Current Events > Kindergarten girl went home crying and scared she might turn into a boy

(+) Yeah! (+)

OpheliaAdenade posted...

voldothegr8 posted...

Yeah that's about to change

you don't get to pick what public schools teach your kids as long as it isn't explicit. if you don't like it, pull your kid out and pay for a private school.

Outrage changes things.
---

I agree with all of that except for the electronic devices and maybe euthanasia
---

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic
---

averagejoel posted...

my daughter, Pumice, says she worries that adults often pretend their kids said things in order to add an emotional appeal to otherwise nonexistent points

It's true. Remember Columbine? The girl in the library that was asked if she believed in God and said yes and then was shot? Actual surviving witnesses say that never happened

s0nicfan posted...

I was referring to studies that show that a mtf brain is objectively not the same as a woman's brain, as well as the study that showed (again, small sample size) that schizophrenia medication completely eliminates a person's desire to transition. I also alluded to the 40% suicide rate, of which there are many studies, and which still stays an order of magnitude above the national average even if only looking at "passing" individuals.

As for her lived experiences, her telling me that she is a woman because she says so contradicts the evidence. Her personal experience having a good tradition is also not evidence that the 40% suicide rate would go away if we all just "accepted it" and it certainly doesn't turn valid science into flat earth nonsense.

I remember that study about the schizophrenia medicine, and it wasn't even using actual trans patients. It was some whack job that got a confused patient, misidentified the problem, and then 'cured' it.

Oh, I don't remember actually arguing the point of being specifically a woman to you. I legally and socially am a woman, and I don't need internet validation to give me warm and fuzzies.

Now try to get me a study that tests how trans people do in a scenario where they aren't treated like shit, and get back to me. All your evidence points to is that at least 40% of trans women live in situations that are pretty awful at points.
---

Sylph posted...

Medz2017 posted...

If they will not have a problem why teach it at such a young age?

Oh that one is easy. It is because that openness and willingness to accept and think about things is a thing that children lose as they get older through indoctrination. If you don't expose your children to things when they are young enough to form their own ideas about it, then the only ideas they end up having are the ones taught to them.

I mean, everything we have on the subject actually argues the exact opposite.

But sure, you can pretend your viewpoint is fact.
---

Zikten posted...

averagejoel posted...

my daughter, Pumice, says she worries that adults often pretend their kids said things in order to add an emotional appeal to otherwise nonexistent points

It's true. Remember Columbine? The girl in the library that was asked if she believed in God and said yes and then was shot? Actual surviving witnesses say that never happened

Happens all the time. This was not a parent however the friend of Michael Brown said Michael was on his knees with his hands up
---

s0nicfan posted...

Medussa posted...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatricians

l o fucking l

How about this one?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697020/

The types of modulating influences that are known from the fields of developmental psychology and family dynamics have therapeutic implications for GID. As children with GID only rarely go on to have permanent transsexualism, irreversible physical interventions are clearly not indicated until after the individual’s psychosexual development ist complete.

it draws it's conclusions not from any people, but from other studies? and then, as far as I can see, not even cite which ones?

we already know one such researcher manipulated his data to sell his beliefs, and his name is all over the references. So, yeah, I'm not at all convinced this isn't misleading as well.
---

Sylph posted...

I remember that study about the schizophrenia medicine, and it wasn't even using actual trans patients. It was some whack job that got a confused patient, misidentified the problem, and then 'cured' it.

Oh, I don't remember actually arguing the point of being specifically a woman to you. I legally and socially am a woman, and I don't need internet validation to give me warm and fuzzies.

Now try to get me a study that tests how trans people do in a scenario where they aren't treated like shit, and get back to me. All your evidence points to is that at least 40% of trans women live in situations that are pretty awful at points.

If you happen to have some kind of cross-examination of the schizo study I'd love to see it, because I have no problem updating my opinions based on new science. I also don't expect to change your mind, nor would I want to, as you're free to believe you are whatever you think. Internet validation isn't going to give you warm fuzzies, but it also won't give you a functional womb.

