Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on February 21, 2016, 02:46:42 PMQuote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 01:08:58 PMit seems like bullshit to me.The legitimacy of transgenderism, or recognizing someone as something other than their sex in a social context?The former. Which is unfortunate, because I really do want to be supportive of it. It's not easy holding views the people around you would be disgusted by. I just can't get over the suicide statistics, genetics and doctors turning away from sex changes. It seems really off at this point.
Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 01:08:58 PMit seems like bullshit to me.The legitimacy of transgenderism, or recognizing someone as something other than their sex in a social context?
it seems like bullshit to me.
Quote from: Mad Max on February 21, 2016, 02:33:23 PMAs usual, transgender discussion on sep7 goes flawlessly."People disagree with me so the discussion has gone to shit"
As usual, transgender discussion on sep7 goes flawlessly.
Quote from: eggsalad on February 21, 2016, 04:21:19 PMIf there were no social consequences in a homogeneous setting like that, the negatives would be minimal, it wouldn't be a terrible decision, but I see no point unless you really harbor racist feelings deep down. With such limited exposure to those outside of your ethnic group (white is not an ethnic group outside of formerly colonial nations), I don't know what would inspire you to develop racist views in the first place.
Quote from: eggsalad on February 21, 2016, 04:35:42 PMQuote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 03:02:09 PMQuote from: HurtfulTurkey on February 21, 2016, 02:46:42 PMQuote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 01:08:58 PMit seems like bullshit to me.The legitimacy of transgenderism, or recognizing someone as something other than their sex in a social context?The former. Which is unfortunate, because I really do want to be supportive of it. It's not easy holding views the people around you would be disgusted by. I just can't get over the suicide statistics, genetics and doctors turning away from sex changes. It seems really off at this point.Are your views on sexual reassignment surgeries and hormone treatments the same?(Let's leave this to the case of adults, medical intervention with children is controversial for obvious and understandable reasons)As someone with a libertarian (no longer necessarily anarchist) political stance this is very problematic to me. Obviously a consenting adult has the right to do with their body as they please. The question is- is a transgender person mentally healthy and able to make this decision reasonably? If not, it would not be morally permissible to offer them these procedures and medications. Quite a few medical professionals are coming out against it, which, coupled with the frequency of suicide and other mental health conditions in transgender persons, makes me very apprehensive about it. I don't think rushing toward this stuff with open arms, screaming "fuuuutuuuuurre" all the way, is the smartest way to handle it.
Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 03:02:09 PMQuote from: HurtfulTurkey on February 21, 2016, 02:46:42 PMQuote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 21, 2016, 01:08:58 PMit seems like bullshit to me.The legitimacy of transgenderism, or recognizing someone as something other than their sex in a social context?The former. Which is unfortunate, because I really do want to be supportive of it. It's not easy holding views the people around you would be disgusted by. I just can't get over the suicide statistics, genetics and doctors turning away from sex changes. It seems really off at this point.Are your views on sexual reassignment surgeries and hormone treatments the same?(Let's leave this to the case of adults, medical intervention with children is controversial for obvious and understandable reasons)
FtM trans individuals are very much invisible, both inside and outside LGBT groups. It's a problem that's been coming to light recently.
The Hopkins chief psychiatrist seemed like he would be against HRT as well, based on the reasoning behind his argument against SRS.
Quote from: Assassin 11D7 on February 21, 2016, 05:35:54 PMThe Hopkins chief psychiatrist seemed like he would be against HRT as well, based on the reasoning behind his argument against SRS.He would be against it for childhood but I don't see any reason he would for adults considering he only cited statistics for postop and the changes made by hormones are far milder than SRS.And in the end, even his argument boils down to it being benign at worst. He can say "removing functional organs" but he can't decide what value a penis is if the person with it never uses it the way he thinks it should be used.
Quote from: eggsalad on February 21, 2016, 05:43:20 PMQuote from: Assassin 11D7 on February 21, 2016, 05:35:54 PMThe Hopkins chief psychiatrist seemed like he would be against HRT as well, based on the reasoning behind his argument against SRS.He would be against it for childhood but I don't see any reason he would for adults considering he only cited statistics for postop and the changes made by hormones are far milder than SRS.And in the end, even his argument boils down to it being benign at worst. He can say "removing functional organs" but he can't decide what value a penis is if the person with it never uses it the way he thinks it should be used.Well how often do people just stop at HRT without aspirations of going further? You might be correct, though.Removing of genitalia does more than just disable the person from commencing in sexual activities, it will have significant effects on the psychology of the individual.
Paul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.”
Wait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.
Quote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 05:58:58 PMWait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.Can you post a link for this?
Quote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 06:14:53 PMQuote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:11:37 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 05:58:58 PMWait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.Can you post a link for this?Look it up yourself, it's out there. All you have to do is google "Paul McHugh Johns Hopkins"The dude's known for being the favorite go-to for conservatives.But where'd you get this from specifically?
