Lest you think I'm making up how concerned the LGBTQ community is right now...

[ICRockets2]

4 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Yet you're totally in favor of pressuring youg children to make gender identity decisions before they're mature or developed enough to truly understand their own gender issues

 

I'm in favor of doing what the science says is healthy.  If you can convince me that there's good reason to follow a different standard, then I'll follow that standard instead.  

 

[ICRockets2]

7 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Yeah, imagination, errr, made up. My oldest kid is here tonight, btw, and I told her about how you refuse to accept that she was bullied by the kids in her school for being straight. She said you're a moron, basically

You talk to your kids about me?  Do I need to be worried about you?

[HipKat]

2 minutes ago, ICRockets2 said:

I'm in favor of doing what the science says is healthy.  If you can convince me that there's good reason to follow a different standard, then I'll follow that standard instead.  

 

You mean psychologists who support a trend that keeps them in patients/income?

Children's brains - not developed fully 'til early 20's
Elementary aged children learning basic reading/writing/math skills.
Educational material typically involves cartoon characters and symbolic parental figures

But you think they're old enough to understand any alternative gender issues and sexual preferences

[ICRockets2]

1 minute ago, HipKat said:

You mean psychologists who support a trend that keeps them in patients/income?

Children's brains - not developed fully 'til early 20's
Elementary aged children learning basic reading/writing/math skills.
Educational material typically involves cartoon characters and symbolic parental figures

But you think they're old enough to understand any alternative gender issues and sexual preferences

Look, let's start simple.  As long as we can agree on agreeable premises, I think I can explain my thought process on this.

You agree that there is such a thing as a trans kid, right?  Like obviously you realize there are kids who question their gender identity, and 100% I recognize that there are kids who decide they're cis, but there are also kids who decide they're trans.  That is a real type of person who exists in this world, yeah?

[HipKat]

7 hours ago, ICRockets2 said:

Look, let's start simple.  As long as we can agree on agreeable premises, I think I can explain my thought process on this.

You agree that there is such a thing as a trans kid, right?  Like obviously you realize there are kids who question their gender identity, and 100% I recognize that there are kids who decide they're cis, but there are also kids who decide they're trans.  That is a real type of person who exists in this world, yeah?

Yep! 

I also know there are kids, one I actually know who claim to be trans, but as they get older, that doesn't stay.

My kid's friend Tracy (Not birth name) is Trans, according to her. I met Tracy a few times, good kid. When he dresses like a girl, it's freaky. My kid has pictures. Tracy goes by her, even though Tracy was born male.

Fast forward a year later, Tracy is 17, no longer dresses like a girl, has a girlfriend, still claims to be Trans but is outwardly not pursing a Trans identity any longer.

[ICRockets2]

2 hours ago, HipKat said:

Yep! 

I also know there are kids, one I actually know who claim to be trans, but as they get older, that doesn't stay.

My kid's friend Tracy (Not birth name) is Trans, according to her. I met Tracy a few times, good kid. When he dresses like a girl, it's freaky. My kid has pictures. Tracy goes by her, even though Tracy was born male.

Fast forward a year later, Tracy is 17, no longer dresses like a girl, has a girlfriend, still claims to be Trans but is outwardly not pursing a Trans identity any longer.

I'm actually talking a little younger than 17, but yeah, same difference, we're agreeing these people exist.

So say we've got a 10 year old trans girl.  She knows she's authentically trans, her parents know she's authentically trans, her doctors know she's authentically trans.  

Now imagine you have to tell her she can't go on puberty blockers.  That she has no choice but to endure a male puberty that will ensure her voice deepens, she grows pecs/abs rather than breasts, her penis gets bigger....basically everything that is still androgynous about her because she hasn't gone through puberty yet stops being androgynous but does so in the direction she DOESN'T want it to go in.  

That's gonna fuck with her mental health.  It's gonna fuck with her self-confidence, her self-image, her ability to integrate into society as a feminine person.  But the solution to preventing that from happening EXISTS!  I fully, fully, fully understand that a human brain does not fully develop until we're in our 20s, but that doesn't stop life from happening to us before we get there, right?  So if there is a process for how to send trans kids through the right puberty, it should be on the table.  

