Mississippi Passes "More Dead Kids Please" bill. Texas responds w/ "hold my beer"

[Emily Lake]

But you don't, because you can't, because there fucking isn't one. The differentiations of puberty are caused by different levels of testosterone, progesterone, and estrogen, and those can absolutely be administered in different ratios to achieve different effects.

Those different effects are colloquially "male puberty", "female puberty" and "non-hormonally puberty".

A male will never have a "female puberty" regardless of how much exogenous estrogen you pump into them. A female will never have a "male puberty" regardless of how much exogenous testosterone you pump into them.

 

[Toni]

Aside from that: Exactly WHAT do you not get that I’m talking about a flight/fight response on the part of people who are likely extremely vulnerable and are likely to gave been traumatized by some kind of sexual assault in their lives, mostly by someone they thought they could trust in a situation that seemed safe?????

The part where nobody is asking you to "just trust" here, seeing as there is either a desk to verify important details before they ever get in through the front door let alone the shower room door, or a lone ungendered shower stand where there is no protection for anyone anyway, or a place where we would expect and demand that they go through the trouble of installing a third option for ANYONE who might need additional privacy and space ala the ADA.

Womens locker rooms are supposed to be safe. No naked person wants to encounter a perceived threat

Not every perception of threat is justified by reality.

AFAIK, everyone here supports trans rights

The point here is that Emily and Bomb very much do not.

Emily vociferously shouts down, with myriad bad faith and myriad bad medical understanding, any effort to afford kids with useful, meaningful solutions:

IF clinicians were doing the due diligence of identifying and treating conditions which may be contributing to dysphoria (autism, anxiety, depression, childhood sexual trauma, confusion about sexual orientation) prior to prescribing either blockers or cross-sex hormones

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA, and autism itself is a physiological brain configuration that is going to be fundamental to the formation of much of dysphoria itself, and that doesn't go away when you take Ritalin.

In fact, it would have led to a reduction in my autism symptoms had I just been able to access blockers, had I known they were even an option, because a lot of the distraction and difficulty comes from having "foreign" and otherwise conflicting noise in one's head, and that is a source of "foreign" noise to me.

All of those are medical red herrings designed to delay shutting the metaphorical door until the cat is already dead in the road.

I don’t think you really understand fight or flight.

I've taken much of my life learning how to control inappropriate fight or flight reflexes, caused by generations of child abuse at the hands of well meaning but abusive parents who promote theater and anxiety over the non-issue rather than contributing to behaviors and education for identifying real risks.

Of course, because of the abuse perpetrated by my own well-meaning but unknowingly racist parents, and conservative media at large, I have to frequently swallow an unwanted and inappropriate fight or flight reflex with regards to black people.

I expect women to not blame the penis, to swallow the reflex, and blame their parents and themselves instead of the penis, because it's nothing less than what I have frequent experience with doing myself, albeit in a different abusively arranged context.

You are not the only one in this thread who has had to repress the fight/flight reflex. Or who still does it.

I am so sorry for the trauma you’ve experienced.

Regardless of how many times you tell women that we fear or blame a penis, you will remain wrong. It’s undermining your argument.

Women and girls and all individuals react in different ways to indicators of danger. Across genders and species, one danger sign is something out of place, or very unexpected. Women and girls are not going to start ignoring our instincts and looking out for our own safety because you say so.

 

[Bomb#20]

I take it what you're claiming I do not support are rights that trans people have but that other people don't have

Like the right to use the same bathroom other people use,

Other people don't have that right and you know it. If you believed people have a right to use the same bathroom other people use, then you'd be claiming unaltered chemically normal high-testosterone cismales have a right to use the same bathroom women use, instead of arguing for your eunuch ID card compromise.

to participate in sports alongside people with the same general steroidal/hormonal profile as themselves.

I take it when you were a kid you had a motor in your soapbox derby car, and you claimed you weren't cheating because half way down the hill you disengaged the motor and coasted the rest of the way down just like contestants with the same general gravitational acceleration profile as yourself.

female babies have a lot less than male babies; and female fetuses have a whole lot less than male fetuses. It's kind of why male babies have penises and female babies don't

No, the difference is caused by a specific moment in which DHT specifically is released by the mother's body.

Dihydrotestosterone

"Dihydrotestosterone (DHT, 5α-dihydrotestosterone, 5α-DHT, androstanolone or stanolone) is an endogenous androgen sex steroid and hormone. The enzyme 5α-reductase catalyzes the formation of DHT from testosterone in certain tissues including the prostate gland, seminal vesicles, epididymides, skin, hair follicles, liver, and brain."​

So no, the DHT isn't released by the mother's body. Fetal tissue makes it from testosterone. Girls produce less DHT because girls have less testosterone.

At any other point in a pregnancy, and without the DHT in particular, a penis doesn't happen no matter how much testosterone there is or is not later on.

And? How the heck do you figure that conflicts with what I wrote? All you're doing is supplying additional details.

Maybe actually read up on how the phallus is triggered to develop?

Maybe take your own advice.

There's a reason prepubescent females are in fact generally bigger and stronger And more physically developed than males on average prior to puberty.

How are you measuring "stronger" and "more physically developed"? No doubt you can back that claim up if you cherry pick the data, but otherwise?

There's a table of childhood track and field records here, listed by event, sex and age. http://age-records.125mb.com/

Matched by age, before puberty, the boys' records are systematically better than the girls' records in nearly all the events.

 

[Emily Lake]

It feels like someone wanting access to the library because it’s quiet enough to play their drums without interruption.

No. You are claiming that there's a peace that is actively being broken here, not just a difference in appearance but a difference in BEHAVIOR and a difference in RISK. Either you can, like Emily, justify the belief that this is the case with trans women, specifically the trans women who don't have balls, or you can admit the argument is based on unjustified prejudice.

You’re still telling women how to feel, how to navigate the world.

You still do not understand life as a woman.

And, I would suggest, you are still doing no favors for trans women, who I don’t think agree with your aggressive insistence that women don’t know what they are talking about when they describe living as a woman.


Look. #NotAllMen. We know that. We already navigate that. You want to tell us we don’t know what we’re doing. You’re not interested in women’s spaces or living as a woman. You have no interest in understanding the people who occupy the space. You just want to take over the space. And you’re not even a trans women. You’re interested in living as a man among women. Without ever understanding women.

Jarhyn want's women's spaces to be open to transwomen (which he is not), based on his personal definition of what constitutes a woman. He ALSO Wants those spaces to be open to eunuchs - which he is.

Jarhyn has repeatedly and very insistently defined "women" in such a way that it MUST include eunuchs, regardless of whether they live "as a woman" or not.

Basically, true to deep-in-the-bones patriarchy, Jarhyn want's to divide the world into "real men" and "non men"

 

[Emily Lake]

The point here is that Emily and Bomb very much do not.

Bullshit.

I don't support the special privileges that you are demanding under the guise of transgender rights.

But I 100% support equal rights to housing, employment, the right to NOT be attacked or abused because they are trans, and the right to have safe spaces available to them - I just disagree that those safe spaces MUST be women's spaces as opposed to transgender spaces.

 

[Emily Lake]

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA

Dapression is ALSO caused by a myriad other things than dysphoria.

You are assuming that if a child presents with depression and also claims to be transgender, then the transgender MUST BE THE ONLY POSSIBLE cause of their depression - even if the depression predates any indication of dysphoria whatsoever.

 

[Jarhyn]

Women and girls are not going to start ignoring our instincts and looking out for our own safety because you say so.

"White people are not going to start ignoring their instincts and looking out for their own safety just because people say it's 'racist'".

Racism IS hard baked into our DNA, to pointedly fear and distrust those who look different from us.

