Sigh.Originally Posted by phonics
Sigh.
Based on that article, the Americans were/are actually prescribing gender-affirming hormones to kids (not just puberty blockers).
That is a TOTALLY different kettle of fish and not something I could ever support.
This is a misunderstanding.
Puberty blocking drugs do exactly what they say. They delay puberty from starting until the child is older and can make decisions on whether to take more permanent steps to transition or whether to stop the drugs and go through puberty in their born gender. As I said the other day, the understanding based on the use of these drugs in other settings is that they don't have long-term physiological effects if the child stops them and goes through puberty, but there have obviously not been randomised controlled trials done on this specific scenario.
The hormones talked about in that American article are gender-affirming hormones. In essence a child born male sex taking oestrogen or a child born female sex taking testosterone. These absolutely do have permanent effects and I could never get behind making them accessible to kids. In the UK you have to be 17 or over and have been on puberty blockers for at least 1 year to access these.
People really need to stop conflating GnRH analogues (so-called puberty blockers) and oestrogen/testosterone. Their effects are absolutely worlds apart. I suspect the people reporting on this stuff don't actually understand what they are talking about, but there is also definitely some intellectual dishonesty going on.
Last edited by randomlegend; 12-02-2023 at 03:27 PM.
Only part way through the article but that is wild. Madness.
Some strange clampdowns happening in Cambodia. Lots of media orgs being shut down all of a sudden. Could lead to civil unrest.
You found a betting market for genocide?
killing fields two electric khmeroo
'Like everybody else, I have my strengths, I have my weaknesses'. Which is this?
Here is a counterpoint to that article from Texas in 2021 during the ongoing legal battles around “gender affirming care”. It largely centers around the definition of gender affirming care and when different treatments happen.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/08...sgender-texas/
Here is a key bit:
Under the gender-affirming model of care, more time is spent allowing kids to socially transition instead of focusing on medical treatment. A social transition consists of the steps a child takes to affirm their identity. An example could include allowing a child assigned male at birth to grow their hair or use a different name and wear clothing that better fits their identity.
This is all meant to happen before any kind of medical treatment. As defined by the medical practitioner organizations in this article, “gender affirming care” seems to be a treatment of care that aims to minimize medical treatments. That seems to be in direct opposition to the article Pepe posted.
It is certainly possible that some groups are bypassing the protocols. If so, they should be prosecuted legally and the governing standards body. And obviously, I have no idea at all what the best practices should be. I’m wary of the heated debate because it leads to laws like this one from Texas - where even parents who are seeking strictly non-medical treatment are under threat of prosecution for child abuse and can have their children taken from them. And how well is the law defined? If your child simply self presents and goes to counseling can this law be triggered? It is very possible.
The big cautionary tale from the US is abortion. For decades, there was an extremely heated debate around late term abortion. Partly driven by anti-choice groups knowing that was the abortion debate they could win morally. Politicians spent that time passing ever more extreme messaging laws at the state level that were incredibly poorly defined. Why? Because Roe meant the laws were on the books but not live so politicians used them to message to the hardest core of their base. Then Roe was overturned. Now, in many states women with ectopic pregnancies can only be treated “when their lives are threatened”. The unintended consequences of all this moral surety can be pretty extreme.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-64625162
Police have ruled out a hate crime so I guess it's just your standard kids killing kids.
The Newsnight woman's article felt like it was trying to cover both sides [which I assume will be the case with her book]. There are obviously going to be polarising/extreme examples in both directions.
In somewhat similar news, I hadn't realised there was a trans angle to this, not that I'd really followed the story beyond the headline. Edit, as above I guess.
Ruling out a hate crime off the bat does feel a bit like 'we think she's definitely fallen in the river'.
I missed this banger quote:
Aye. Just ask the last two to see her alive.They continued: "She was a larger than life character who would leave a lasting impression on all who met her.
@Don you should search Joe Westerman on twitter. You could learn a few techniques.
His first game of the new season is away at the team he left under a cloud as well.
Shinners 100% kills prostitutes.
The wife has had to come and deny that it is her.His first game of the new season is away at the team he left under a cloud as well.
The Yorkshire Rimmer looked like he didn't have a scooby where he was on the video.
There was a similar video taken in Barrow a few months back of two randoms except the camera man advised the lad to 'give it fast arse'.
And dogs.
Surprised there’s tranny bashers in Culceth.
I'm a twit
What? Says who? Who is policing that? Surely you can write whatever you want on a gravestone, as long as it's not obscene?She won’t be allowed the dignity of having ‘beloved daughter’ on her gravestone.
I thought that, maybe it has to be whatever is in the official record if it's in a public cemetery (and presumably the religious folk wouldn't allow the burial of such a heretic in their grounds)? Does seem odd.
Yeah, if it's linked back to official records, it'll probably put a spanner in the works. We get confusion with the DWP all the time. They go by birth gender, we have to put both a gender and a gender preference.
The finger will never be pointed at the ones really at fault that the kid is dead - the bored fuckers who started off this whole sex change as fashion trend.
Incredibly brave, this. The opposition chants and dressing room banter are going to be vicious. Anyways, anyone manage to get Sam Smith tour tickets yet?
I'm not on board with all the media fetishising either but facts are facts, it's very brave.
Surely everyone just looks the other way and let's them put what they want. You would have to be a massive prick to object.
I'm sure there are things you can't change, but given the gender on a tombstone isn't mandatory (I'm assuming name, dob and dod are), I can't see how it would cause a problem at all.
Lol what
yeah man and Martin Luther King died because of all the uppity n-words. you truly are a spectacularly thick cunt sometimes.
That's all this sick bullshit is. Warping kids.
This news has made me curious if service providers at work record deaths with their legal or chosen gender. The person to ask has responded with an out of office for a week though, and I won't care by then.
I'm a twit
Just change everything official that has the word gender in it to sex and be done with this nonsense.
Sex? YES PLEASE
I'm a twit
You can write basically whatever you want on headstones and memorials, most cemeteries have guidelines on materials and shape/size and not much else. So unless they want to write 'beloved daughter' on an 8 foot chrome penis I'm sure they will be allowed to include it.
Let's be frank, the ones who we should point the finger at are the ones killing people.
The finger will never be pointed at the ones really at fault for killing that kid - the bored fuckers who started off this murder as fashion trend.
Weren't they stabbed? Has anyone considered the role the knife manufacturer has to play in all this? Makes you think.
Huh. Like, I shouldn't be surprised kids get big on that platform but still ... huh.Tributes have also been paid to Brianna on social media and in particular Tik Tok, where she had a huge following.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ality#comments
Comment section is a riot.
It takes a lot to get me fully behind Polly Toynbee but I think the commenters there have managed it.
Remind me of Polly Toynbee's stance when something more than Tory-lite was on the table from His Majesty's Opposition?
Did the 2017 and 2019 Labour manifestos have any specific policies for spreading out massive pensioner wealth and benefits? The best anti-boomer policy in years was Theresa May's plan for people to pay for their own old age care, and they (thankfully) stopped her winning the election by calling it a 'Dementia Tax'.
I don't know, specifically, I just think Toynbee's a cunt.
Remember she needs feeding like everyone, and if the dinner party invitations dry up she'd have to employ a cook.
I must be missing something as both the article and the comments seems a bit meh.
Here we go, wealthy boomers on the defensive.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-64646039
Final Destination 7 confirmed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-64648879
Outed by a rapist troll.
Still surprised this classic thread didn't take off.
I'm a twit
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote