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

[excreationist]

You are assuming that Carroll, a known rapist, wouldn't have raped one or more of their fellow inmates if she'd been incarcerated among men. Your argument rests on the notion that people don't get raped in prison by their fellow inmates when they all have the same sex traits, even though it has long been known that rape is about power and control, not sexual attraction.

The law that allows female gendered persons to be incarcerated among female bodied persons isn't the problem here. The problem is the failure to sequester a rapist from vulnerable people who can't easily escape him/her.

Ok those are good points. But I think the news story is something people could easily get outraged about especially since it purely based on what the person self-identifies as. Same with stories about people with penises being allowed to shower with women who are totally against it.

 

[Arctish]

Well another video from Chris - that is different to what I've seen so far:

A person who claims to have been on puberty blockers and testosterone and had breast removal says they're a "huge fan", "you're doing a good thing" and "I can't believe people disagree with you on this".
The description says:

I’m at UCLA and I just met Clementine, who recently detransitioned.

When she was 12, Johanna Olson-Kennedy at the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles put her on puberty blockers.

At 13, she was put on testosterone.

At only 14 years of age, she was given a double mastectomy!

Clementine had suffered sexual abuse, and that was the source of great trauma, and is why she didn’t want to be a girl.

Johanna Olson-Kennedy didn’t care about that. Within 30 minutes of her first appointment she was told she needed to go on puberty blockers, or she might kill herself.

Her parents were told they could have a dead daughter or a live son.

Were they wrong about that?

A teenager with a history of being sexually abused, who desperately didn't want her breasts to develop, who didn't want boys looking at her like some kind of sex object, might have committed suicide to prevent it. Puberty blockers might have been the best treatment at that time, providing the opportunity for her to receive counseling and therapy.

If you don't know her case history you can't say the diagnosis or treatment was wrong.

 

[excreationist]

Her parents were told they could have a dead daughter or a live son.

Were they wrong about that?

A teenager with a history of being sexually abused, who desperately didn't want her breasts to develop, who didn't want boys looking at her like some kind of sex object, might have committed suicide to prevent it. Puberty blockers might have been the best treatment at that time, providing the opportunity for her to receive counseling and therapy.

If you don't know her case history you can't say the diagnosis or treatment was wrong.

In her case she said at 5:15

she told them the same thing that she tells everybody that I was deeply suicidal and that if she didn't if they didn't let me transition I would be at high risk for suicide and I only attempted to kill myself after I transitioned so she convinced them that had two options a dead daughter or an alive son

Though maybe she also would have tried to kill herself if she didn't have the treatment.
Chris's site has a lot to say about the claims about suicide:

The Studies — Billboard Chris

www.billboardchris.com

I'm not planning on reading it all though but I'd just say that there seem to be some arguments against the suicide claims. (which might be deeply flawed)

 

[NoHolyCows]

I think gender-affirming care can genuinely help some trans kids, especially when they’re struggling deeply and have gone through careful psychological support. There’s real evidence that it can ease distress and even save lives in those cases. But I also think we need to be honest about the gaps in research, especially when it comes to long-term effects. It worries me when decisions are rushed or when young people are put on a medical path without enough time, support, or information.

I don’t think the answer is to ban or dismiss this kind of care altogether — that feels reactionary and doesn’t reflect what many trans people actually experience. But I also don’t think we should just affirm everything automatically. These are complex, deeply personal situations, and they deserve more care, better evidence, and a lot more nuance than what we usually see in public debates.

NHC

 

[excreationist]

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

The post linked to a Daily Mail article about the person and his involvement in the World Health Organization, and Elston’s tweet read “people who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards”.

The regulator said it should be removed on the grounds it was in breach of Australia’s Online Safety Act. It was determined to be cyber abuse directed at an Australian adult, given it was found to misgender him, mock his gender identity and equated transgender identity with a psychiatric condition.