Many people justify that very similar behavior for the same reasons.

Not all instincts deserve to be paid heed in all contexts, even if it's hard to break them.

Jarhyn has repeatedly and very insistently defined "women" in such a way that it MUST include eunuchs, regardless of whether they live "as a woman" or not

You persistently define women in a way that it must include females regardless of whether or not they "live as women".

I wish to divide the world specifically into "on steroids" and "not on steroids".

It says nothing about who is a man and who is not. The fact is, I actually think people who decide to cleave to steroids are the ones who are making a foolish decision, and deserving of doubt, suspicion, and certain forms of censures.

But go ahead. Tell me more about what I feel and believe

 

[Jarhyn]

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA

Dapression is ALSO caused by a myriad other things than dysphoria.

You are assuming that if a child presents with depression and also claims to be transgender, then the transgender MUST BE THE ONLY POSSIBLE cause of their depression - even if the depression predates any indication of dysphoria whatsoever.

When there is both dysphoria and depression, some of the depression WILL BE caused by the dysphoria.

It is certainly not the only cause but where there is dysphoria, it always deserves immediate evaluation.

If there is less depression after solving the dysphoria issue, then we can keep on treating that, but if the depression is caused by dysphoria, it will not be resolved no matter what other things you try.

If treating for dysphoria has no effect on the depression, and the evaluation indicates that their dysphoria is based not on solid footing and motives, it can be terminated with no major complications especially in a 6 week time frame, but the same cannot be said the other way around, especially in the case where a voice suddenly changes, or breasts develop.

If that happens in those six weeks, and there is genuine dysphoria, the dysphoria permanently gets WORSE and in fact becomes untreatable for years.

There's no good case to delay on an introduction of blockers, because it WILL make things worse for those with dysphoria and immediate treatment won't make things worse for those without.

Arguably, a few weeks' break from hormones will allow folks to contextualize their hormonal situation and effects anyway, and I think that's yet another benefit of doing so. Being able to observe when "it's the hormones" rather than "it's just me" has real value.

 

[Toni]

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA

Dapression is ALSO caused by a myriad other things than dysphoria.

You are assuming that if a child presents with depression and also claims to be transgender, then the transgender MUST BE THE ONLY POSSIBLE cause of their depression - even if the depression predates any indication of dysphoria whatsoever.

When there is both dysphoria and depression, some of the depression WILL BE caused by the dysphoria.

It is certainly not the only cause but where there is dysphoria, it always deserves immediate evaluation.

If there is less depression after solving the dysphoria issue, then we can keep on treating that, but if the depression is caused by dysphoria, it will not be resolved no matter what other things you try.

If treating for dysphoria has no effect on the depression, and the evaluation indicates that their dysphoria is based not on solid footing and motives, it can be terminated with no major complications especially in a 6 week time frame, but the same cannot be said the other way around, especially in the case where a voice suddenly changes, or breasts develop.

If that happens in those six weeks, and there is genuine dysphoria, the dysphoria permanently gets WORSE and in fact becomes untreatable for years.

There's no good case to delay on an introduction of blockers, because it WILL make things worse for those with dysphoria and immediate treatment won't make things worse for those without.

Arguably, a few weeks' break from hormones will allow folks to contextualize their hormonal situation and effects anyway, and I think that's yet another benefit of doing so. Being able to observe when "it's the hormones" rather than "it's just me" has real value.

Ok, having gone through both puberty AND surgically induced menopause, there is no way that 6 weeks is enough time for any body to adjust to an abrupt shift in the hormonal milieu.

I totally agree that gender and/or body dysmorphia can cause depression and that they are often linked.

Depression is far, far more common than being transsexual. It seems to me that it makes sense to treat the depression—for potentially longer than 6 weeks.

It really is not harmless to just block puberty for 6 weeks to see if that clears up dysmorphia.

