BREAKING: NCAA says state of North Carolina will again be considered for championship hosting....

[ncjacket79]

?

I'm not aware of any law that specifically said anything about it. There are clearly social norms and you can be charged with other crimes if you molest someone or expose yourself.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Exactly. I have 2 daughters as well and recognize someone who wants to rape a woman doesn't care what the law says about which bathroom they are supposed to be in.

Safety is only 1 small smidgeon of my objection to it. If we let all transgender folks flood women's restrooms, I don't think the needle on sexual attacks would budge. Thinking about locker rooms and what not, I just don't think young girls need to see penises and testicles. I don't want my daughter undressed or half dressed around undressed or half dressed people of the opposite gender. I don't think they need to worry about it or stress about it. Why don't we walk down the street naked? Why don't we show nudity on regular television? There are some basic norms that to me are highly shocking that folks could even disagree with. If there's any mental disorder, that's where it is.

 

[Squints]

There are numerous studies, and here is one of a 30 year period from Sweden, that shows more support for the danger of this type of approach:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
To me, its just more proof of how harmful all this is on the inside for transgender people. Until they truly embrace how they were born and who they are, I can't imagine these statistics changing. They need to understand what they are, embrace it, be proud of it and defend it and educate others about it. In the studies I've read, those that are most open and honest about it have much better health outcomes.

You are completely misrepresenting what that study says.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

You are completely misrepresenting what that study says.

Oh, but I'm not. Just think about it. The narrative is that these folks commit suicide because they are bullied and ostracized from society. Yet here you have a group of transgender people that went so far to try and become the other gender as to have sex reassignment surgery. So now you have (for example) a male who looks, acts, dresses, and even genitally looks like a female. Yet the study specifically states that those people still sport massively high mortality rates and suicide rates. And, if you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see over many years post-surgery those rates don't measurably change relative to the general population. The study specifically states they need psychiatric and somatic care. All the data and studies cries out that they have an identity problem that everyone is trying to gloss over, even by trying to alter their physical appearance...and it doesn't work.

 

[Squints]

Oh, but I'm not. Just think about it. The narrative is that these folks commit suicide because they are bullied and ostracized from society. Yet here you have a group of transgender people that went so far to try and become the other gender as to have sex reassignment surgery. So now you have (for example) a male who looks, acts, dresses, and even genitally looks like a female. Yet the study specifically states that those people still sport massively high mortality rates and suicide rates. And, if you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see over many years post-surgery those rates don't measurably change relative to the general population. The study specifically states they need psychiatric and somatic care. All the data and studies cries out that they have an identity problem that everyone is trying to gloss over, even by trying to alter their physical appearance...and it doesn't work.

Oh, but you are. I mean have you actually read it? The author herself doesn't agree with your assessment so with all due respect I'm going with her rather than you.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Oh, but you are. I mean have you actually read it? The author herself doesn't agree with your assessment so with all due respect I'm going with her rather than you.

Did I read it, LOL. Of course I read it, I'm the one who linked to it, and that's why I gave the detailed summary. I'm not surprised I disagree with the author. But I'm not making things up, I'm using their statements and data. Its all there for you.

Its the same as what the American Psychiatric/Medical Associations and the World Health Organization said when they dropped Disorder from Transgenderism and renamed it to Gender Dysphoria. You can google and read all the announcements from the organizations - they did it to reduce stygmas and barriers to care. Now those organizations and many other folks would disagree with my characterization just like you did now, but all you have to do is read what they actually say. The WHO in particular had a really difficult time figuring out what to rename the condition to, because words like Incongruence meant completely different things (good versus bad) in different languages. It is easily clear they are worried about the public perception and not the actual diagnosis. Again, if you asked them they wouldn't admit to it - but in all the pronouncements you don't read anything about the pathology or science behind it, only the Marketing of it.

