at all , doesn't make you think that we should stop and figure it out before we could potentially damage more people through carelessness or a rush to a solution short term.

My arguement is that , they admit they don't know , and therefore we shouldn't be doing anything to these kids until we do

I am merely showing you what the leading researchers are doing in this field , you are somehow telling me that its my opinion or my position, I'm just showing you what they have researched

edit on 23-10-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in