As for your last point, if you want to offer a counter-study that isolates for those conditions feel free to provide one. I've provided evidence and at this point it's not my job to provide a perpetual stream of studies you're just going to ignore. In a real debate, when faced with real evidence, you either debunk it directly, or provide something of equal or greater validity.
---

Medussa posted...

it draws it's conclusions not from any people, but from other studies? and then, as far as I can see, not even cite which ones?

we already know one such researcher manipulated his data to sell his beliefs, and his name is all over the references. So, yeah, I'm not at all convinced this isn't misleading as well.

*shrugs* I was fine finding a different source because you didn't like the bias that the first host had, but if you're not going to accept studies from the NCBI (a well-respected branch of the NIH) either then no study is going to satisfy you. Feel free to believe whatever you want, just don't try claiming it's based on any science.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Medussa posted...

it draws it's conclusions not from any people, but from other studies? and then, as far as I can see, not even cite which ones?

we already know one such researcher manipulated his data to sell his beliefs, and his name is all over the references. So, yeah, I'm not at all convinced this isn't misleading as well.

*shrugs* I was fine finding a different source because you didn't like the bias that the first host had, but if you're not going to accept studies from the NCBI (a well-respected branch of the NIH) either then no study is going to satisfy you. Feel free to believe whatever you want, just don't try claiming it's based on any science.

1) you lost all credibility when you tried to pass that first steaming pile off as science.
2) NCBI never ever, not even once, posts things from biased sources? or things that other NBCI studies disagree with?

you found a source that told you what you wanted to hear. don't blame me when you ignore all the others that disagree with it, whether you go looking for them or not.
---

Medussa posted...

1) you lost all credibility when you tried to pass that first steaming pile off as science.
2) NCBI never ever, not even once, posts things from biased sources? or things that other NBCI studies disagree with?

1. The first was based on a quick google search. I knew the evidence was out there, I was just looking for a link. I had no idea they were a group with an agenda, which is why I even bothered looking a second time.

2. If you want to just disagree for the sake of it, fine, but you can't counter a study with "I don't like it" and then pretend your worldview is completely 100% correct and everyone should follow it.

EDIT: And if there's all this counter-evidence, provide it or fuck off. Otherwise your argument is based on nothing but your own vapid sense of self-importance.
---

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.
---

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).
---

Medussa posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Medussa posted...

it draws it's conclusions not from any people, but from other studies? and then, as far as I can see, not even cite which ones?

we already know one such researcher manipulated his data to sell his beliefs, and his name is all over the references. So, yeah, I'm not at all convinced this isn't misleading as well.

*shrugs* I was fine finding a different source because you didn't like the bias that the first host had, but if you're not going to accept studies from the NCBI (a well-respected branch of the NIH) either then no study is going to satisfy you. Feel free to believe whatever you want, just don't try claiming it's based on any science.

1) you lost all credibility when you tried to pass that first steaming pile off as science.
2) NCBI never ever, not even once, posts things from biased sources? or things that other NBCI studies disagree with?

you found a source that told you what you wanted to hear. don't blame me when you ignore all the others that disagree with it, whether you go looking for them or not.

He found THREE sources, and showed the actual data.

Kids aren't trans. Fucking deal with it.
---

"I am very concerned about what's being indoctrinated at school only when I want to indoctrinate them with my own beliefs first."
---

You basically ignored my point, which I sort of expected. There are no credible studies for trans suicide, since none of them actually rigorously isolate the reasons for it. Most of the ones used are done by religious nutjobs with an agenda, or are simply cases of misconstruing data from older studies and whatnot.

There hasn't been any sort of study done in the last few years, now that there are so many better options available to trans in the US. Stop taking your cues from totally irrelevant and obsolete information. But that wouldn't fit the narrative, now would it?
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

"I am very concerned about what's being indoctrinated at school only when I want to indoctrinate them with my own beliefs first."

How about no "indoctrination" at all?
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).

I readily admit that no good studies have ever been attempted. that doesn't mean the bad ones are valid.
---

Sylph posted...