 

[SlawDog]

A man believes he is Napoleon, you get him a psychiatrist.
A man thinks he's a women, you get him a surgeon with a knife.
Something is completely wrong with this thinking

 

[AE 87]

Did I read it, LOL. Of course I read it, I'm the one who linked to it, and that's why I gave the detailed summary. I'm not surprised I disagree with the author. But I'm not making things up, I'm using their statements and data. Its all there for you.

Its the same as what the American Psychiatric/Medical Associations and the World Health Organization said when they dropped Disorder from Transgenderism and renamed it to Gender Dysphoria. You can google and read all the announcements from the organizations - they did it to reduce stygmas and barriers to care. Now those organizations and many other folks would disagree with my characterization just like you did now, but all you have to do is read what they actually say. The WHO in particular had a really difficult time figuring out what to rename the condition to, because words like Incongruence meant completely different things (good versus bad) in different languages. It is easily clear they are worried about the public perception and not the actual diagnosis. Again, if you asked them they wouldn't admit to it - but in all the pronouncements you don't read anything about the pathology or science behind it, only the Marketing of it.

You are right on the data imo. There are similar studies related to homosexuality which was removed as a disorder from the DSM because of the sexual politics of the 60s and early 70s.

However, it's difficult to discuss because many liberals believe their faith positions on these topics are backed by science.

 

[Squints]

Did I read it, LOL. Of course I read it, I'm the one who linked to it, and that's why I gave the detailed summary. I'm not surprised I disagree with the author. But I'm not making things up, I'm using their statements and data. Its all there for you.

So you read the study? Specifically the last two sentences of the introduction:

This study design sheds new light on transsexual persons' health after sex reassignment. It does not, however, address whether sex reassignment is an effective treatment or not.

And then are using its statements and data to judge whether sex reassignment surgery is an effective treatment? When it was not designed for that purpose and explicitly stated as such? You don't see the issue there?

Its the same as what the American Psychiatric/Medical Associations and the World Health Organization said when they dropped Disorder from Transgenderism and renamed it to Gender Dysphoria. You can google and read all the announcements from the organizations - they did it to reduce stygmas and barriers to care. Now those organizations and many other folks would disagree with my characterization just like you did now, but all you have to do is read what they actually say. The WHO in particular had a really difficult time figuring out what to rename the condition to, because words like Incongruence meant completely different things (good versus bad) in different languages. It is easily clear they are worried about the public perception and not the actual diagnosis. Again, if you asked them they wouldn't admit to it - but in all the pronouncements you don't read anything about the pathology or science behind it, only the Marketing of it.

I'm sorry but this is complete speculation on your part based on your own personal reading. Trying to pass it off as a reality is disingenuous at best.

 

[ncjacket79]

Safety is only 1 small smidgeon of my objection to it. If we let all transgender folks flood women's restrooms, I don't think the needle on sexual attacks would budge. Thinking about locker rooms and what not, I just don't think young girls need to see penises and testicles. I don't want my daughter undressed or half dressed around undressed or half dressed people of the opposite gender. I don't think they need to worry about it or stress about it. Why don't we walk down the street naked? Why don't we show nudity on regular television? There are some basic norms that to me are highly shocking that folks could even disagree with. If there's any mental disorder, that's where it is.

I don't disagree with all of this. In fact I am not sure what an answer is for locker rooms as an example. But think about this. There are men who identify as women, who look like women. Dress, hair style, whatever. If you saw them you would think they were women. What bathroom should they go in? Or vice versa? Short of someone undressing doesn't that present exactly the same dilemma you are talking about? wouldn't it confuse children just the same?

Finally, if Columbia wanted to pass a local ordinance, and you don't live in Columbia, why would you care? Honest question. Why is it we want the government to stay out of local issues except when we disagree with what someone else wants to do in their community?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

So you read the study? Specifically the last two sentences of the introduction:

And then are using its statements and data to judge whether sex reassignment surgery is an effective treatment? When it was not designed for that purpose and explicitly stated as such? You don't see the issue there?

