Active Users:637 Time:22/12/2024 08:37:23 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: I'll chew... - Edit 1

Before modification by entyti at 14/08/2023 10:57:39 PM


I don't think anorexia, bulimia and BIID have that much to do with each other to begin with... though indeed you often see the comparison to BIID as gender confirmation surgery involves removal of perfectly healthy body parts (though not all trans people take that step), just like people with BIID express a desire for, so if doctors agree to do that in the one case, why not in the other. I think the big difference there is simply in the nature of the desire - one is a rational enough desire (even if until quite recently it was an impossible one), the other very much isn't. Now that medical science does allow one to physically change one's gender, albeit still imperfectly and at a cost, I see no rational reason to block it.

Well, as I said, they seem to share a root of being a type of body dysmorphia. Perhaps you disagree, and that's fine. I don't claim this as known fact, but simply an association that I (and others) am making. Though I doubt there is enough evidence to say one way or the other, and we'll have to agree to disagree. Welcome to complex systems

You stated that one is rational enough. I'd ask that you say more on that, as I don't understand where the distinction is. I assume you are referring to transgender individuals? Can I assume you are basing this on the distinction between sex and gender, with gender being socially inculcated behavioral tendencies?



You should still have the freedom to not accept it as normal, of course - that's pretty much the cornerstone of liberal democracy, that people accept opinions and actions of others which they disagree with, as long as such actions don't violate their own rights or those of third parties.

I am glad to hear you say this. And I completely agree with you in theory. Unfortunately, people have been fired, children pulled into communist style struggle sessions, for expressing views similar to mine. And there's no doubt that similar atrocities are committed the other way as well.

Regardless, it is not so clean-cut as you have "your opinions and I have mine, and yet we'll live together and do just fine." I wish it were...



I had to look up Chesteron's Fence, but from what I read just now it has to do with reform in society - changing laws, dismantling institutions, etc. - and how one shouldn't undertake such reform until one understands what the original purpose for said law or institution was, and hence the consequences of changing/removing it. I'm not sure that's very relevant for choices affecting a single individual, except in the blatantly obvious sense that one should take the time and effort to fully and accurately weigh the pros and cons in advance. Which, yes, obviously one should, also in these cases. And sure, the cons now may still be bigger than they will be in the future because we don't know everything yet and puberty blockers still have downsides which maybe could be mitigated with further research. But if you let that factor stop you, there's going to be a whole lot of medical treatments that you'd have to call a halt to.

I could probably have phrased that better. Certainly, not taking puberty blockers means avoiding its side effects and those side effects will impact the patient whether or not they later want to revert to their birth gender. But since those side effects are part of the price to pay to change one's gender, patients who do continue down that path wouldn't regret them, or at least would accept them as part of the price to pay.

But blocking puberty will avoid some changes that would have to be surgically reversed later - if that's possible, obviously some puberty-induced changes can't be reversed at all, as we see in the debates about trans male-to-female athletes.


Chesterton's Fence is a thought experiment highlighting the importance of reflecting on what is already in place before making changes. And there are a couple of Chesterton's Fences to consider with this issue.

The first fence is puberty itself. And yes, in this example, it would refer to an individual's choice. And I think you laid out the concerns that an individual would want to consider well enough.

The second fence relates the view that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder, which has been the common view up until recently. Society removing this "fence" for the view that it is normal opens up a floodgate of issues, with which we are only seeing the beginnings of; some examples of this are the division of mens and womens sports, which bathrooms are acceptable to use, and whether gender-affirming care is appropriate for underage people.

And the implications gain in intensity with time. Will insurance companies be forced to accept gender-affirming care as covered medical procedures? Are parents of a child with gender dysphoria who refuse to pursue gender-affirming care committing abuse and lose the right to their children?

All of this is sitting on a house of cards of fairly shaky science and fairly loud activists, as I see it.



That's a reason to be more careful and take more time to assess a teenager's desire for puberty blockers, yes, but I don't think it's a reason to automatically always refuse it. Of course there are many other things that teenagers aren't allowed to do until the day they turn 18 and then suddenly they can (and even one rather minor thing which for some absurd reason they have to be 21 for...), but given that puberty blockers are very much a time-dependent thing and that by age 18, in the overwhelming majority of cases, that ship has very much sailed, it makes no sense to put it in that same category.

Though as long as they're below 18 it does mean their parents have more of a say, and it's always going to be difficult to find the right balance about how much say they should have when their parents hold the opposite view. My view is rather different from yours below, but I'm not sure I could draw a clear line anywhere in particular.


Except that we aren't being careful, by and large. Society is being inundated with these ideas, which are being transmitted in government policies, medical practices, and educational institutions. Children are being taught (in some cases) by activist teachers to come out of the closet to them, and keep secrets from their parents. Some countries and some US States allow for underage kids to seek gender-affirming care without consent from their parents. And I can certainly understand and empathize with the sentiment that traditional parents would not be on board with these radical views. But it is not very difficult to see how all of this can be exploited by bad actors, both in the medical field as well as individuals seeking validation, not to mention the swath of confused and impressionable youths who get caught up in the cultural tornado and end up with consequences their minds were too underdeveloped to comprehend.



I expected something along those lines from Tyr and yourself, indeed.

Well, I'm sorry to be so predictable. I'll have to try harder next time


Return to message