You basically ignored my point, which I sort of expected. There are no credible studies for trans suicide, since none of them actually rigorously isolate the reasons for it. Most of the ones used are done by religious nutjobs with an agenda, or are simply cases of misconstruing data from older studies and whatnot.

There hasn't been any sort of study done in the last few years, now that there are so many better options available to trans in the US. Stop taking your cues from totally irrelevant and obsolete information. But that wouldn't fit the narrative, now would it?

Ya I'm like 90% sure he was referring to the brain mapping. Convient that he very briefly alluded to suicide rates and that was your sole focus.

Nice attempt to cherrypick though. It didn't work.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Ya I'm like 90% sure he was referring to the brain mapping and such not just the suicide rate.

Nice attempt to cherrypick though. It didn't work.

Really? Cause he mentioned the suicide rate multiple times over and over again to me.

Nice attempt at observation though. It didn't work.
---

YookaLaylee posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

"I am very concerned about what's being indoctrinated at school only when I want to indoctrinate them with my own beliefs first."

How about no "indoctrination" at all?

Not possible in an education system.

Indoctrination is a dirty word with a lot of malicious connotation behind it; but at the end of the day, the very act of growing up in a system necessarily requires that the youth be indoctrinated in the ways of their society by the adults. And school has never, ever been a place to simply learn facts (and it's arguable whether even learning "just the facts" falls outside the realm of what could be called "indoctrination").

That's why parents get mad at schools. They have things they do or don't want their children to believe or don't want them to know for whatever reason, and sometimes that doesn't mesh with what the school teaches.
---

Sylph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Ya I'm like 90% sure he was referring to the brain mapping and such not just the suicide rate.

Nice attempt to cherrypick though. It didn't work.

Really? Cause he mentioned the suicide rate multiple times over and over again to me.

Nice attempt at observation though. It didn't work.

Ya he mentioned plenty of other things multiple times. Why didn't you focus on any of those at all?

Cat got your tounge now?
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

Not possible in an education system.

Indoctrination is a dirty word with a lot of malicious connotation behind it; but at the end of the day, the very act of growing up in a system necessarily requires that the youth be indoctrinated in the ways of their society by the adults. And school has never, ever been a place to simply learn facts (and it's arguable whether even learning "just the facts" falls outside the realm of what could be called "indoctrination").

Bingo. And thus it is up to the parents to round out the education indoctrination. If you do not want your teachers to be the ones teaching a subject, get to it before it becomes a matter that they have to.
---

This should be part of sexual education in school, not freakin kindergarten.

Earlier you teach kids not to hate the better

These. Teach them too late and it'll be ineffective. The desired effect being fostering acceptance.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Ya he mentioned plenty of other things multiple times. Why didn't you focus on any of those at all?

Cat got your tounge now?

Do you have anything better to do than to try to play gotcha games? I'm not even talking to you, so maybe you should try something more constructive?
---

Lmao good job libruls, your bullshit is harming children.
---

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again
---

Sylph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Ya he mentioned plenty of other things multiple times. Why didn't you focus on any of those at all?

Cat got your tounge now?

Do you have anything better to do than to try to play gotcha games? I'm not even talking to you, so maybe you should try something more constructive?

"I can't refute the statement so instead I'll defend myself by saying I wasn't talking to you".

Accurate AF.
---

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again

What word do you suggest when talking about transgenders?
---

Medussa posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).

I readily admit that no good studies have ever been attempted. that doesn't mean the bad ones are valid.

So, you freely admit you have literally ZERO evidence of your claim.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Medussa posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).

I readily admit that no good studies have ever been attempted. that doesn't mean the bad ones are valid.

So, you freely admit you have literally ZERO evidence of your claim.

my claim is that your claims were bullshit. and they are. even if the study posted by sonic is right, you are still wrong. a high desistance rate is still not a 100% desistance rate, therefore trans kids do, in fact, exist
---

Medussa posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Medussa posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).

I readily admit that no good studies have ever been attempted. that doesn't mean the bad ones are valid.

