< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

American Booksellers Assoc. vs. “Irreversible Damage, The Transgender Craze Seducing our Daughters”

 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  1903
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:19
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:10 PM
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 02:04 PM

The age of consent is an arbitrary number.

The age of consent is not arbitrary. It is well established in law. It is designed to protect children who do not yet possess the critical faculties to make life altering and lasting decisions.

Your argument is becoming absurd.

Is the age of consent the same everywhere?  We already know it isn’t.  In Mississippi, it’s 18 (though it increases to 21 for HIV and AIDS treatments).

Please, tell me the objective and verifiable reason why the age of consent SHOULD be 15 in Oregon, but 18 in Mississippi.  Explain to us how these are NOT arbitrary numbers.  Also, why does Mississippi specifically increase the age for HIV and AIDS medical care?  What is the objective fact that explains this?

[ Edited: 23 July 2021 14:24 by weird buffalo]
 
mapadofu
 
Avatar
 
 
mapadofu
Total Posts:  1262
Joined  20-07-2017
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:23
 

The is a big difference between something varying between jurisdictions and a thing being arbitrary.

 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1923
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:25
 
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 02:19 PM
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:10 PM
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 02:04 PM

The age of consent is an arbitrary number.

The age of consent is not arbitrary. It is well established in law. It is designed to protect children who do not yet possess the critical faculties to make life altering and lasting decisions.

Your argument is becoming absurd.

Is the age of consent the same everywhere?

I’m not a lawyer. I’m sure it varies from country to country.

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

 
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  1903
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:26
 
mapadofu - 23 July 2021 02:23 PM

The is a big difference between something varying between jurisdictions and a thing being arbitrary.

For this to be true, there would have to be a demonstrable variable that isn’t just a cultural standard.  If the explanation ends at “cultural norms”... that’s really just a different way of saying “arbitrary”.  There’s not verifiable variable that is being demonstrated, other than “that’s what people decided”.

 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  2213
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:30
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 01:57 PM
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 01:50 PM

You can get WPATH’s standards of care here. If you’d like to read them yourself.  The criteria for hormone therapy that they propose has 4 criteria:

Initiation of hormone therapy may be undertaken after a psychosocial assessment has been
conducted and informed consent has been obtained by a qualified health professional, as outlined
in section VII of the SOC. A referral is required from the mental health professional who performed
the assessment, unless the assessment was done by a hormone provider who is also qualified in
this area.

1. Persistent, well-documented gender dysphoria;
2. Capacity to make a fully informed decision and to consent for treatment;
3. Age of majority in a given country (if younger, follow the SOC outlined in section VI);
4. If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be reasonably wellcontrolled.

Is there a part of this that you think is bad?  The medical profession itself has routine and constant oversight.  We also have lots of rules for how to sue doctors for malpractice, so if parents believe that a doctor is mistreating their child in regards to gender counseling, they can always avail themselves for malpractice.

If I get booted from these forums for calling out obvious transphobic behavior, I have zero issues with that.

The age of medical consent is 15 in Oregon.

Do you think you were mature enough to make a major decision about changing your sex at that age?

I guess the moderators are napping.

I hadn’t thought of this before. But perhaps you are only fifteen years old.

With your name calling and pouting, you certainly act like it.

The mods will go on their way, of course.

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  8255
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:34
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent…

Informed Legal Medical Consent.  As I have repeated.

Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

...and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

Signing off on therapy? As in performing it on minors without that Informed Legal Medical Consent? Doubtful.  Especially in the United States of Litigation.

They’d have their pants sued off of them by distraught families if they were actually bypassing consent laws, and would probably have their license to practice removed for violation of medical ethics regarding those bypasses.

But if you have evidence of ‘a fairly large amount of cover-their-asses doctors’ going ahead with non-consensual medical therapy for under-age minors, feel free to present it.  I’m sure there are conservative lawyers and politicians out there hungry to start that litigative discovery chain.

 
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  1903
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:35
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 02:19 PM
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:10 PM
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 02:04 PM

The age of consent is an arbitrary number.

The age of consent is not arbitrary. It is well established in law. It is designed to protect children who do not yet possess the critical faculties to make life altering and lasting decisions.

Your argument is becoming absurd.

Is the age of consent the same everywhere?

I’m not a lawyer. I’m sure it varies from country to country.

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

I agree it varies by country/state.  Why are children able to consent at age 15 in Oregon, but not until 18 in Mississippi?  Referring to the law as the reason for why the law is what it is… would be a circular argument.  The law itself cannot explain why the age of consent is that number.  The law cannot explain why the law exists.  Since everyone concerned is the same species, there’s no evidence that I am aware of that children in Oregon age faster than in Mississippi.  In fact, if we were to base the age of consent on biological evidence, it is much more likely that it would be either 12 or 25-28.  At the age of 12, the majority of people have the full capacity to reason as an adult does (neurologically speaking).  And then the next milestone is at the age of 25-28 is when most people finish developing their brain.  Since, neither of those ages are the age of consent, and the age of consent varies from 15-18 for most states (and up to 21 for certain issues), with no basis in biological science, then I feel justified in calling that number arbitrary.