I’ve never been a boy but I do know that a LOT of girls are not enthusiastic about menstruation and many aren’t thrilled with the idea of getting breasts, the attention that attracts, or the fact that it can hurt! Depression can be triggered by phases of the menstrual cycle.

 

[IIDB Staff]

Reminder: please address the argument and NOT the person, and that includes misrepresenting someone's position AND doing so in a goading manner.

Some of you continue to brink multiple rules, so I suggest you take five and then review your draft post and remove the goading, the ad homs, and misrepresentations.

Thank you.
IIDB Staff

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You are so polite in calling this an "argument".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Evolution happens because of genetic mutations. The vast overwhelming number of mutations are deleterious: they are fatal outright or inhibit the fitness of the individual for survival and the opportunity to pass on its genes. The vast overwhelming majority of mutations are not passed on to subsequent generations.

Source?

According to what I've read, the vast majority of mutations are neutral and the average human is a mutant forty times over.

Only 40?! Or is that in comparison to their parents, not in comparison to the human norm?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're wrong. In so many ways you're wrong. People who have been forcibly penetrated with objects against their will don't fear the objects, they fear the type of person who forcibly penetrated them. And in 99% of cases, that person is a male.

You're tarring all who share a characteristic with an evildoer.

If it's ok to keep men out it's also ok to keep blacks out.

You keep saying that as though it were a logical implication. It isn't. It's perfectly possible for it to be okay to keep men out but not okay to keep blacks out -- all it takes is for your parallel to break down in some way. For example, if ladies' rooms had been instituted by the matriarchy to keep the female rulers and their ingroup from having to rub elbows with the powerless men they oppress, that would make your parallel quite a bit better than it in fact is.

In both cases it's a decision based on a basically immutable characteristic that causes fear.

Nobody has addressed this.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That's not a reliable sample. There are 129 prisoners known by the MOJ to be transwomen, but there are surely hundreds more thieves and drug dealers and whatnot who are also transwomen but who've very sensibly kept in the closet about it to avoid making themselves targets to all the macho jerks they're locked up with. Moreover, some of those 129 are probably cismen who lied to the prison authorities about being trans in order to get special treatment. Whether transwomen have a higher rate of sexual offenses than men in general can't be determined from this data.

Yup. This is where Kinsey screwed up, also--prisons are not remotely representative. (Most of what Kinsey did was good, but most of his statistics are worthless because of this.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Jarhyn want's women's spaces to be open to transwomen (which he is not), based on his personal definition of what constitutes a woman. He ALSO Wants those spaces to be open to eunuchs - which he is.

Jarhyn has repeatedly and very insistently defined "women" in such a way that it MUST include eunuchs, regardless of whether they live "as a woman" or not.

Basically, true to deep-in-the-bones patriarchy, Jarhyn want's to divide the world into "real men" and "non men"

His definition seems to permit a eunuch to use whichever bathroom they choose to present as.

 

[Toni]

Evolution happens because of genetic mutations. The vast overwhelming number of mutations are deleterious: they are fatal outright or inhibit the fitness of the individual for survival and the opportunity to pass on its genes. The vast overwhelming majority of mutations are not passed on to subsequent generations.

Source?

According to what I've read, the vast majority of mutations are neutral and the average human is a mutant forty times over.

My genetics and molecular biology professors. Sorry but it’s been a day and I am not terribly inclined to search the web for you.

But:

Study: Most 'silent' genetic mutations are harmful, not neutral, a finding with broad implications

Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast. Image credit: iStock In the early 1960s, University of Michigan alumnus Marshall Nirenberg and a few other scientists deciphered the genetic code of life, determining the rules by which information in DNA molecules is translated into proteins, the working parts of

news.umich.edu

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707611045

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But I 100% support equal rights to housing, employment, the right to NOT be attacked or abused because they are trans, and the right to have safe spaces available to them - I just disagree that those safe spaces MUST be women's spaces as opposed to transgender spaces.

