Transphobia is just repackaged homophobia

[TGLS]

I may get skewered but, that last line is my personal concern. Getting your gender changed is not like putting on a new jacket. If someone is too young to vote, too young to drink, and too young to fight for your country. How then are they old enough to make a life altering decision this big?

I think my one line in the sand is wait till you are 18 and an adult.

Isn't that what puberty blockers are for?

Which, coincidentally, Transphobes also want to ban.

[Nealithi]

I may get skewered but, that last line is my personal concern. Getting your gender changed is not like putting on a new jacket. If someone is too young to vote, too young to drink, and too young to fight for your country. How then are they old enough to make a life altering decision this big?

I think my one line in the sand is wait till you are 18 and an adult.

Did you not know if you were a boy or a girl before 18?

Did I have the right to smoke a cigarette?

You want to unlock life altering choices at a young age why pick and choose? If they are too young to make that kind of decision they are too young. If they are not then they are not on any of them. You can't just say 'this particular issue is important to me so make an exception'.

[Nealithi]

I may get skewered but, that last line is my personal concern. Getting your gender changed is not like putting on a new jacket. If someone is too young to vote, too young to drink, and too young to fight for your country. How then are they old enough to make a life altering decision this big?

I think my one line in the sand is wait till you are 18 and an adult.

Isn't that what puberty blockers are for?

Which, coincidentally, Transphobes also want to ban.

I do not know what a puberty blocker is or what it is for other than the context clue in the name. I would ask a why?

[Madner Kami]

I do not know what a puberty blocker is or what it is for other than the context clue in the name.

It's exactly what is says on the can. It's a (usually) hormonally-based medicine which supresses the production of sex-hormones like testosterone and estrogen. The human body, lacking those androgens, stops developing sex-characteristics like beard-growth, development of breasts and so on. You can effectively indefinitly delay puberty through these. There are some potential side-effects to the use of these, like compromised fertility later in life, chronic fatigue, lower mineralization rate of the bones and adverse effects on sex-characteristic-related body-tissue, like muscles and breast-tissue, though the puberty-related effects are largely reversible by simply stopping to take the hormones.

There's an ongoing debate and a lack of long-term studies regarding any influence to mental development. For example, it's commonly known that our brains are essentially entirely rewired during our puberty-process, which generally lasts until we're about 25 years old. You're certainly aware that teenagers undergo some quite drastic personality-changes during puberty and those changes are an expression of that rewiring process, which, again, is directly related to our hormonal, physical and psychological restructuring during puberty. This process is influenced and will be delayed due to the puberty blockers, though this doesn't directly lead into a "childish" adult or any other sort of "retardation" in that sense, but... Well, it's poorly understood and thus hard to put into words. Let's just say that someone who took puberty blockers, will have a delayed development and it could be argued, that they haven't reached their full mental capacity and thus may not be necessarily "adult" in this regard. Even though you aren't exactly dealing with a child, if there's someone who's, let's say, 18 years old but hasn't undergone puberty yet, that person isn't on the same level as someone who's 18 and has undergone puberty in a "normal" way. But that does not mean, that they are any dumber or less understanding or "childish" or anything. They just aren't their "final" self yet.

[Nealithi]

I do not know what a puberty blocker is or what it is for other than the context clue in the name.

It's exactly what is says on the can. It's a (usually) hormonally-based medicine which supresses the production of sex-hormones like testosterone and estrogen. The human body, lacking those androgens, stops developing sex-characteristics like beard-growth, development of breasts and so on. You can effectively indefinitly delay puberty through these. There are some potential side-effects to the use of these, like compromised fertility later in life, chronic fatigue, lower mineralization rate of the bones and adverse effects on sex-characteristic-related body-tissue, like muscles and breast-tissue, though the puberty-related effects are largely reversible by simply stopping to take the hormones.

There's an ongoing debate and a lack of long-term studies regarding any influence to mental development. For example, it's commonly known that our brains are essentially entirely rewired during our puberty-process, which generally lasts until we're about 25 years old. You're certainly aware that teenagers undergo some quite drastic personality-changes during puberty and those changes are an expression of that rewiring process, which, again, is directly related to our hormonal, physical and psychological restructuring during puberty. This process is influenced and will be delayed due to the puberty blockers, though this doesn't directly lead into a "childish" adult or any other sort of "retardation" in that sense, but... Well, it's poorly understood and thus hard to put into words. Let's just say that someone who took puberty blockers, will have a delayed development and it could be argued, that they haven't reached their full mental capacity and thus may not be necessarily "adult" in this regard. Even though you aren't exactly dealing with a child, if there's someone who's, let's say, 18 years old but hasn't undergone puberty yet, that person isn't on the same level as someone who's 18 and has undergone puberty in a "normal" way. But that does not mean, that they are any dumber or less understanding or "childish" or anything. They just aren't their "final" self yet.

