Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules

[TomC]

LD wrote “humane”

And I agreed with him.
Tom

What does “you can’t seriously believe that” mean? That looks accusatory.

It was totally accusatory.
LD doesn't think that people he considers "conservative" value their children as much as liberals.
And you are agreeing with him.

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children. I responded to that bullshit.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions. Conservatives not only love their children, they'll happily talk your ear off about that fact. "But think of the children" has been a top 5 rallying cry for the American conservative since the Victorians first reinvented childhood as a time of innocence.

 

[TomC]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions.

Do you even remember the post you made started this exchange?

To conservatives, children are disobedient property, even when they aren't children anymore.

Tom

 

[TomC]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions. Conservatives not only love their children, they'll happily talk your ear off about that fact. "But think of the children" has been a top 5 rallying cry for the American conservative since the Victorians first reinvented childhood as a time of innocence.

Lemme know when you're done editing your viciousness.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions. Conservatives not only love their children, they'll happily talk your ear off about that fact. "But think of the children" has been a top 5 rallying cry for the American conservative since the Victorians first reinvented childhood as a time of innocence.

Lemme know when you're done editing your viciousness.
Tom

I'm done. And it's just an observation. You've seriously never encountered the idea of controlling children's self-expression before?

It's wild to me that you ignore child abuse, but play tone police on anyone who calls it out. Oh no, Poli was rude! But you're trying to convince me that you love kids? As what, dartboards for the dumbass culture war?

 

[TomC]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions. Conservatives not only love their children, they'll happily talk your ear off about that fact. "But think of the children" has been a top 5 rallying cry for the American conservative since the Victorians first reinvented childhood as a time of innocence.

Lemme know when you're done editing your viciousness.
Tom

I'm done. And it's just an observation. You've seriously never encountered the idea of controlling children's self-expression before?

It's wild to me that you ignore child abuse, but play tone police on anyone who calls it out. Oh no, Poli was rude! But you're trying to convince me that you love kids? As what, dartboards for the dumbass culture war?

You're cute when you're reduced to woke sputtering.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

To liberals, queer children are trophies.
Tom

To any humane being, any child is a trophy.

I agree.
But look around you. Do you honestly think that all parents are good parents? That all parents see their children as trophies?
You can't seriously believe that.
Tom

I know all parents are not good parents. And I know that even if someone thought their child was a trophy, that they may not be a good parent. And some parents are not humane.

Do you realize that I was responding to Politesse?

You replied to my post that had no comments by Politesse, so no.

My observation and reply stand by themselves.

Do you realize that the post you responded to was a response to Politesse. Clipping off that part just makes your response nonsensical.
Tom

Not to anyone with basic reading comprehension

LD wrote “humane”

And I agreed with him.
Tom

What does “you can’t seriously believe that” mean? That looks accusatory.

It was totally accusatory.
LD doesn't think that people he considers "conservative" value their children as much as liberals.

[/QUOTE] That is nonsense.

Are you posting drunk or what?

 

[Emily Lake]

The doctors enabling it are engaging in something so close to eugenics that I don't know what else to call it.

Medical care.

Suppressing hormones that our bodies evolved to need and which are critical to our physical, reproductive, and cognitive maturation; replacing critical hormones with hormones that are antagonistic to fertility and increase the risk of stroke and other ailments; amputating health body parts.

That's what you consider "medical care"?

 

[Politesse]

The doctors enabling it are engaging in something so close to eugenics that I don't know what else to call it.

Medical care.

Suppressing hormones that our bodies evolved to need and which are critical to our physical, reproductive, and cognitive maturation; replacing critical hormones with hormones that are antagonistic to fertility and increase the risk of stroke and other ailments; amputating health body parts.

That's what you consider "medical care"?

Absent all your Christian-y pseudoscientific bullshit, yes. You have no medical expertise of any kind. Doctors do. You have no right to decide what's best for anyone else's child. They do, and their parents do. Frankly, if torturing people for being different is what you consider "medical care", I wouldn't trust you to watch my cat for the weekend, let alone hire you to be my child's pediatrician.

 

[Emily Lake]

Ask any child, be they "queer" or straight, whether they'd rather be celebrated and loved, or dehumanized and abused. You'll find there is pretty clear consensus.

Ask any child if they would throw rocks at puppies if doing so would get them their parent's love and attention, and you're going to get a clear consensus.