Creating trans spaces (or my version of having "any" spaces) would work going forward but there's a lot of facilities out there that wouldn't be practical to refit.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA

Dapression is ALSO caused by a myriad other things than dysphoria.

You are assuming that if a child presents with depression and also claims to be transgender, then the transgender MUST BE THE ONLY POSSIBLE cause of their depression - even if the depression predates any indication of dysphoria whatsoever.

No, you are assuming the psychiatrists can't tell if the depression is related to the dysphoria.

 

[Rhea]

You're wrong. In so many ways you're wrong. People who have been forcibly penetrated with objects against their will don't fear the objects, they fear the type of person who forcibly penetrated them. And in 99% of cases, that person is a male.

You're tarring all who share a characteristic with an evildoer.

If it's ok to keep men out it's also ok to keep blacks out.

You keep saying that as though it were a logical implication. It isn't. It's perfectly possible for it to be okay to keep men out but not okay to keep blacks out -- all it takes is for your parallel to break down in some way. For example, if ladies' rooms had been instituted by the matriarchy to keep the female rulers and their ingroup from having to rub elbows with the powerless men they oppress, that would make your parallel quite a bit better than it in fact is.

In both cases it's a decision based on a basically immutable characteristic that causes fear.

Nobody has addressed this.

It has been addressed.

1 in 4 women have been the victim of a rape or attempted rape by a man.
One in four.
That has NEVER EVER been true of white people being victims of black crime. Ever.

Moreover, white people claiming they were attacked by black people have never been accused of being the cause of their own attack.


Women have navigated this all our lives. We know who attacks us and we know what happens to us if we DON’T aggressively manage that risk.


The fact that you sit there and say we never addressed it when we HAVE and in this thread, is a demonstration of the problem.

NO, the two are not the same. They never were. Black Americans have been unjustly deemed a threat by people who were never attacked. The same is not true for women managing not only their risk but their typical blame For not managing their risk enough.

 

[Jarhyn]

1 in 4 women have been the victim of a rape or attempted rape by a man.
One in four.
That has NEVER EVER been true of white people being victims of black crime. Ever

Are you kidding? I've never once seen an active violent public crime in progress by a white person, and directly encountered several active crimes perpetrated by black people.

It's a HUGE outsized difference encountered both media and reality.

This does not justify prejudice, however, even when the experience of such people is a racially motivated crime.

Moreover, white people claiming they were attacked by black people have never been accused of being the cause of their own attack

The existence of victim blaming does not justify prejudice. This is also non-sequitur to prejudice.

If you wish to attack victim blaming, attack victim blaming behaviors, and victim blamers, but this is not an act of "victim blaming".

You, however, are participating in broad-brushing.

Broad brushing is not justified by victim blaming.

Black Americans have been unjustly deemed a threat by people who were never attacked

No, non-criminal black people have been unjustly deemed a threat despite not being people who have attacked others. There's a huge difference there.



The rapes I've been involved with have all been by people on testosterone. I've never been raped nor even felt a suspicion that I may by anyone who is not.

Maybe the difference here is that I actually have context that divorces the threat of rape from the ownership of a penis?

I have offered a dimension based specifically around something that IS a decision made: the decision to continue taking a specific chemical known to be a causal contributor to violent ideations. I seek essentially banning "accessing spaces used by people who are vulnerable while under the influence of testosterone".

I proposed a mechanism to filter people specifically on that dimension in any environment capable of prescreen, and in any other environment to REQUIRE the means for people who are under the influence of testosterone or who may easily and legally put themselves under the influence of testosterone unilaterally and without notification to have a space where they can access without risk while in a vulnerable state themselves, assuming they care about that exposed vulnerability.

If you would like to propose some other behavioral contributor that does not amount to "how people brainwashed them", I'm all ears.

I've been asking for such a thing.

It has not materialized.