Gender again. Sorry!

[newfhouse]

He doesn't.

How do you know what’s going on in his mind any more than I do?

He cares about whether medical interventions are appropriate with young people, and how the interpretation of what is going on in some people's heads affects the hard won rights of other groups of marginalised people.

That’s what he says, I agree.

What does the first part of your sentence have to do with the second? I mean, even if there were no doubts about surgery there could still be concerns about segregation of facilities and services. Doesn’t each argument stand or fall alone?

That's something we should all care about.

Two things. Why do you think I don’t, simply because we disagree about how we balance harms?

I think also the suppression of free speech on the basis that if every time someone says something that a trans activist doesn't like, someone trans dies is also a concern.

I don’t understand this part at all. What does it mean?

 

[newfhouse]

No gay rights required impinging on anybody else's rights or boundaries.

True, but you wouldn’t have thought so if you’d listened to those railing against equality and acceptance. You surely must remember all the wailing and gnashing over equal marriage and the age of consent. Strangely enough, the current moral panic is being driven and amplified by many of the same people.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Strangely enough, the current moral panic is being driven and amplified by many of the same people.

Even if that was true, it hardly follows that you can spout incoherent nonsense and expect to be taken seriously.
Chemical castration used to be used against homosexual men. It's now rightly seen as abhorrent. Yet chemical castration of a bloke who decides he's a woman is now a valid treatment.
You might think my example is absurd, but it's no less absurd than your daft argument.

 

[AndyRM]

Even if that was true, it hardly follows that you can spout incoherent nonsense and expect to be taken seriously.
Chemical castration used to be used against homosexual men. It's now rightly seen as abhorrent. Yet chemical castration of a bloke who decides he's a woman is now a valid treatment.
You might think my example is absurd, but it's no less absurd than your daft argument.

There is a difference with the chemical castration analogy, though I see where you're coming from: it wasn't a voluntary "solution".

 

[newfhouse]

Even if that was true

It is.

, it hardly follows that you can spout incoherent nonsense and expect to be taken seriously.

Go on…?

Chemical castration used to be used against homosexual men. It's now rightly seen as abhorrent. Yet chemical castration of a bloke who decides he's a woman is now a valid treatment.

Coercion vs. consent?

You might think my example is absurd, but it's no less absurd than your daft argument.

The argument you quoted? That it’s at least partly driven by the religious right?

 

[bobzmyunkle]

The argument you quoted? That it’s at least partly driven by the religious right?

Not sure what you're on about here? Shutting down debate by associating an argument with the religious right certainly doesn't stand up.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

it wasn't a voluntary "solution".

Sorry, I wasn't presenting it as a coherent, fully thought through argument. I was just trying to point out the daftness of @newfhouse's statement.

 

[newfhouse]

Not sure what you're on about here?

Your words didn’t seem to bear any relation to the part of my post that you quoted.

Shutting down debate by associating an argument with the religious right certainly doesn't stand up.

I’m not attempting to shut anything down, merely noting that some of those promoting moral panic are the same people that were and are against gay equality. This was in the context of Aurora’s claim (as I understand it) that trans and gay rights don’t have much in common.

 

[icowden]

How do you know what’s going on in his mind any more than I do?

Educated guess?

What does the first part of your sentence have to do with the second? I mean, even if there were no doubts about surgery there could still be concerns about segregation of facilities and services. Doesn’t each argument stand or fall alone?

Nothing. I should have used two sentences. I apologise.

I don’t understand this part at all. What does it mean?

Part of this discussion has been focused on the desire to shut down conversation. To attempt to cancel people for saying relatively sane things whether they are JK Rowling or Graham Linehan.

 

[icowden]

They used to say that about gay people. That was wrong too.

I agree. However there isn't a gay category in sporting events or a special toilet to use. No medicine or surgery is required. That's just letting people be people.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

This was in the context of Aurora’s claim (as I understand it) that trans and gay rights don’t have much in common.

A claim that doesn't appear to have been made. Gay rights don't impinge on anyone else's rights, trans rights impinge on women's rights, is what I read from what she said. I suspect you're aware of that argument after god knows how many pages.

 

[Deleted member 159]

We also differ in that I think you should butt out of other people’s decisions. Why do you care what goes on in anyone’s head or pants?

Children's safeguarding should be every caring adults responsibility.


When it could effect females in my life.

Like I've said before, If you want to multilate yourself as an adult, fine. Don't expect me or the general public to accept or accommodate your predilections.

Thankfully, it seems to the world is waking up to these abuses and are rowing back, placing legislation to stop further abuses, whether social, sporting or physical

 

[AuroraSaab]

True, but you wouldn’t have thought so if you’d listened to those railing against equality and acceptance. You surely must remember all the wailing and gnashing over equal marriage and the age of consent. Strangely enough, the current moral panic is being driven and amplified by many of the same people.

A lot of the people who oppose the demands of transactivists seem to be gay themselves, including lots of gay men. It's a concern to them that so many kids referred to the Tavistock were same sex attracted and that so many detransitioners are gay. A clinician there even joked 'There won't be any gay kids left at this rate'.

I think dismissing concerns from women and the gay community simply because other factions have a different agenda is a mistake.

 

[newfhouse]

Part of this discussion has been focused on the desire to shut down conversation. To attempt to cancel people for saying relatively sane things whether they are JK Rowling or Graham Linehan.

Where have I done that? Saying that venues have a right to choose who performs or that nobody is entitled to an audience is a long way from denying free speech.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Strangely enough, the current moral panic is being driven and amplified by many of the same people.

Moral panic is caused by trans ideology involving children in their actions.