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful. They are given a non-stop reward of positive attention for doing so. Children observe that when other kids say they're trans, those kids get attention and love and celebration and praise.

Children are incentivized to identify as trans.

Children are not praised for simply being the sex they are. They're also not dehumanized and abused for simply being the sex they are. And these days, pretty much zero kids are being abused if they say they're trans. The closest you get to that is a parent who refuses to indulge their child when doing so has long term negative health affects, and wants their kid to go through a normal healthy puberty and become a full adult.

 

[Emily Lake]

The problem with this exchange is that Politesse doesn't think that people he doesn't like value their children.

How do you get that from my post? Most people love their possessions. Conservatives not only love their children, they'll happily talk your ear off about that fact. "But think of the children" has been a top 5 rallying cry for the American conservative since the Victorians first reinvented childhood as a time of innocence.

Oh, please do go ahead and regale us with how kids aren't innocents, Alok.

 

[Politesse]

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful.

So... what you're really against is showing unconditional love to children?

Charming.

A vision of utopia.

And these days, pretty much zero kids are being abused if they say they're trans.

And overtly defending child abuse also, lovely. Yes, claiming that child abuse doesn't happen when you know it does, when the evidence has been presented to you over and over, is supporting it.

It is very clear what you are, and what you do. You are not hiding anything.

Enjoy your day in the sun. This regime won't last forever.

 

[Emily Lake]

You've seriously never encountered the idea of controlling children's self-expression before?

It's wild to me that you ignore child abuse, but play tone police on anyone who calls it out.

This is at least part of the issue here Poli. You are framing controlling a child's self-expression as being child abuse.

By your logic, the only way to NOT engage in child abuse is to let a child express themselves however they want. And that is irresponsible and negligent. Clearly, nobody should be abusive, over overly restrictive... but there must be some degree to which it's a parent's duty to control their child's self-expression. It's important for the child as well as society as a whole for them to learn self-control, appropriate behavior, and courtesy. And in some cases, it's necessary in order to protect the child from their own ignorance and naivete.

If your kid's self-expression is to cut off both of their perfectly healthy legs, and you let them do it, you are a horrible parent.
If your kid's self-expression is to cut off someone else's legs, and you let them do it, you are a horrible person.

 

[Emily Lake]

Absent all your Christian-y pseudoscientific bullshit, yes. You have no medical expertise of any kind. Doctors do. You have no right to decide what's best for anyone else's child. They do, and their parents do. If torturing people for being different is what you consider "medical care", I wouldn't trust you to watch my cat for the weekend, let alone hire you to be my child's pediatrician.

Why do you insist on trying to foist religion onto me?

And I absolutely fucking do have at least some right to decide what's best for someone else's child! If someone is beating their child, I absolutely have the fucking right to decide that intervening is best for their child.

And despite your profession here, you ALSO think you have the right to decide what's best for other people's children.

Just because we don't agree on what's best doesn't mean it's not our motivation.

 

[Emily Lake]

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful.

So... what you're really against is showing unconditional love to children?

This is so blatantly bad faith I actually laughed out loud.

I'm assuming that you're well aware of my intent, and that you're actively twisting it to pretend it means something else. What I can't figure out is why you think that's at all effective.

The only plausible alternative is that you genuinely think that children who kill small animals and throw rocks at the neighbor's car should be praised for doing so.

Charming.

A vision of utopia.

And these days, pretty much zero kids are being abused if they say they're trans.

And overtly defending child abuse also, lovely. Yes, claiming that child abuse doesn't happen when you know it does, when the evidence has been presented to you over and over, is supporting it.

It is very clear what you are, and what you do. You are not hiding anything.

Enjoy your day in the sun. This regime won't last forever.

You sound like some kind of conspiracy theorists here. You're not even making sense.

 

[scombrid]

Ask any child, be they "queer" or straight, whether they'd rather be celebrated and loved, or dehumanized and abused. You'll find there is pretty clear consensus.

Ask any child if they would throw rocks at puppies if doing so would get them their parent's love and attention, and you're going to get a clear consensus.

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful.

You can’t be serious.

They are given a non-stop reward of positive attention for doing so. Children observe that when other kids say they're trans, those kids get attention and love and celebration and praise.

So says James Dobson? What planet is this?

Children are incentivized to identify as trans

This is a very bold sweeping statement. It does not match reality.

 

[scombrid]

Ask any child, be they "queer" or straight, whether they'd rather be celebrated and loved, or dehumanized and abused. You'll find there is pretty clear consensus.