So, you freely admit you have literally ZERO evidence of your claim.

my claim is that your claims were bullshit. and they are. even if the study posted by sonic is right, you are still wrong. a high desistance rate is still not a 100% desistance rate, therefore trans kids do, in fact, exist

Ya, idk what he's on about..
---

Bloodychess posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Bloodychess posted...

LBGT trying to indoctrinate them when they are young

Nope. Not at all what it's about.

You can lie through your teeth but that doesn't change anything

I don't have to lie. There is no logic behind what you claim.
---

JohnLennon6 posted...

How is this any different than forcing kids to be religious?

Let's start with the fact the forcing is forcing and not forcing is not forcing.
---

UncleBourbon33 posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

Medz2017 posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

Some of yall are fucking insane

Who and why?

Anyone and everyone crying about "indoctrination" or comparing this to ISIS should never breed

It is indoctrination to teach kindergartners about transgenderism.

The loony left

Again, no. This is just a blatantly incorrect statement.
---

JohnLennon6 posted...

UncleBourbon33 posted...

JohnLennon6 posted...

UncleBourbon33 posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

Medz2017 posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

Some of yall are fucking insane

Who and why?

Anyone and everyone crying about "indoctrination" or comparing this to ISIS should never breed

It is indoctrination to teach kindergartners about transgenderism.

The loony left

Is it indoctrination to force your kids to go to church?

No.

So you have no idea what you're talking about.

Wait... are we on the same side about something? Or am I just confused?
---

Medussa posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Medussa posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Medussa posted...

I didn't counter it with "I don't like it". I counted it with "what exactly are they basing this conclusion on?" because, i can't find it, and what few leads it gives don't exactly paint a flattering picture.

But like the others in this topic you still didn't provide any counter evidence or do anything to debunk his claims aside from claiming the source was bad (while providing unsubstantiated claims as to why).

I readily admit that no good studies have ever been attempted. that doesn't mean the bad ones are valid.

So, you freely admit you have literally ZERO evidence of your claim.

my claim is that your claims were bullshit. and they are. even if the study posted by sonic is right, you are still wrong. a high desistance rate is still not a 100% desistance rate, therefore trans kids do, in fact, exist

Prove it with evidence.
---

1) you first. you made the claim.
2) sonic literally just did.
---

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again

What word do you suggest when talking about transgenders?

try "transgender people"
---

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again

What word do you suggest when talking about transgenders?

try "transgender people"

I know someone who is transgender people
---

Ugh this madness has to stop.
---

You want to install good values in people as early as possible, and one of those good values is tolerance for people who are different than you. The only reason why people are against this is cuz they didn't ever have those values instilled in them and turned out to be vindictive.

All y'all who want to "protect children" from trans people have greater emotional sickness than anyone with gender dysphoria.
---

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again

What word do you suggest when talking about transgenders?

try "transgender people"

I know someone who is transgender people

reread the post. "transgender" is an adjective, not a noun
---

MangaFan462 posted...

Ugh this madness has to stop.

You mean people getting offended over nothing?

I completely agree.
---

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

read the last sentence of the post again

What word do you suggest when talking about transgenders?

try "transgender people"

I know someone who is transgender people

reread the post. "transgender" is an adjective, not a noun

I know someone. They are transgender people.
---

Does anyone even know what DJL is trying to argue?
---

Yeah the teacher overstepped her bounds. Especially with children as young as this. She should be fired for not asking for permission.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

Yeah the teacher overstepped her bounds. Especially with children as young as this. She should be fired for not asking for permission.

Nah, she should get teacher of the month. =)

Medz2017 posted...

averagejoel posted...

ok I know there are bigger problems with trans acceptance, but can people not use "transgenderism"? that implies transgender people are subscribing to some sort of ideology

and maybe, while you're at it, don't use "transgender" as a noun - it's like referring to black people as "the blacks". dehumanizing to reduce people to one aspect of their identity

It is official. Using transgender while referring to transgender people is transphobic

I think averagejoel is really subtle gimmick account designed to make far-left liberals look insane.
---