And of course, if you argue that people should not be allowed to have ANY sort of gender confirming therapy until age 25, then you are mandating that everyone must undergo uncontrolled puberty, which has life-altering effects on the body.  You are on the side of the government making medical decisions for people, and in this case, as a way of erasing trans-identities by making it far more difficult for people to transition if they should choose.  They would then have to make much more difficult medical choices, including a lot more surgery that would be necessary to undo the effects of puberty.

[ Edited: 23 July 2021 14:38 by weird buffalo]
 
mapadofu
 
Avatar
 
 
mapadofu
Total Posts:  1262
Joined  20-07-2017
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:40
 

It depends on the statistical mental characteristics of people.  Young people, especially very young people think differently from older, especially very old, people (this is a statistical statement).  This is an objective fact about the world even though we don’t, to my knowledge, have precise psychometric measures to numerically characterize it. 

Another reason why it is not arbitrary is because it is related to exactly the same physical phenomenon that motivates a few people to want to start their transition early: puberty.  In most places, for most things, the legal age limit is set such that most people have completed or mostly completed going through puberty.

So it is not arbitrary.

If it were arbitrary there would be no reason not to set it at 5, or 35.  Ages that are absurd given human biology.

 
mapadofu
 
Avatar
 
 
mapadofu
Total Posts:  1262
Joined  20-07-2017
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:46
 

Referring back to a post by Cheshire a while back.

There are a whole host of decisions I or anyone else could make at the age of 15 that would have life altering consequences.  Things that come to mind are drinking and driving and having unprotected sex.  So, whether we like it or not, some 15 year olds are already making irrevocable decisions.

 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1923
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
23 July 2021 14:46
 
Jefe - 23 July 2021 02:34 PM
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent…

Informed Legal Medical Consent.  As I have repeated.

Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

...and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

Signing off on therapy? As in performing it on minors without that Informed Legal Medical Consent? Doubtful.  Especially in the United States of Litigation.

They’d have their pants sued off of them by distraught families if they were actually bypassing consent laws, and would probably have their license to practice removed for violation of medical ethics regarding those bypasses.

But if you have evidence of ‘a fairly large amount of cover-their-asses doctors’ going ahead with non-consensual medical therapy for under-age minors, feel free to present it.  I’m sure there are conservative lawyers and politicians out there hungry to start that litigative discovery chain.

Weird is saying that the age of medical consent is arbitrary. He is in favor of puberty blocking therapy at age 12 or 13. He is in favor of this.

If the age of medical consent is arbitrary, and he wants children to get puberty blockers, then he must be in favor of the medical age of consent being lowered to 12.

This is a horrifying idea to me.

You keep mentioning “Informed Legal Medical Consent.” I have a general idea of what you are talking about, but I’d be interested in knowing what you mean exactly.

[ Edited: 23 July 2021 14:48 by Cheshire Cat]
 
 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1923
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
23 July 2021 15:05
 
mapadofu - 23 July 2021 02:46 PM

Referring back to a post by Cheshire a while back.

There are a whole host of decisions I or anyone else could make at the age of 15 that would have life altering consequences.  Things that come to mind are drinking and driving and having unprotected sex.  So, whether we like it or not, some 15 year olds are already making irrevocable decisions.

You are right.

And this only proves that adolescents make notoriously bad decisions. That’s why the law sets age limits so as to protect them. It is protecting them from self harm.

Taking powerful sex hormones as an adolescent to alter your sex should not be taken lightly, and it certainly should not done in a self-administered way.

 
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  1903
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
23 July 2021 15:07
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:46 PM
Jefe - 23 July 2021 02:34 PM
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent…

Informed Legal Medical Consent.  As I have repeated.

Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

...and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

Signing off on therapy? As in performing it on minors without that Informed Legal Medical Consent? Doubtful.  Especially in the United States of Litigation.

They’d have their pants sued off of them by distraught families if they were actually bypassing consent laws, and would probably have their license to practice removed for violation of medical ethics regarding those bypasses.

But if you have evidence of ‘a fairly large amount of cover-their-asses doctors’ going ahead with non-consensual medical therapy for under-age minors, feel free to present it.  I’m sure there are conservative lawyers and politicians out there hungry to start that litigative discovery chain.

Weird is saying that the age of medical consent is arbitrary. He is in favor of puberty blocking therapy at age 12 or 13. He is in favor of this.

If the age of medical consent is arbitrary, and he wants children to get puberty blockers, then he must be in favor of the medical age of consent being lowered to 12.

This is a horrifying idea to me.

You keep mentioning “Informed Legal Medical Consent.” I have a general idea of what you are talking about, but I’d be interested in knowing what you mean exactly.