I'm sorry but this is complete speculation on your part based on your own personal reading. Trying to pass it off as a reality is disingenuous at best.

I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. I KNOW what I am saying contradicts what they are stating in their conclusion. That is part of my point - you can see from the data they are ignoring right in front of them. Happens all the time in 'studies' when people know what the purpose of the study is, have a vested interest in its outcome, and it colors everything they do.

In terms of speculating about the public perception - again - go google the announcements and read it for yourself. All I am doing is reiterating what THEY are saying. Their announcements said literally NOTHING about the pathology or science. They spoke at great length about easing the public perception, stygma, and access to care.

So where do we go from here? Well, you can actually disagree with the data I posted my conclusions from or the statements I quoted about intentions. I gave you the links. You are welcome to disagree on substance on any of that and then we can go from there.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I don't disagree with all of this. In fact I am not sure what an answer is for locker rooms as an example. But think about this. There are men who identify as women, who look like women. Dress, hair style, whatever. If you saw them you would think they were women. What bathroom should they go in? Or vice versa? Short of someone undressing doesn't that present exactly the same dilemma you are talking about? wouldn't it confuse children just the same?

Finally, if Columbia wanted to pass a local ordinance, and you don't live in Columbia, why would you care? Honest question. Why is it we want the government to stay out of local issues except when we disagree with what someone else wants to do in their community?

That's the way we've done it forever isn't it? Just mind your own business. It worked and it works. Yes that means the occasional ***** shows up in a women's restroom, but nobody would know because the person looks like a woman. But that's not enough - there is a movement of people hell bound to tear down all of society's norms because how dare anybody tell them anything they do or think isn't normal. Why does that matter, what do I mean? Well, if a city (for example) says you can choose your own bathroom, then you no longer just have a real-looking woman (who is a man) walking into the women's restroom. Now you have all kinds of people that look like men as well. I would prefer men and women never ever mixed in bathrooms, locker rooms, or changing rooms where people are half naked, but I think the way we always did it before was the best option we had at the time.

Why would I care if another city wanted to pass an ordinance? I admit I wouldn't really care so much, but the people there damn well would. So you would need to take that argument up with them. When the City of Charlotte passed their ordinance, the city went up in arms. Sure not everyone, but a great many. If you aren't familiar with Charlotte, its looney toons ville. They once floated a bond to a vote to have the citizens pay for the new Charlotte Bobcats arena. The citizens voted it down. The City Council approved it anyway and borrowed several hundred million dollars. This is the school district who came up with the Gender Unicorn who was hellbent on introducing all kinds of abnormal sex and gender theories into classrooms all the way down through Kindergarten. I'm not exaggerating, you can Google any of this. So if Columbia passed such a resolution (I don't live there), I would be all for the State Government overriding it. We don't need that garbage spreading across the state.

 

[MWBATL]

All of this entire brouhaha is the result of an overreach by the North Carolina legislature and is largely ideological in nature. If they had left Charlotte's original ordinance alone, then this would have been a tempest in a teapot. The only result has been $1B or so of lost business to NC and a return of the championship games to Tobacco Road in future. What a waste of public resources!

You mean the Charlotte City Council, of course, don't you?

Just saying that the perception of who "over-reached" is largely based on one's perception about the base issue. Those who believe that the concept was bending the law to pander to a tiny minority would actually cite the city as initiating this brouhaha, and I have heard many folks in NC say the whole thing was cooked up as a deliberate scheme to "pick a fight" that would have ramifications on election day.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Actually, it is a disorder, and labelled as such by the medical community...until just a couple years ago when they were lobbied hard by the LGBTQetc crowd. They (and many people these days) don't like/can't stand thinking that there is anything wrong with them whatsoever. Like they are defective. They're not, its just a medical term. Lots of people have anxiety disorders, alcohol disorders, ADHD, eating disorders, depression. Its how you're born. It doesn't mean you are a defective human being. The point is in this case these people legitimately 100% think they are the opposite gender. The reason it is a disorder is that like how anorexics erroneously think they are fat these folks are not actually the other gender. And that's why there is this huge struggle about bathrooms and locker rooms. Many people are taking the position that you are whatever gender you say you are. That is scientifically and biologically false. Its like a triangle saying it wants to be a square. "Okay, you're a square." ITS NOT TRUE. We are literally killing our transgender children - over half of them attempt suicide. Because they are living a lie and being told to live a lie. They need to understand the nature of the disorder, educate others, and be open about it. Deep inside is this identity crisis that's going to decay in them forever if we keep playing this make believe game.