Chris is claiming he used that language was because Teddy Cook (2:45) "posted a picture of a dog sodomizing a man", "says trans identified people have better sex when they're high on illicit drugs". Chris said "she is not the type of person who should be drafting health care policy for kids who are struggling, she is not a medical professional".
His female friend is from a Christian legal group promoting "free speech" and being able to "live and speak the truth".

Anyway the point is that Chris is trying to fight it in court. Maybe he will take it to the High Court of Australia.

Chris says the he fights against "children coming to permanent harm".

 

[excreationist]

@Jarhyn
In this example the professor began the conversation with hostile swearing and refused to have any kind of normal conversation with Chris.
Edit: initially the professor asked a polite question.

Btw sometimes people accuse Chris of being hateful but that professor seems way more hateful to me.

Chris even says:

And remember, children are beautiful just as they are. No drugs or scalpels needed.

Which doesn’t sound hateful - even if it is inaccurate.

I guess a related thing is hate speech laws.

Something you never see these jackasses post is their outtakes.

First off, we have no idea whether another professor in the faculty got ambushed by this shitheel and the footage was never posted. It could have been this same professor, previously asked some other question, but the question itself is quite generally always loaded in the first place.

The OP question is loaded, and this is a common tactic of religious shysters.

It's a pattern I have been trying to make sure stays successfully beaten out of me by myself.

It is absolutely hateful to tell someone who is 96:4 going to like what they ask for and hate what you tell them over regretting their decision (but generally being able to make peace with it because it WAS their decision, and most often capable of reversing that decision).

About the topic of hating again... I have no idea what "someone who is 96:4" means.

I would consider the woman in the video to be very hateful (and violent)


I can't seem to find examples of Chris in his videos or website being "absolutely hateful". He strongly dislikes (some?) people in charge of the transitioning of kids but he still seems pretty respectful about it (except for the tweet saying a specific non-medical professional "belongs in psychiatric wards") I think it is possible so say someone "belongs in psychiatric wards" without being "hateful". (or at least it not being classed as "hate speech" - note a reason Chris gave was that the woman "posted a picture of a dog sodomizing a man") It could still classed as cyberbullying though.

 

[excreationist]

An "academic psychiatrist" says "led the Americans and Europeans to ban puberty blockers and hormones for gender-confused kids".

So what the billboard is against is already banned in the U.S. and Europe? I think that makes it a lot less controversial or problematic.

3:37 - "in my opinion we really need to follow the international research and ban gender affirming care immediately". He talks about there being a "lack of scrunity" in Australia.

Though on the other hand this is from Sky News Australia.

 

[Jarhyn]

If that law about people who merely self-identify as a trans woman being able to go to a womens prison wasn't a law then multiple alledged rapes wouldn't have happened.

And if certain people without penises hadn't been allowed in, several people wouldn't have been raped by a particular person without a penis.

That doesn't change the fact that not having that law would have prevented rapes of women. I guess you believe the law about womens prisons is a great idea.

No, it wouldn't have, because rapes would have happened anyway. Rapes were already happening in the prison. Rapes are still happening in the prison.

The only law that will actually prevent rapes from happening is actually caring being serious about sequestering rapists from normal prison populations.

You keep asking leading questions and making straw man arguments. I keep pointing out that you got these same arguments from the door we have already identified as "always/usually lies".

I'm talking about there being less rapes. Banning kids from being allowed to buy knifes at stores could reduce murder and injuries but it could still happen anyway...

So do you think the law about women's prisons is a great idea? (where men can go there if they merely self-identify as trans)

Men apparently generally have quite a lot more upper body strength than women so it is easier for them to rape women. That happens a lot in marriages, date-rape, etc where they are able to overpower the woman. Sure some women in the prison could overpower the man but there would also be a lot of women who are weaker depending on the man.

There won't be, statistically speaking. It's a rule of large numbers.

The other problem here that you keep avoiding is why you are calling for this rather than declaring a separate estate entirely for rapists?

