Girl Too Young For Tattoo Offered Irreversible Gender Surgery.

[roguenuke]

You've defeated your own argument.

Age limits​

Each branch of the military has age limits to enlist in active duty:​

• Air Force: 17 - 39
• Army: 17 - 35
• Coast Guard: 17 - 31
• Marine Corps: 17 - 28
• Navy: 17 - 39
• Space Force: 17 - 39

Requirements to join the U.S. military | USAGov

Get the age, physical, educational, and other requirements for enlisting in each branch of the U.S. military. Learn about ASVAB testing.

www.usa.gov

Given the above, 17 years of age would appear to be reasonable, per your own argument.

17 is considered a minor. I'm not the one trying to limit it to "minor".

And the only irreversible surgeries are done on mainly adults, a few 17 year olds. Maybe you should research better. A few exceptions aren't going to prove your point. Having a few restrictions, enforced mainly by the actual doctors, ethical review boards of doctors, should work just fine.

 

[bomberfox]

Surgery? No. Puberty blockers yes.

 

[PoS]

I voted NO because the nature of the surgery is a permanent solution for what is often a temporary state of confusion. Kids are too young to unilaterally be making their own decisions about gender reassignment surgery.

Agreed. Im all for sex change operations, but only for adults.

 

[poweRob]

I point out anti-trans ragebait. Have you turned off the faux yet? I still recommend that. Give yourself three years of it, then go back and look at what you were consuming. When I listened to Limbaugh again for a minute after the 2012 election, I was like, "Why in the **** did I listen to this person?"

Well I like Rush's contributions as of late.

 

[maquiscat]

This is a Babylon Bee video making a political point through "humor" about Gender reassignment surgery.

​

I posted a poll question based on this humorous but informative video on gender reassignment surgery.

The choices are Agree, Disagree, and Other.

For those who typically ignore videos and/or the substance of posts in favor of "voting" based on confirmation bias, the poll still applies.

However, the thread question does expect a reply as to why you voted as you did, whether viewing the video or not.

Note: An argument based on "my body, my choice" may fit for abortion, but is insufficient when it comes to "body mutilation" for minors.

Didn't watch video.

I voted no, but that was based upon the wording of the question. No the minor should not be able to unilaterally make that decision. With that said, if the doctors involved feel that the physical and mental health of the minor is best served by early surgery, especially following years of consistent and persistent GD, then such should be allowed. The key there being the long term persistence of the condition. And that is what is happening. It's not like the minor walks in, asks for surgery, and next month is on the table, for all that opponents try to paint the picture that way.

 

[maquiscat]

A minor should never be allowed to have purely elective surgery.


Medical professionals should never be allowed, by law, to perform purely elective surgery on minors.

I reserve the right to make exceptions for things like cleft palates, and some other quality of life improving procedures for birth defects and/or injuries.

The problem with this argument is that transitioning is a life improving procedure for them. It wouldn't be for you because you don't have GD. Also, the other problem with the argument is that opponents are seeking to ban all transgender care, but are only citing the surgery. If the measures were only trying to ban the surgery itself, there might be more of an argument.

 

[Opossum]

Another day, another bit of anti-trans propaganda.

What is anti-trans about the post and what is the propaganda part of it, specifically?

 

[Lisa]

Didn't watch video.

I voted no, but that was based upon the wording of the question. No the minor should not be able to unilaterally make that decision. With that said, if the doctors involved feel that the physical and mental health of the minor is best served by early surgery, especially following years of consistent and persistent GD, then such should be allowed. The key there being the long term persistence of the condition. And that is what is happening. It's not like the minor walks in, asks for surgery, and next month is on the table, for all that opponents try to paint the picture that way.

Absolutely correct.

 

[maquiscat]

I point out anti-trans ragebait. Have you turned off the faux yet? I still recommend that. Give yourself three years of it, then go back and look at what you were consuming. When I listened to Limbaugh again for a minute after the 2012 election, I was like, "Why in the **** did I listen to this person?"

Because he was not the same person as when he first started out. I liked him too initially, but he just went further and further down his little rabbit hole.

 

[Helix]

What is anti-trans about the post and what is the propaganda part of it, specifically?

Ah, the sealioning thing. No thanks.

 

[maquiscat]

This logic is flawed because we already perform elective surgeries on minors that aren't even trans. Breast reductions, pigeon chest corrections, nose jobs.

It is not flawed if they hold the position that those surgeries should not be done to minors as well. Don't conflate what the law allows with what the poster thinks should or should not be allowed.

 

[Opossum]

Ah, the sealioning thing. No thanks.

So you're unable to voice an actual point on anything at all? You just prefer screeching to the choir, got it.

 

[maquiscat]

Buncha shrinks probably getting kickbacks from "gender-affirming care" doctors for recommending their mutilation services.

Conspiracy theory section is that way --->

 

[Helix]

So you're unable to voice an actual point on anything at all? You just prefer screeching to the choir, got it.

Peace.

 

[Lisa]

Buncha shrinks probably getting kickbacks from "gender-affirming care" doctors for recommending their mutilation services.