UNLESS, of course, there is evidence that this process does more harm than good.  So we study it.  And if I'm remembering the data correctly, studies indicate that the desistence/de-trans rate of kids who do indeed receive professional diagnoses of gender dysphoria is about 6%.  Which means for 94% of kids, the process is appropriate.  I think that's an indication that it does in fact help more than it hurts.  

Now obviously we still want to tighten things up a bit, so we don't just dust off our hands and say Mission Accomplished.  We want to refine diagnostic standards so as many of those 6% as possible aren't receiving improper treatment.  We want to ensure they have the...social maneuverability?  I guess would be how to phrase it? to figure out who they are safely and confidently.  But if the numbers are valid, and they do appear to be when you look at meta-analyses of multiple studies lining up with each other, then I just don't think "their brain isn't fully developed" passes muster as a good argument against helping the kids who we know are, objectively, transgender. 

We can and should do better by the 6%, but if we do so by telling the 94% that they have to tolerate physiological changes we KNOW are psychologically damaging then I think that is- frankly- barbaric.  It sets them up for an entire lifetime that will be harder for them socially.  I don't think you'd find it controversial if I said it's easier for someone to "pass" as a woman if they go through female puberty than it is if they were to have gone through male puberty.  So if there's a way to ensure that happens in transfem youth- and there is!- then we should be using it where applicable.  

Ultimately, that's how I look at this stuff.  

[HipKat]

3 hours ago, ICRockets2 said:

I'm actually talking a little younger than 17, but yeah, same difference, we're agreeing these people exist.

So say we've got a 10 year old trans girl.  She knows she's authentically trans, her parents know she's authentically trans, her doctors know she's authentically trans.  

Now imagine you have to tell her she can't go on puberty blockers.  That she has no choice but to endure a male puberty that will ensure her voice deepens, she grows pecs/abs rather than breasts, her penis gets bigger....basically everything that is still androgynous about her because she hasn't gone through puberty yet stops being androgynous but does so in the direction she DOESN'T want it to go in.  

That's gonna fuck with her mental health.  It's gonna fuck with her self-confidence, her self-image, her ability to integrate into society as a feminine person.  But the solution to preventing that from happening EXISTS!  I fully, fully, fully understand that a human brain does not fully develop until we're in our 20s, but that doesn't stop life from happening to us before we get there, right?  So if there is a process for how to send trans kids through the right puberty, it should be on the table.  

UNLESS, of course, there is evidence that this process does more harm than good.  So we study it.  And if I'm remembering the data correctly, studies indicate that the desistence/de-trans rate of kids who do indeed receive professional diagnoses of gender dysphoria is about 6%.  Which means for 94% of kids, the process is appropriate.  I think that's an indication that it does in fact help more than it hurts.  

Now obviously we still want to tighten things up a bit, so we don't just dust off our hands and say Mission Accomplished.  We want to refine diagnostic standards so as many of those 6% as possible aren't receiving improper treatment.  We want to ensure they have the...social maneuverability?  I guess would be how to phrase it? to figure out who they are safely and confidently.  But if the numbers are valid, and they do appear to be when you look at meta-analyses of multiple studies lining up with each other, then I just don't think "their brain isn't fully developed" passes muster as a good argument against helping the kids who we know are, objectively, transgender. 

We can and should do better by the 6%, but if we do so by telling the 94% that they have to tolerate physiological changes we KNOW are psychologically damaging then I think that is- frankly- barbaric.  It sets them up for an entire lifetime that will be harder for them socially.  I don't think you'd find it controversial if I said it's easier for someone to "pass" as a woman if they go through female puberty than it is if they were to have gone through male puberty.  So if there's a way to ensure that happens in transfem youth- and there is!- then we should be using it where applicable.  

Ultimately, that's how I look at this stuff.  