We at these forums have had this argument. I keep saying you should look up the arguments already had, wherein everyone's position here was already stated.

No testosterone, no sperm, no problem, as far as goes to rapists housed with rapists in a way so as to prevent rape anyway.

I started my position and frankly, it's one of the most tiresome topics on the forum.

Go ahead. Bring up fucking bathrooms next. That's next right?

Then Loren can point out just like last time how it doesn't actually happen, with statistics and everything same as last time? Seriously. I am so fucking beyond tired of having to debate every ancillary topic instead of the primary one:

What the fuck concern is it of yours that some people want to cut their balls off and live as women? The Bible you stopped believing in, whose indoctrination you continue to cleave to, said to accept these, born and made by their own hand.

Today, it's try before you buy for whatever flavor. Blockers create low regrets, and de-transitioning from them tends to be easy. 4% detransition as minors.

What the research does not say is how many were disappointed of the 4% with the overall result, as far as I read.

So far you have held up a classic Gosh Gallop.

Hell, actually taking kids seriously, allowing them to start treatment, and making an avenue where they can access it through proper channels without parental interference would prevent the whole prison issue.

 

[Jarhyn]

"gender confused".

You fucking heard a goddamn neuroscientist trash this kind of fucking language.

I cannot seriously believe you are operating in good faith anymore.

 

[excreationist]

"gender confused".

You fucking heard a goddamn neuroscientist trash this kind of fucking language.

I cannot seriously believe you are operating in good faith anymore.

So you completely ignored the bit about "led the Americans and Europeans to ban puberty blockers and hormones for gender-confused kids".

Since you didn't disagree about that I assume that puberty blockers and hormones are actually banned for kids in America and Europe. So is that the case?

Yes he used the term "gender confused" and I didn't call him out on it so I'm the one being misleading or whatever?

 

[excreationist]

We at these forums have had this argument. I keep saying you should look up the arguments already had, wherein everyone's position here was already stated.

Then look this up:
Post #181

You are assuming that Carroll, a known rapist, wouldn't have raped one or more of their fellow inmates if she'd been incarcerated among men. Your argument rests on the notion that people don't get raped in prison by their fellow inmates when they all have the same sex traits, even though it has long been known that rape is about power and control, not sexual attraction.

The law that allows female gendered persons to be incarcerated among female bodied persons isn't the problem here. The problem is the failure to sequester a rapist from vulnerable people who can't easily escape him/her.

Ok those are good points. But I think the news story is something people could easily get outraged about especially since it purely based on what the person self-identifies as. Same with stories about people with penises being allowed to shower with women who are totally against it.

So I admitted about someone having good arguments about the topic of rape. Most of the things I said were just some uninformed opinions I had rather than being about what the topic of this thread was intended to be about - what Chris says.

 

[Jarhyn]

"gender confused".

You fucking heard a goddamn neuroscientist trash this kind of fucking language.

I cannot seriously believe you are operating in good faith anymore.

So you completely ignored the bit about "led the Americans and Europeans to ban puberty blockers and hormones for gender-confused kids".

Since you didn't disagree about that I assume that puberty blockers and hormones are actually banned for kids in America and Europe. So is that the case?

Yes he used the term "gender confused" and I didn't call him out on it so I'm the one being misleading or whatever?

"Gender confused"

First off, puberty blockers weren't banned in the US last I knew. Some states ban them, inappropriately, and for completely political reasons, and those political forces which seek their banning originates in anticipation of a patsy like that shitheel making such claims.

See also the effects of The Cas Report and the language used there.

"Gender confused" assumes something, right off the bat, that the neuroscientist whose interview sits near the head of this thread says is bullshit.

It's not confusion.

Generally, the kids with gender issues are not the confused ones. It is the adults like you who fail to understand.

You are the gender confused person here. Gender seems very confusing for you.