You do realize that the patients can seek a second option., don't you? Nobody is forced to seek any medical care. This is very technical surgery, that only a handful of Drs perform, and nobody is mutilating anyone.

Surgeons, for those patients who choose to get surgery, in the future arent paying psychiatrists/psychologists/ clinical social workers or endocrinologists. The wait for surgery after you have been approved, can be 6 months to a year. Almost all the medications used as generic, so there is no money to be made there either.


It is amusing how those who know the least about the diagnosis and treatment process seem to have the strongest opinions that are almost always laughably wrong. They also never post sources to support their outrageous claims. That lack of supporting sources is very noticeable.

 

[Opossum]

Peace.

Why do you continue to reply saying nothing ever?

 

[StillBallin75]

Uhhh unilaterally?

Should be a decision made in conjunction with their doctor. Like literally any other ****ing surgery.

 

[Lisa]

Uhhh unilaterally?

Should be a decision made in conjunction with their doctor. Like literally any other ****ing surgery.

It is a treatment team of Drs and psychologists who make these decisions after talking to the patient and the family. They are made after usually 2-3 years of hormones, mental health evaluations and medical monitoring. Anyone who says otherwise if so full of sheet that their eyes are brown.

 

[StillBallin75]

It is a treatment team of Drs and psychologists who make these decisions after talking to the patient and the family. They are made after usually 2-3 years of hormones, mental health evaluations and medical monitoring. Anyone who says otherwise if so full of sheet that their eyes are brown.

Right, it's always "small government conservatives" and "classical liberals" who think it's their place to insert government into decisions made collaboratively between medical professionals and patient.

 

[Lisa]

Right, it's always "small government conservatives" and "classical liberals" who think it's their place to insert government into decisions made collaboratively between medical professionals and patient.

These are medical decisions between the patient and provider. The patient always has the choice to say no, stop treatment, or get a second opinion.

This patients Bill of Rights is a 24x36" post that is posted in public areas and in Drs offices. The patients are also given a paper copy for themselves and sign a statement that they have been informed of their rights.

https://www.summahealth.org/patientvisitor/Patients/patientrights

 

[CLAX1911]

This is a Babylon Bee video making a political point through "humor" about Gender reassignment surgery.

​

I posted a poll question based on this humorous but informative video on gender reassignment surgery.

The choices are Agree, Disagree, and Other.

For those who typically ignore videos and/or the substance of posts in favor of "voting" based on confirmation bias, the poll still applies.

However, the thread question does expect a reply as to why you voted as you did, whether viewing the video or not.

Note: An argument based on "my body, my choice" may fit for abortion, but is insufficient when it comes to "body mutilation" for minors.

Well the idea is to get them on the path toward transition before they realize what a bad idea it is.

 

[reinaert]

Parents decide all sorts of things that children are unable to consent to; but, a child seeking even the first steps of reassignment, like temporary puberty blockers, has to consent, and has to undergo multiple steps to approval.

Imagine if that were required before a pair of shit gibbons decided to infect a toddler with salvational anxiety, crippling fears of hell, and an apocalyptic sense of history...

 

[Lisa]

Well the idea is to get them on the path toward transition before they realize what a bad idea it is.

How do you push a patient and their guardian toward transition without their knowledge? Who told you that this is even a possibility? Do you have any idea of what you are saying or do you think its true because you make the claim and maybe even believe it?

Your claim would be actionable malpractice.

 

[CLAX1911]

How do you push a patient and their guardian toward transition without their knowledge?

Grooming

Who told you that this is even a possibility?

I don't need to be told things I have the power of observation. If you only believe what you are told I'm sorry for you.

Do you have any idea of what you are saying or do you think its true because you make the claim and maybe even believe it?

Yeah I'm repeating what was stated in the WPATH files.

Your claim would be actionable malpractice.

I believe it is. Lawsuits and criminal charges may be in the future. One can only hope

 

[Lisa]

Grooming

Grooming someone to be transgender is not medically possible. I dont care what you believe. It is not possible. This has been known for 50+ years. If it were possible to groom someone to be trans then it would also be possible to groom a transgender person to be cisgender. That doesn't happen and cannot happen. The nature vs nurture question was answered by John Money's abuse of David Reimer almost 50 years ago.

Misusing the term ‘grooming’ is problematic, experts say

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ press secretary Christina Pushaw was not happy that critics had nicknamed a controversial Flo

www.politifact.com

Did someone groom you to be gay?

I don't need to be told things I have the power of observation. If you only believe what you are told I'm sorry for you.

Tell me about your supposed ability of observation when you have never met any Drs or psychologists?

Yeah I'm repeating what was stated in the WPATH files.

I dare you to post those lies.

I believe it is. Lawsuits and criminal charges may be in the future. One can only hope

The Drs are not harming patiemnts by treating them in the approved manner that has proven 95% effective for 50+ years.

Reading your claims and those of MrNiceGuy are not less insane than those of young earth creationists, anti-vaxxers, moon landing deniers and 5G conspiracy theorists.