Except at 10, she doesn't know she's authentically anything, which blows your whole theory out the window not to mention puberty blockers are NOT 100% reversible but starting the journey towards physically transitioning CAN be be held-off until she's older, more sure of her feelings, more emotionally developed and more able to make a lifetime commitment

[SpikedLemonade]

How old do you have to be to work at Dairy Queen?

 

[Angry Byrds]

On 1/20/2023 at 11:07 AM, ICRockets2 said:

The flip side of this whole "you don't have kids so you don't get a say" bullshit is that you're tacitly confessing to us all that if you didn't have kids you wouldn't give a shit about them.  

Why should we, as people who want what's best for children despite not having any, regard you as an appropriate moral arbiter?

I think he was pretty much telling to teach YOUR kids what you want them to learn and let other parents teach their kids what they want and let teachers stick to reading, writing and math. Idk why that’s hard for you. 
 

Teacher “hey Jeffry, it’s ok if you want to be a little girl. 
 Jeffry “ hey daddy, Ms Rockets said it was ok if I wanted to be a little girl.

Daddy “Jeffry your teacher is a complete moron, and that’s not true. 
Jeffry “now I’m even more confused”
 

 

[ICRockets2]

19 minutes ago, Angry Byrds said:

I think he was pretty much telling to teach YOUR kids what you want them to learn and let other parents teach their kids what they want and let teachers stick to reading, writing and math. Idk why that’s hard for you. 
 

Teacher “hey Jeffry, it’s ok if you want to be a little girl. 
 Jeffry “ hey daddy, Ms Rockets said it was ok if I wanted to be a little girl.

Daddy “Jeffry your teacher is a complete moron, and that’s not true. 
Jeffry “now I’m even more confused”
 

 

Sounds like the confusion came from the bigoted dad in that scenario.

[ICRockets2]

36 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Except at 10, she doesn't know she's authentically anything, which blows your whole theory out the window not to mention puberty blockers are NOT 100% reversible but starting the journey towards physically transitioning CAN be be held-off until she's older, more sure of her feelings, more emotionally developed and more able to make a lifetime commitment

We're talking about a hypothetical where we do in fact control for all the variables and know the girl is trans.  In that scenario, making her go through male puberty when we know what it will do to her is child abuse.

[ICRockets2]

24 minutes ago, Angry Byrds said:

I think he was pretty much telling to teach YOUR kids what you want them to learn and let other parents teach their kids what they want and let teachers stick to reading, writing and math. Idk why that’s hard for you. 
 

When we apply this standard to how kids get taught things outside STEM, we get more child abuse.  

For example, one thing I've been saying for months that you guys really hate is that we need to teach some small degree of sex education to young children.  Bad touch, private parts, that kind of stuff.  We do that because if a kid who gets molested doesn't know that what's happening to them is inappropriate, the abuse continues.  When they do, they're able to tell people who can stop it.  Now, what happens when that education is handled by parents?  Quite simply, kids whose parents molest them never receive it.  The point of giving public schools a larger role in other subjects beyond the core stuff is that we're standardizing access to information that keeps kids safe. 

You teach them about bad touch so they know how to prevent it, and you teach it in school so it isn't gate-kept from the kids who would be most vulnerable otherwise.  You teach them that some mommies love mommies and that sometimes boys want to be girls so that queer and trans kids who need to know that stuff don't feel like there's something wrong with them, and you teach it in school so it isn't gate-kept from the kids with bigoted parents who would otherwise try to FORCE cisheteronormativity on them.  

 

[Angry Byrds]

40 minutes ago, ICRockets2 said:

Sounds like the confusion came from the bigoted dad in that scenario.

No, it’s definitely not ok for ANYONE other than the parent of a child to tell them it’s ok to be something they aren’t and even if the dad is wrong dad trumps teacher. Parent > Ms rockets

[HipKat]

42 minutes ago, ICRockets2 said:

Sounds like the confusion came from the bigoted dad in that scenario.

