"Children cannot consent to puberty blockers" and being in the wrong body

[Patooka]

Chris claims to be having "conversations".

When was the last time you fucked your mum?

Don't even think of trying to censor me - I'm just asking questions here. Why are you so afraid?

 

[excreationist]

Chris claims to be having "conversations".

When was the last time you fucked your mum?

Don't even think of trying to censor me - I'm just asking questions here. Why are you so afraid?

BTW a lot of the time someone voices their opinion and Chris replies "ok" and doesn't try to refute it. So I don't agree that he "just wants to impose their opinions on other people".
How am I trying to censor you? (that's how Chris can respond to people)

 

[Patooka]

You know what - fuck it. Let's ask the question @excreationist is too afraid to answer.

@excreationist - what is your stance on this?

 

[Patooka]

Chris claims to be having "conversations".

When was the last time you fucked your mum?

Don't even think of trying to censor me - I'm just asking questions here. Why are you so afraid?

BTW a lot of the time someone voices their opinion and Chris replies "ok" and doesn't try to refute it. So I don't agree that he "just wants to impose their opinions on other people".
How am I trying to censor you? (that's how Chris can respond to people)

Ok.

So when was the last time you fucked your mum? Because I have studies that show you have.

 

[excreationist]

You know what - fuck it. Let's ask the question @excreationist is too afraid to answer.

@excreationist - what is your stance on this?

Well based on the Dunning-Kruger effect I currently don't feel very confident in saying much about this (about the technical issues - but I think I'm fairly knowledgeable about the videos involving Chris). When I looked at his studies page it seemed like he might have made some valid points.

The Studies — Billboard Chris

www.billboardchris.com

I still find his arguments about breast removal in 13 year olds to be persuasive.

 

[excreationist]

Chris claims to be having "conversations".

When was the last time you fucked your mum?

Don't even think of trying to censor me - I'm just asking questions here. Why are you so afraid?

BTW a lot of the time someone voices their opinion and Chris replies "ok" and doesn't try to refute it. So I don't agree that he "just wants to impose their opinions on other people".
How am I trying to censor you? (that's how Chris can respond to people)

Ok.

So when was the last time you fucked your mum? Because I have studies that show you have.

I'm not sure how I could try and censor you. It's not like I'm a moderator or something.

Also I think Chris likes his opponents to speak out - sometimes they make fools of themselves. I find it interesting when people make fools of themselves when they're trying to argue against me. Though I shouldn't be scoffing at them.

 

[Patooka]

Well based on the Dunning-Kruger effect

That is such a weak excuse. If you don't know what your talking about, shut the fuck up.

But you didn't. So please stop using Dunning-Kruger as a crutch because your argument are fucking bullshit.

Maybe just shut the fuck up.

By the way - you have used Dunning-Kruger as an excuse for your piss weak arguments not once, not twice, not three times but all the fucking time.

I have to ask - are you a child and thinks ,"dunning kruger" is some magical spell that pwns the adults? Like some children's novel? Is that why you do it? Cuase it isn't fucking working.

​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My point is Chris seemed persuasive when he debated University students. I’ve now listened to most of the 54 minute professor Dave video. I guess this is an example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. Maybe I’ll change my mind about breast removal on 13 year olds eventually.

Your point? For a person who is just dipping their toes into transgender issues, you sound an awful like Chris.

 

[Patooka]

This is my fault really. I'm old enough to realise what the internet can bring into my house. I should have fucking known better.

Should have listened to my own advice, really.

 

[excreationist]

Well based on the Dunning-Kruger effect

That is such a weak excuse. If you don't know what your talking about, shut the fuck up.

But you didn't. So please stop using Dunning-Kruger as a crutch because your argument are fucking bullshit.

Maybe just shut the fuck up.

You said "Don't even think of trying to censor me" but you sound like you're trying to censor me.

By the way - you have used Dunning-Kruger as an excuse for your piss weak arguments not once, not twice, not three times but all the fucking time.

I have to ask - are you a child and thinks ,"dunning kruger" is some magical spell that pwns the adults? Like some children's novel? Is that why you do it? Cuase it isn't fucking working.

My point was after watching Chris for a couple of days I started off at the "I know everything" stage then I was going to "there's more to this than I thought" and "I'm never going to understand this".

 

[excreationist]

My point is Chris seemed persuasive when he debated University students. I’ve now listened to most of the 54 minute professor Dave video. I guess this is an example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. Maybe I’ll change my mind about breast removal on 13 year olds eventually.

Your point? For a person who is just dipping their toes into transgender issues, you sound an awful like Chris.

Well most of what I've heard about these issues was from Chris. I thought it's good I could hear a lot of counter-arguments from many people after only looking into this for a couple of hours in these forums.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My point is Chris seemed persuasive when he debated University students. I’ve now listened to most of the 54 minute professor Dave video. I guess this is an example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. Maybe I’ll change my mind about breast removal on 13 year olds eventually.

Your point? For a person who is just dipping their toes into transgender issues, you sound an awful like Chris.