Quote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:11:37 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 05:58:58 PMWait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.Can you post a link for this?Look it up yourself, it's out there. All you have to do is google "Paul McHugh Johns Hopkins"The dude's known for being the favorite go-to for conservatives.
Quote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 06:16:46 PMQuote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:15:48 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 06:14:53 PMQuote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:11:37 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 05:58:58 PMWait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.Can you post a link for this?Look it up yourself, it's out there. All you have to do is google "Paul McHugh Johns Hopkins"The dude's known for being the favorite go-to for conservatives.But where'd you get this from specifically?GLAADLink it please
Quote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:15:48 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 06:14:53 PMQuote from: challengerX on February 21, 2016, 06:11:37 PMQuote from: Varg on February 21, 2016, 05:58:58 PMWait, are people seriously citing the fuckheads from Hopkins?QuotePaul McHughUniversity Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineFormer member of the United State Conference of Catholic Bishop's National Review BoardRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.” Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.Can you post a link for this?Look it up yourself, it's out there. All you have to do is google "Paul McHugh Johns Hopkins"The dude's known for being the favorite go-to for conservatives.But where'd you get this from specifically?GLAAD
Wow, what a great unbiased source that definitely doesn't have any sort of religious agenda.
Refers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"
Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"
Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."
Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"
lol here nerds: http://www.glaad.org/cap/paul-mchughlooks like it links to sources
QuoteRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Well, biologically this is correct.
On another front, as the sexuality debate within mainline churches seems to have shifted so profoundly in favor of the left, how do you see the debates of the broader culture changing in the next five to ten years?It really is amazing ... I mean, 50 years ago [homosexual behavior] was a crime, and now we're talking about [same-sex marriage]. Anyone who wants to stick with the tradition is accused of being a biblical literalist or a homophobic racist, because, in part, of the more fundamental change in our society towards permissiveness, that is, easy divorce, cohabitation and concubinage, abortion, pornography ... and euthanasia. The issue of the homosexual is not separate ... it's all part and parcel of the pandemonium that the permissive movement has brought. We have just licensed all kinds of behavior."You have noted the critical influence of social behavior clusters on sexual development. You also mentioned that, early on in your medical training, you knew there were certain things that would disqualify you from becoming a doctor, including poor grades, a criminal record or a failed marriage.Yes, that's right. Fundamentally, I expected that, if I did marry, I was supposed to make it a go.Now, wouldn't some argue that those were societal expectations which were imposed upon you and your generation?Yes, and they were good ones - and biblically based, and part and parcel of my commitment to really what amounts to loving relationships. You see, what has happened with the permissive movement is that it has picked up the Freudian confusion of desire and love, making them the same. And with the implication, for example, that I must desire my mother. I don't desire my mother. I love my mother. Now the fact is that in my marriage, of course, I desired this woman and I felt love for her. Now, 50 years into marriage with her, I still desire her, but now I love her. She's irreplaceable. There is this thing that has come and it's different. This person exists for me as irreplaceable. So, there is this confusion of desire and love. [Homosexuality] is erroneous desire.
Quote from: Assassin 11D7 on February 21, 2016, 06:22:28 PMQuoteRefers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"Well, biologically this is correct.QuoteOn another front, as the sexuality debate within mainline churches seems to have shifted so profoundly in favor of the left, how do you see the debates of the broader culture changing in the next five to ten years?It really is amazing ... I mean, 50 years ago [homosexual behavior] was a crime, and now we're talking about [same-sex marriage]. Anyone who wants to stick with the tradition is accused of being a biblical literalist or a homophobic racist, because, in part, of the more fundamental change in our society towards permissiveness, that is, easy divorce, cohabitation and concubinage, abortion, pornography ... and euthanasia. The issue of the homosexual is not separate ... it's all part and parcel of the pandemonium that the permissive movement has brought. We have just licensed all kinds of behavior."You have noted the critical influence of social behavior clusters on sexual development. You also mentioned that, early on in your medical training, you knew there were certain things that would disqualify you from becoming a doctor, including poor grades, a criminal record or a failed marriage.Yes, that's right. Fundamentally, I expected that, if I did marry, I was supposed to make it a go.Now, wouldn't some argue that those were societal expectations which were imposed upon you and your generation?Yes, and they were good ones - and biblically based, and part and parcel of my commitment to really what amounts to loving relationships. You see, what has happened with the permissive movement is that it has picked up the Freudian confusion of desire and love, making them the same. And with the implication, for example, that I must desire my mother. I don't desire my mother. I love my mother. Now the fact is that in my marriage, of course, I desired this woman and I felt love for her. Now, 50 years into marriage with her, I still desire her, but now I love her. She's irreplaceable. There is this thing that has come and it's different. This person exists for me as irreplaceable. So, there is this confusion of desire and love. [Homosexuality] is erroneous desire.Doesn't sound to me like he's making any appeal to biology.
"Transmisogyny"