For people with actual gender issues, we read shit and figure out our way past the confusion. Our demands for care are often a result of us having to resolve our understanding for ourselves. This leads to that confusion that you feel because now they are talking about experiences YOU do not understand even though they absolutely do.

I am getting very tired of saying this: 96% of all minors who receive blockers continue this treatment until hormones, and continue those hormones their entire lives. This does not sound like confusion. It sounds more like them knowing exactly the fuck what they want.

 

[excreationist]

First off, puberty blockers weren't banned in the US last I knew. Some states ban them, inappropriately, and for completely political reasons, and those political forces which seek their banning originates in anticipation of a patsy like that shitheel making such claims.

Ok it seems the guest was a bit incorrect saying "led the Americans and Europeans to ban puberty blockers and hormones for gender-confused kids" rather than "led Americans". You not mentioning Europeans suggests that it is true that the Europeans banned those things. I find it dishonest to just ignore that. Then you spend 90% of your reply complaining about the term "gender confused". I don't claim to understand the minds of these kinds of kids. Even if the banning is injust the point is that other governments have apparently decided to ban them.

 

[bilby]

I can't seem to find examples of Chris in his videos or website being "absolutely hateful".

I am shocked.

He wouldn't stoop so low as to only show himself in a good light, surely?

No, he said himself that he opposes censorship, so obviously the ONLY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION is that he has never, ever, ever, cross his heart and hope to die, been "absolutely hateful".

Well, unless he's a fucking liar, obviously.

 

[bilby]

Though on the other hand this is from Sky News Australia.

Yeah, and as a rule, people who are giving you real news; Or who are expressing honest views, don't feel the need to explicitly claim that that's what they are doing.

Honestly. For real.

 

[Axulus]

Perhaps lots of people here would think transitioning early is a good thing.

The people that rush sexually confused youngsters into transitioning (chemical castration, breast removal etc) are sinister af. Thankfully there are places that have stopped allowing this.

Her parents were told they could have a dead daughter or a live son.

Were they wrong about that?

A teenager with a history of being sexually abused, who desperately didn't want her breasts to develop, who didn't want boys looking at her like some kind of sex object, might have committed suicide to prevent it. Puberty blockers might have been the best treatment at that time, providing the opportunity for her to receive counseling and therapy.

If you don't know her case history you can't say the diagnosis or treatment was wrong.

In her case she said at 5:15

she told them the same thing that she tells everybody that I was deeply suicidal and that if she didn't if they didn't let me transition I would be at high risk for suicide and I only attempted to kill myself after I transitioned so she convinced them that had two options a dead daughter or an alive son

Though maybe she also would have tried to kill herself if she didn't have the treatment.
Chris's site has a lot to say about the claims about suicide:

The Studies — Billboard Chris

www.billboardchris.com

I'm not planning on reading it all though but I'd just say that there seem to be some arguments against the suicide claims. (which might be deeply flawed)

Jesus fucking Christ why do you keep using Chris' site for information on these issues? I aldeady explained how problematic this is. Do you go to Ken Ham's answers in genesis for information on evolution? Do you go to oil industry websites to get info about climate change? Do you go to Stormfront to get information on immigration issues? Stop with the bullshit.

 

[Axulus]

Honestly, if you want something that best supports the positions you are taking, the CASS review from Britian I think is fair information to discuss in any debate like this. There are many things worth criticizing about it, but it isn't intentionally distored, cherry picked and done in bad faith like the info is on Chris' site.

The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People (commonly, the Cass Review) was commissioned in 2020 by NHS England and NHS Improvement[1] and led by Hilary Cass, a retired consultant paediatrician and the former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.[2] It dealt with gender services for children and young people, including transgender youth and those with gender dysphoria in England.

Cass Review - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Jarhyn]

First off, puberty blockers weren't banned in the US last I knew. Some states ban them, inappropriately, and for completely political reasons, and those political forces which seek their banning originates in anticipation of a patsy like that shitheel making such claims.