Well most of what I've heard about these issues was from Chris. I thought it's good I could hear a lot of counter-arguments from many people after only looking into this for a couple of hours in these forums.

You aren't listening to counter arguments, you are clearly assimilating them and not listening to anything else.
But congrats on becoming an expert on this by watching a long YouTube video.

 

[Patooka]

ou said "Don't even think of trying to censor me" but you sound like you're trying to censor me.

Last time I checked, mate, "shut the fuck up": didn't have any fucking nuance.

Mate.

 

[Jarhyn]

You know what - fuck it. Let's ask the question @excreationist is too afraid to answer.

@excreationist - what is your stance on this?

Well based on the Dunning-Kruger effect I currently don't feel very confident in saying much about this (about the technical issues - but I think I'm fairly knowledgeable about the videos involving Chris). When I looked at his studies page it seemed like he might have made some valid points.

The Studies — Billboard Chris

www.billboardchris.com

I still find his arguments about breast removal in 13 year olds to be persuasive.

I find them to be full of shit.

We remove breasts for teens who don't want them all the time.

I'm missing one of my breast tissues myself because the doctor just removed it that same day when I felt a "lump" and worried it was a tumor and discovered it was a growing breast after having already opened up my nipple.

The fact is, the trans surgery regret rates is even lower, at <2%, and a vanishing minority have had any kind of reassignment surgeries as teens. We aren't talking 2000 here, we are talking maybe less than two hundred in the entire country have had surgery as teens. The detransition rate for these is going to be in the tens.

Are you going to let 20 people who think they made a mistake define the rights for the 1980 people who enjoyed the resuls?

 

[Jarhyn]

The really messed up part is that I am in that 1% who regret their teenage surgical breast removal, for all I only lost the one breast. Part of it was caused by a doctor just not asking once they knew what it was, not even doing any tests. Part of it was also that I would have been strongly socially pressured to remove it, to strengthen the masculinity of my image: Men don't usually walk around with a uniboob.

But the fact that I regret it isn't an argument for others to not do what they wish, but rather a strong argument against such immediate "straight" gender confirming acts. Unlike a "trans kid", I wasn't counseled for a year on whether I really wanted that breast tissue gone, or even told "it's a breast and it's natural" albeit a minor cancer risk. It was just done in the course of an afternoon, and now I can't really enjoy playing with that nipple anymore.

If I had counseling like trans kids get, maybe I wouldn't have had a surgery I regret.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Chris Elston aka "Billboard Chris" is a transphobic cunt of a human being. Fuck any of his views.

https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/news/cops-forcibly-remove-canadian-from-brisbane/news-story/145b17904566f2eab232e0615a481666

Anti-trans activist tests Australian regulator’s power to remove X post it deemed cyber abuse

Counsel for ‘Billboard Chris’, AKA Chris Elston, says takedown notice from eSafety commissioner was regulatory overreach

www.theguardian.com

Chris Elston, aka “Billboard Chris” | GLAAD

—Protests against transgender health care and transgender people. Elston travels the United States, wearing a sandwich board with messages including, “Children cannot consent to puberty blockers.” Since June 1, 2022, Elston has been involves in 20 incidents including 15 protests and five cases...

glaad.org

Seriously it bears repeating, fuck this guy to the moon and back.

EDIt: They've changed the headline on the first news article I posted. It was originally "‘Move’: Canadian troll gets Aussie response"

View attachment 50086

Oh noes, you called him transphobic! That's so unfair! /sarcasm

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Some more educational YouTube with Robert Sapolsky. Cool dude. Unless of course you're a pretentious twat who believes free will is necessary for morality or whatever, then you won't think he's a cool dude.

 

[Jarhyn]

Some more educational YouTube with Robert Sapolsky. Cool dude. Unless of course you're a pretentious twat who believes free will is necessary for morality or whatever, then you won't think he's a cool dude.

I mean, I'm not pretentious, but I think he is over-extending himself with lack of any desire to actually understand the compatibilist position. It's off-topic

That doesn't mean he's going to be wrong, but it does put him vaguely in the same camp as the folks who left FFRF because they are "outdated" in their understanding.

He's not so qualified on discussing neurobiology in computational terms, so I don't see how he is even qualified in the first place to take on free will as it would have to be in computational terms, but he's absolutely qualified in recognizing structural differences and their material causes in the sense of naive observation.

I dislike his occasional use of the word disorder and enjoy that so far he hasn't talked about free will... Oh, just after I unpaused he got grilled about that! I prefer the word "condition". "Disease labeling is in the eye of the beholder".

MY only question is why this needs to be said by some guy on a video for anyone to listen to this? We saw the research he's referencing being published here over the years about this research.

"Tremendous overlap".

I would also point to the partial feminization of male fetuses later in the birth order as implicating an immune response from the microchimerism aspect? That's cool to think about.

He nails it that the genes in the liver don't matter to the structure of the brain. It's the brain every time.