Thank you, that gives me a what. A very thought provoking what. But why? I mean from context it would be to assist transition? As a poorly understood medical practice I would put my concern that this will be viewed on the same level as eugenics in a few decades. Ethically you can't test this on people can you? But how would animal testing for long term effects be possible. Since the primary concerns for something like this is medicinal and I do not have a medical background. I would have to defer my opinion to medical professionals.

[hammerofglass]

I may get skewered but, that last line is my personal concern. Getting your gender changed is not like putting on a new jacket. If someone is too young to vote, too young to drink, and too young to fight for your country. How then are they old enough to make a life altering decision this big?

I think my one line in the sand is wait till you are 18 and an adult.

Did you not know if you were a boy or a girl before 18?

Did I have the right to smoke a cigarette?

You want to unlock life altering choices at a young age why pick and choose? If they are too young to make that kind of decision they are too young. If they are not then they are not on any of them. You can't just say 'this particular issue is important to me so make an exception'.

I mean, other than the voting one I think those limits should all be eliminated or at least reduced to sixteen. I don't know anyone IRL who obeyed them, especially 21 for alcohol. Just a waste of everyone's time to keep them in place.

[Madner Kami]

Thank you, that gives me a what. A very thought provoking what. But why? I mean from context it would be to assist transition?

It's mostly used to "buy time" in a manner of speaking. Say you got a boy-child, aged 10. Puberty hasn't hit yet, but will inevitably do soon. The boy has expressed in some way that he doesn't feel to be a he, but a her. Now it would obviously be sensible to help that child by supressing the natural development of all the not-yet-fully developed man-parts in that potential girl, because he isn't a he and it's obviously better for the transitioning process in the long run, if hormonal therapy can start before the child's body is well on it's way to become a fully grown man. But you don't really wanna do that to a 10 year old child for, what I feel is, obvious reasons. You'd wanna give that child some time to figure out it's place in the world and develop mentally into a state, where it could sensibly decide and comprehend, what it means to transition.

As a poorly understood medical practice I would put my concern that this will be viewed on the same level as eugenics in a few decades. Ethically you can't test this on people can you? But how would animal testing for long term effects be possible. Since the primary concerns for something like this is medicinal and I do not have a medical background. I would have to defer my opinion to medical professionals.

I dunno if medical professionals are the right adress in general. I feel this is more of a psychological issue. And this is right where the best arguement against the usage of puberty blockers comes in, in my opinion. You're gonna arrest the natural development of a child. A child that, by all accounts, isn't yet fully able to comprehend what is happening to it, both physically and mentally and none of us really comprehended what it means to be an adult male or adult female, before we're actually there ourselves. So it can easily be argued, that this trans-child isn't capable of understanding it's decission yet and neither can you really easily tell from "the outside", whether that's a flight of fancy, a psychosis, a wierd result of a wierd education or some actual "wrong body"-phenomenon, for lack of a better word.

In essence, the primary arguement there is, that an adult could make an informed decission, while a child can't. But you are argueably preventing the child to become an adult through the use of puberty-blockers, even though the individual will develop into a sex-less adult (so to say), if you just supress the puberty. At the same time, the hormonal changes we undergo when becoming a full adult during puberty are so fundamental, that it's kinda hard to argue that you really reached adulthood without undergoing puberty in the first place.

Personally, I am very much on the fence on that particular issue. It's both the best means we have to support pre-puberty or early-puberty transsexuals, while at the same time the process is so poorly understood, both on a medical/pyschological level, as well as a philosophical/societal level, that it's quite the minefield to traverse. There's no clear right or wrong on that issue. Though I think it's best to allow the useage of puberty blockers, as long as the individual gets all the psychological counceling that is necessary and possible. In most cases I feel though, that we fail fundamentally on the later part, for various and obvious reasons (argueably more in the US than, say, Germany or the EU in general, where health care is more of a public concern, rather than a playing field of quacks, capitalists and religious nutjobs of any colour).