Ok it seems the guest was a bit incorrect saying "led the Americans and Europeans to ban puberty blockers and hormones for gender-confused kids" rather than "led Americans". You not mentioning Europeans suggests that it is true that the Europeans banned those things. I find it dishonest to just ignore that. Then you spend 90% of your reply complaining about the term "gender confused". I don't claim to understand the minds of these kinds of kids. Even if the banning is injust the point is that other governments have apparently decided to ban them.

No, it doesn't, it means I'm not going to talk about shit I don't know for certain and you pulling that bullshit right out your own ass and continuing to sew propaganda when...

You are the confused one here

Further @Axulus

Yes, CAS is biased as shit and yes it IS intentionally distorted with more of this "gender confused" nonsense.

The whole thing is peppered with language that disregards the reality of how these people feel, calls for conversion camps (thoroughly debunked science), and cherry picks it's studies based on deeply flawed claims (double-blinding expectations which are both impossible and unethical in the domain of study; there's no way to blind someone on whether or not they are going through puberty).

To that end, they achieve a "slick" bit of propaganda.

Of course, this was ALSO floated in the last thread and these concerns were brought up and then various Nazis came out of the woodwork to support it despite the knowledge of that clear bias.

There is a push to wrap this trans hate in legitimate-seeming science and this is just one iteration of attack on real research.

It is clearly biased from the "disordered" language crowd, and it's a shame ANYONE fell for it.

 

[Jarhyn]

I can't seem to find examples of Chris in his videos or website being "absolutely hateful".

I am shocked.

He wouldn't stoop so low as to only show himself in a good light, surely?

No, he said himself that he opposes censorship, so obviously the ONLY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION is that he has never, ever, ever, cross his heart and hope to die, been "absolutely hateful".

Well, unless he's a fucking liar, obviously.

Not to mention the fact that if it were easy to always spot people in the middle of being hateful, we would see a lot less hate.

People have always figured out ways to make such hateful views seem alright in euphemism and such rhetoric.

"Gender confused" is so fucking hateful. It gaslights people into thinking that THEIR confusion should be projected on younger folks who understand, as if nobody younger than you could ever understand something profound about themselves.

Going on a tear across the country to ambush people and tell them they shouldn't have a right to as smooth a puberty and up-growing as anyone else because THAT asshole is confused about SOMEONE ELSE'S BODY is hateful.

Every post that echos and slides back to those views no matter how @excreationist is told that these views come "from the door that always lies", they start parroting them again.

@excreationist, If you want to know how to make someone fucking hate you, go ahead. Call me "confused" one more time by proxy. I fucking dare you.

Maybe you didn't realize how hateful those words are? Well now you do.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

And if certain people without penises hadn't been allowed in, several people wouldn't have been raped by a particular person without a penis.

It's almost as if this stupid fucking culture war issue would be less of an issue primarily if we actually identified those likely to rape others and prevented them from having access to victims no matter their sex or gender or genitals.

Instead of pursuing this policy, which would be highly effective at preventing prison rapes, you're being pennywise and pound foolish with this culture war shit.

I thought that it would be worse for a female in prison to be raped by a person with a penis than by a woman without one.

It sounds like you should change the subject of your thread to "Trans people!!111!" You can't seem to respond to good points people make and then go on about something else not related to the narrower subject of trans minors. That said, ...

I thought that it would be worse for a female in prison to be raped by a person with a penis than by a woman without one.

Have you considered that there are orders of magnitude more male prison guards in female prisons and than trans persons and that there are orders of magnitude more sexual assaults, rapes, power manipulations, and coercion by those guards than by alleged trans persons in prisons? Do you ever hear those same people complaining (typically conservatives) that female prisons should only be staffed by female guards and do YOU think they should only be staffed by female guards since as you say "it would be worse for a female in prison to be raped by a person with a penis than by a woman without one?"