It's not a disorder. Disorders result in sickness and death or severe hardship if untreated. Transgendered people don't get sick and die unless pushed into it by societal pressure.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

It's not a disorder. Disorders result in sickness and death or severe hardship if untreated. Transgendered people don't get sick and die unless pushed into it by societal pressure.

"Disorders result in sickness and death or severe hardship if untreated." That's exactly what has occurred, is occurring, and is what we are discussing on this thread.

"Transgendered people don't get sick and die unless pushed into it by societal pressure." That is the exact opposite of the results of the 30 year study I linked to earlier.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

This is a heated political discussion, not a football one. I'm surprised it hasn't been moved yet. However, I'm very pleased to see the level of respect afforded each other of opposite views.

Respect and quality dialogue is a hallmark of this forum, even in this and it is very refreshing.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

"Disorders result in sickness and death or severe hardship if untreated." That's exactly what has occurred, is occurring, and is what we are discussing on this thread.

"Transgendered people don't get sick and die unless pushed into it by societal pressure." That is the exact opposite of the results of the 30 year study I linked to earlier.

I'd argue societal pressure as the leading cause of those outcomes. Either way, it's still only one study.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

This is a heated political discussion, not a football one. I'm surprised it hasn't been moved yet. However, I'm very pleased to see the level of respect afforded each other of opposite views.

Respect and quality dialogue is a hallmark of this forum, even in this and it is very refreshing.

I learn massive amounts from interacting with people who have different opinions and beliefs from me. And my personal opinions and beliefs have changed over time as a result of that.

EDIT: But I will always laugh at and make fun of the dwags, no matter how much I may interact with them.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I learn massive amounts from interacting with people who have different opinions and beliefs from me. And my personal opinions and beliefs have changed over time as a result of that.

EDIT: But I will always laugh at and make fun of the dwags, no matter how much I may interact with them.

Me too brother!

 

[takethepoints]

I'd argue societal pressure as the leading cause of those outcomes. Either way, it's still only one study.

Yes. I looked at the study and it has one major flaw that isn't (and can't be) addressed in the design: it looks at transgendered people after they have had sexual reassignment surgery then looks at problems that, according to our friend, indicate a continuing difficulty with adjustment due to a basic unresolved conflict. The problem with the study design - admitted by the authors - is that, in the instance of psychiatric care and suicide attempts, the damage is already done. People who had sex reassignment surgery had higher rates of psychiatric problems before reassignment. As the authors say, "In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity (they include psychiatric treatment in this) and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment." Indeed, as they point out, that is what the meta-analyses of studies about transgender people who have sex reassignment surgery indicate; anxiety due to gender mis-identity decreases after reassignment. That there are significant increases in overall mortality only for those who got the surgery before 1989 is also indicative; as the authors note, treatment now is more sophisticated and societal attitudes have changed. Or, to put this short, people who have psychiatric problems continue to have psychiatric problems, even their gender identity problems have been addressed by reassignment.

There are other problems with the study, but the authors are candid about those. What the study doesn't support, however, is the conclusion that transgendered people are "living a lie" or that "Deep inside is this identity crisis that is going to decay in them forever if we keep playing this make believe game". Quite the contrary. They instead recommend that more attention be paid to overall health problems of people who have had reassignment surgery. Full Stop.

Full Stop for me too; this is my last on this subject.