There's no argument against the determined-ness of who we are, from me, but there's also the matter of environment/processor, and the fact that the processor has "possibilities" in any view of the thing.

I will gladly show Sapolski how free will works, if he ever decides to look me up. In fact, if you ever meet him, send him my way; that said, some choices are unreasonable to expect people to make, and some things can't be chosen so easily as saying "presto change-o, I choose Bepis, now."

You can choose your gonads and what messages you hear as if you were to have any particular kind.

You can't choose your brain without [horrors beyond normal human comprehension].

Some things can't be changed after they happen. Pretty much everything, really, with biology and certain particulars of sexual development. Some things need to be changed from what they are now, before some inevitable event, so that they do not permanently become something else.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Some more educational YouTube with Robert Sapolsky. Cool dude. Unless of course you're a pretentious twat who believes free will is necessary for morality or whatever, then you won't think he's a cool dude.

I mean, I'm not pretentious, but I think he is over-extending himself with lack of any desire to actually understand the compatibilist position. It's off-topic

That doesn't mean he's going to be wrong, but it does put him vaguely in the same camp as the folks who left FFRF because they are "outdated" in their understanding.

He's not so qualified on discussing neurobiology in computational terms, so I don't see how he is even qualified in the first place to take on free will as it would have to be in computational terms, but he's absolutely qualified in recognizing structural differences and their material causes in the sense of naive observation.

I dislike his occasional use of the word disorder and enjoy that so far he hasn't talked about free will... Oh, just after I unpaused he got grilled about that! I prefer the word "condition". "Disease labeling is in the eye of the beholder".

MY only question is why this needs to be said by some guy on a video for anyone to listen to this? We saw the research he's referencing being published here over the years about this research.

"Tremendous overlap".

I would also point to the partial feminization of male fetuses later in the birth order as implicating an immune response from the microchimerism aspect? That's cool to think about.

He nails it that the genes in the liver don't matter to the structure of the brain. It's the brain every time.

There's no argument against the determined-ness of who we are, from me, but there's also the matter of environment/processor, and the fact that the processor has "possibilities" in any view of the thing.

I will gladly show Sapolski how free will works, if he ever decides to look me up. In fact, if you ever meet him, send him my way; that said, some choices are unreasonable to expect people to make, and some things can't be chosen so easily as saying "presto change-o, I choose Bepis, now."

You can choose your gonads and what messages you hear as if you were to have any particular kind.

You can't choose your brain without [horrors beyond normal human comprehension].

Oh I'm fine with people thinking free will exists, it's just the moralistic argument I have a problem with.

 

[Jarhyn]

Some more educational YouTube with Robert Sapolsky. Cool dude. Unless of course you're a pretentious twat who believes free will is necessary for morality or whatever, then you won't think he's a cool dude.

I mean, I'm not pretentious, but I think he is over-extending himself with lack of any desire to actually understand the compatibilist position. It's off-topic

That doesn't mean he's going to be wrong, but it does put him vaguely in the same camp as the folks who left FFRF because they are "outdated" in their understanding.

He's not so qualified on discussing neurobiology in computational terms, so I don't see how he is even qualified in the first place to take on free will as it would have to be in computational terms, but he's absolutely qualified in recognizing structural differences and their material causes in the sense of naive observation.

I dislike his occasional use of the word disorder and enjoy that so far he hasn't talked about free will... Oh, just after I unpaused he got grilled about that! I prefer the word "condition". "Disease labeling is in the eye of the beholder".

MY only question is why this needs to be said by some guy on a video for anyone to listen to this? We saw the research he's referencing being published here over the years about this research.

"Tremendous overlap".

I would also point to the partial feminization of male fetuses later in the birth order as implicating an immune response from the microchimerism aspect? That's cool to think about.

He nails it that the genes in the liver don't matter to the structure of the brain. It's the brain every time.

There's no argument against the determined-ness of who we are, from me, but there's also the matter of environment/processor, and the fact that the processor has "possibilities" in any view of the thing.

I will gladly show Sapolski how free will works, if he ever decides to look me up. In fact, if you ever meet him, send him my way; that said, some choices are unreasonable to expect people to make, and some things can't be chosen so easily as saying "presto change-o, I choose Bepis, now."

You can choose your gonads and what messages you hear as if you were to have any particular kind.

You can't choose your brain without [horrors beyond normal human comprehension].

Oh I'm fine with people thinking free will exists, it's just the moralistic argument I have a problem with.

Yeah, for me, I searched over a decade for a moral rule and I found it by generalizing the concept of a goal and a goal conflict, and the resolution to the problem was always symmetrical informed consent.

"you can do anything you want so long as folks consent to it", 100%.

This moralistic argument says... Make sure people have all the information they need, so they can make the best choice possible; if the quality of the resulting choice is in question, delay the choice until the last possible moment with blockers.

Adding "ought" to simple differences in ways of existing is fascistic Nazi shit.

I'm not gonna go into a long post about the fundamentals of why? Just that I haven't seen any reason to pick up any other moral rule.