Ask any child if they would throw rocks at puppies if doing so would get them their parent's love and attention, and you're going to get a clear consensus.

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful. They are given a non-stop reward of positive attention for doing so. Children observe that when other kids say they're trans, those kids get attention and love and celebration and praise.

Children are incentivized to identify as trans.

Children are not praised for simply being the sex they are. They're also not dehumanized and abused for simply being the sex they are. And these days, pretty much zero kids are being abused if they say they're trans. The closest you get to that is a parent who refuses to indulge their child when doing so has long term negative health affects, and wants their kid to go through a normal healthy puberty and become a full adult.

Do you really intend to assert that gender identity is entirely the result of parental choice and action? The parents made the kid gay.

 

[Toni]

The doctors enabling it are engaging in something so close to eugenics that I don't know what else to call it.

Medical care.

Suppressing hormones that our bodies evolved to need and which are critical to our physical, reproductive, and cognitive maturation; replacing critical hormones with hormones that are antagonistic to fertility and increase the risk of stroke and other ailments; amputating health body parts.

That's what you consider "medical care"?

Do you know how hormonal birth control works? Do you know about HRT? Are you aware that suppressing hormones ( of different t types) is an important tool in some cancer treatment?

Do you actually know what a hormone is, functionally? Or that not all hormones pertain to sexual development/function?

 

[Emily Lake]

Ask any child, be they "queer" or straight, whether they'd rather be celebrated and loved, or dehumanized and abused. You'll find there is pretty clear consensus.

Ask any child if they would throw rocks at puppies if doing so would get them their parent's love and attention, and you're going to get a clear consensus.

That's actually part of the problem - any child who says they're queer or trans is immediately love-bombed, and celebrated as special and brave and wonderful and beautiful. They are given a non-stop reward of positive attention for doing so. Children observe that when other kids say they're trans, those kids get attention and love and celebration and praise.

Children are incentivized to identify as trans.

Children are not praised for simply being the sex they are. They're also not dehumanized and abused for simply being the sex they are. And these days, pretty much zero kids are being abused if they say they're trans. The closest you get to that is a parent who refuses to indulge their child when doing so has long term negative health affects, and wants their kid to go through a normal healthy puberty and become a full adult.

Do you really intend to assert that gender identity is entirely the result of parental choice and action?

I didn't assert any of that.

Teachers, other adults, social media, other kids all play a role in framing what is rewarded for children's behavior, and what is not. As it stands right now... a child who says they're trans is rewarded by their teachers and school staff for doing so, they're lauded and celebrated by teachers and other kids and a wide variety of adults. They're praised, celebrated, told they're special and brave.

The parents made the kid gay.

Gender identity is not sexual orientation. This is a silly thing to say.

 

[Emily Lake]

The doctors enabling it are engaging in something so close to eugenics that I don't know what else to call it.

Medical care.

Suppressing hormones that our bodies evolved to need and which are critical to our physical, reproductive, and cognitive maturation; replacing critical hormones with hormones that are antagonistic to fertility and increase the risk of stroke and other ailments; amputating health body parts.

That's what you consider "medical care"?

Do you know how hormonal birth control works? Do you know about HRT? Are you aware that suppressing hormones ( of different t types) is an important tool in some cancer treatment?

Do you actually know what a hormone is, functionally? Or that not all hormones pertain to sexual development/function?

Yes, Toni, I know all of this. I'm not entirely sure that you do though.

Do you actually know the role that sex hormones play during puberty?

Hormonal birth control doesn't suppress estrogen. It sends a hormonal signal to the pituitary that prevents the release of a matured egg; it's the same signalling that is present while you're pregnant. That's how they work. But estrogen production continues normally, and it's estrogen that is vital for pubertal maturation.

HRT - as in actual supplementation - provides additional estrogen or testosterone to bring them back to the normal level for each sex. The level of those hormones present naturally in the opposite sex is antagonistic to fertility. A female that takes normal male levels of testosterone almost always end up with vaginal atrophy, thinning of the vaginal walls, and the destruction of eggs. A male that takes normal female levels of estrogen will have decreased sperm motility as well as lower sperm count, because estrogen destroys spermatozoa.

Are you aware that puberty isn't cancer? SHort term suppression of hormone production for some cancers is a trade-off; the cancer will do far more harm than the blockade of hormones - that doesn't mean it's safe and harmless if you don't have cancer.