Teacher had no business saying a fucking thing

[HipKat]

42 minutes ago, ICRockets2 said:

We're talking about a hypothetical where we do in fact control for all the variables and know the girl is trans.  In that scenario, making her go through male puberty when we know what it will do to her is child abuse.

You're just making up that anyone KNOWS the girl is trans. Kids.Are.Curious.And.Unsure.Of.Their.Place.In.The.World

[HipKat]

27 minutes ago, ICRockets2 said:

When we apply this standard to how kids get taught things outside STEM, we get more child abuse.  

For example, one thing I've been saying for months that you guys really hate is that we need to teach some small degree of sex education to young children.  Bad touch, private parts, that kind of stuff.  We do that because if a kid who gets molested doesn't know that what's happening to them is inappropriate, the abuse continues.  When they do, they're able to tell people who can stop it.  Now, what happens when that education is handled by parents?  Quite simply, kids whose parents molest them never receive it.  The point of giving public schools a larger role in other subjects beyond the core stuff is that we're standardizing access to information that keeps kids safe. 

You teach them about bad touch so they know how to prevent it, and you teach it in school so it isn't gate-kept from the kids who would be most vulnerable otherwise.  You teach them that some mommies love mommies and that sometimes boys want to be girls so that queer and trans kids who need to know that stuff don't feel like there's something wrong with them, and you teach it in school so it isn't gate-kept from the kids with bigoted parents who would otherwise try to FORCE cisheteronormativity on them.  

 

It's twisted how you exploit the bad touch thing to push the "it's OK to be a girl" thing. 

But you're not a groomer....

[ICRockets2]

3 minutes ago, Angry Byrds said:

No, it’s definitely not ok for ANYONE other than the parent of a child to tell them it’s ok to be something they aren’t and even if the dad is wrong dad trumps teacher. Parent > Ms rockets

Children are not your property.  They are human beings who have a right to education.  Trans girls ARE girls.  Trans boys ARE boys.  Nobody is telling them they're anything they are not.  They're telling them it's okay to be who they ARE.

[ICRockets2]

3 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Teacher had no business saying a fucking thing

That is actually precisely the business teachers are in.

[ICRockets2]

2 minutes ago, HipKat said:

You're just making up that anyone KNOWS the girl is trans. Kids.Are.Curious.And.Unsure.Of.Their.Place.In.The.World

You've stopped listening again because you don't want to admit that everything I said follows a 100% consistent logical process.

[HipKat]

1 minute ago, ICRockets2 said:

Children are not your property. 

They ARE their PARENTS' responsibility. 

[ICRockets2]

2 minutes ago, HipKat said:

It's twisted how you exploit the bad touch thing to push the "it's OK to be a girl" thing. 

But you're not a groomer....

I'm not exploiting shit.  I am explaining the thought process followed by educators and then applying it consistently across subjects.

[HipKat]

1 minute ago, ICRockets2 said:

That is actually precisely the business teachers are in.

No, it precisely is NOT. They are TEACHERS! Teaching a curriculum designed to graduate to the next level/grade. Teachers are not social workers, psychologists, parental counselors or babysitters

[HipKat]

1 minute ago, ICRockets2 said:

You've stopped listening again because you don't want to admit that everything I said follows a 100% consistent logical process.

The "logical process" is this part: Kids.Are.Curious.And.Unsure.Of.Their.Place.In.The.World

The shit you're pushing is exploiting one thing to push another agenda

[ICRockets2]

Just now, HipKat said:

They ARE their PARENTS' responsibility. 

And some parents are irresponsible.  Since a kid with irresponsible parents has no real recourse to know themselves that they're in such a situation, it is everybody's civic obligation to make sure society is there to pick up the slack.

[ICRockets2]

2 minutes ago, HipKat said:

No, it precisely is NOT. They are TEACHERS! Teaching a curriculum designed to graduate to the next level/grade. Teachers are not social workers, psychologists, parental counselors or babysitters

If you were to ask the best teachers what they think of that statement, they'd say it would be nice if they weren't any of those things but that on a practical level they find themselves playing all of those roles to some extent over the course of the school year.