[Madner Kami]

I mean, other than the voting one I think those limits should all be eliminated or at least reduced to sixteen. I don't know anyone IRL who obeyed them, especially 21 for alcohol. Just a waste of everyone's time to keep them in place.

You do realize, that this is also an arguement to abolish a lot of laws like, say, traffic or environmental laws, right? Laws are there to enforce a desired state (defined by the law), not a statement of fact. The breach of laws, doesn't justify their abolishment, it's a justification to improve enforcement.

[Nealithi]

I may get skewered but, that last line is my personal concern. Getting your gender changed is not like putting on a new jacket. If someone is too young to vote, too young to drink, and too young to fight for your country. How then are they old enough to make a life altering decision this big?

I think my one line in the sand is wait till you are 18 and an adult.

Did you not know if you were a boy or a girl before 18?

Did I have the right to smoke a cigarette?

You want to unlock life altering choices at a young age why pick and choose? If they are too young to make that kind of decision they are too young. If they are not then they are not on any of them. You can't just say 'this particular issue is important to me so make an exception'.

I mean, other than the voting one I think those limits should all be eliminated or at least reduced to sixteen. I don't know anyone IRL who obeyed them, especially 21 for alcohol. Just a waste of everyone's time to keep them in place.

<Raises Hand> I did not smoke till 19 and in the Air Force. Did not drink till 21, and in the Air Force. Never fired a gun till 18 and, yes in the Air Force.

Now I am curious why you feel voting should wait but other things should be at 16?

[Nealithi]

Thank you, that gives me a what. A very thought provoking what. But why? I mean from context it would be to assist transition?

It's mostly used to "buy time" in a manner of speaking. Say you got a boy-child, aged 10. Puberty hasn't hit yet, but will inevitably do soon. The boy has expressed in some way that he doesn't feel to be a he, but a her. Now it would obviously be sensible to help that child by supressing the natural development of all the not-yet-fully developed man-parts in that potential girl, because he isn't a he and it's obviously better for the transitioning process in the long run, if hormonal therapy can start before the child's body is well on it's way to become a fully grown man. But you don't really wanna do that to a 10 year old child for, what I feel is, obvious reasons. You'd wanna give that child some time to figure out it's place in the world and develop mentally into a state, where it could sensibly decide and comprehend, what it means to transition.

As a poorly understood medical practice I would put my concern that this will be viewed on the same level as eugenics in a few decades. Ethically you can't test this on people can you? But how would animal testing for long term effects be possible. Since the primary concerns for something like this is medicinal and I do not have a medical background. I would have to defer my opinion to medical professionals.

I dunno if medical professionals are the right adress in general. I feel this is more of a psychological issue. And this is right where the best arguement against the usage of puberty blockers comes in, in my opinion. You're gonna arrest the natural development of a child. A child that, by all accounts, isn't yet fully able to comprehend what is happening to it, both physically and mentally and none of us really comprehended what it means to be an adult male or adult female, before we're actually there ourselves. So it can easily be argued, that this trans-child isn't capable of understanding it's decission yet and neither can you really easily tell from "the outside", whether that's a flight of fancy, a psychosis, a wierd result of a wierd education or some actual "wrong body"-phenomenon, for lack of a better word.

In essence, the primary arguement there is, that an adult could make an informed decission, while a child can't. But you are argueably preventing the child to become an adult through the use of puberty-blockers, even though the individual will develop into a sex-less adult (so to say), if you just supress the puberty. At the same time, the hormonal changes we undergo when becoming a full adult during puberty are so fundamental, that it's kinda hard to argue that you really reached adulthood without undergoing puberty in the first place.

Personally, I am very much on the fence on that particular issue. It's both the best means we have to support pre-puberty or early-puberty transsexuals, while at the same time the process is so poorly understood, both on a medical/pyschological level, as well as a philosophical/societal level, that it's quite the minefield to traverse. There's no clear right or wrong on that issue. Though I think it's best to allow the useage of puberty blockers, as long as the individual gets all the psychological counceling that is necessary and possible. In most cases I feel though, that we fail fundamentally on the later part, for various and obvious reasons (argueably more in the US than, say, Germany or the EU in general).

I can see both the fence and can agree the US is not the best for psychological counseling.