Yes, I am in favor of people having access to puberty blockers at the age of 13, and those blockers should be prescribed by a medical profession who is providing long term consultation and care.  The fact that this HORRIFIES you is disgusting.  Why?  Because that HORROR is transphobic bigotry.

[ Edited: 23 July 2021 15:11 by weird buffalo]
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  8255
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
23 July 2021 15:08
 
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:46 PM
Jefe - 23 July 2021 02:34 PM
Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

But I’m pretty certain that no country exists that allows a child to take puberty blocking drugs without parental consent…

Informed Legal Medical Consent.  As I have repeated.

Cheshire Cat - 23 July 2021 02:25 PM

...and a fairly large amount of cover-your-ass medical experts signing off on it.

Signing off on therapy? As in performing it on minors without that Informed Legal Medical Consent? Doubtful.  Especially in the United States of Litigation.

They’d have their pants sued off of them by distraught families if they were actually bypassing consent laws, and would probably have their license to practice removed for violation of medical ethics regarding those bypasses.

But if you have evidence of ‘a fairly large amount of cover-their-asses doctors’ going ahead with non-consensual medical therapy for under-age minors, feel free to present it.  I’m sure there are conservative lawyers and politicians out there hungry to start that litigative discovery chain.

Weird is saying that the age of medical consent is arbitrary. He is in favor of puberty blocking therapy at age 12 or 13. He is in favor of this.

If the age of medical consent is arbitrary, and he wants children to get puberty blockers, then he must be in favor of the medical age of consent being lowered to 12.

This is a horrifying idea to me.

You keep mentioning “Informed Legal Medical Consent.” I have a general idea of what you are talking about, but I’d be interested in knowing what you mean exactly.

Informed:  Knowing the consequences and understanding the lasting ramifications of any medical procedure. People who are non compos mentis (not of sound mind) are often excluded from being able to be informed.  People with psychological problems, senility, under the effects of drugs or alcohol, minors, etc… are often considered unable to be ‘informed’ from a legal perspective.

Legal: Consent must be provided by either a person at the age of majority, a legal guardian, or other person(s) able to grant permission for permanent, life changing therapy.  There are a variety of reasons for this, but the simple reason is that it prevents exploitation of people under duress or altered states of mind.

Medical: Doctors must conform to medical ethics that are overseen by legal and professional organizations, and those that do not are often stripped of their license to practice medicine, and also subject to litigatory action for violating ethics and laws created to enforce those ethics.  (See Andrew Wakefield as an example of a medical doctor who violated medical ethics and was stripped of his ability to practice medicine in the UK.)  Medical practitioners are often held stringently to their oaths and ethics.

Consent: It’s no good for a person to verbally consent to a permanent life-altering medical procedure or therapy. Frequently documentation and procedural history are required before a medical establishment will perform or prescribe any sort of medical therapy with lasting effects on a person.  It is very unlikely that a medical professional will engage in, perform or prescribe any potentially permanent treatments to someone without all of the above being in place.  The public, professional and legal ramifications are non-trivial for those to violate these trusts.

Initiation of hormone therapy may be undertaken after a psychosocial assessment has been
conducted and informed consent has been obtained by a qualified health professional, as outlined
in section VII of the SOC. A referral is required from the mental health professional who performed
the assessment, unless the assessment was done by a hormone provider who is also qualified in
this area.

1. Persistent, well-documented gender dysphoria;
2. Capacity to make a fully informed decision and to consent for treatment;
3. Age of majority in a given country (if younger, follow the SOC outlined in section VI);
4. If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be reasonably wellcontrolled.

In the referenced quote above, all four of these factors must be demonstrable - including ‘Persistent, well documented dysphoria…’.
So it is a non-trivial thing for hormone therapy to begin.

Hope that helps. 

EN may or may not correct me if I’ve mis-stated something here.  He has a complimentary background to this legal ethics stuff…

As to the whole ‘13 year olds…’ line of thought - I think it becomes a factor of all four items above, and is not a trivial decision for those involved.  I’d be surprised if there weren’t strict requirements for documentation, counselling and consent behind any person not at the age of majority to undergo medical treatment.  And the fact is, these things are expensive, so not many minors are going to have the means to proceed without grants or guardian-level-help, anyway.

[ Edited: 23 July 2021 15:20 by Jefe]
 
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  1903
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
23 July 2021 15:27
 

And still, the underlying argument for why this is bad… is that being trans is bad.  The argument that we cannot allow children to seek the help of medical professionals is at it’s core transphobic.  Cheshire’s concern is that the child might be making a life-altering mistake.  Why is being trans a “mistake”?

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  8255
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
23 July 2021 15:31
 
weird buffalo - 23 July 2021 03:27 PM

And still, the underlying argument for why this is bad… is that being trans is bad.  The argument that we cannot allow children to seek the help of medical professionals is at it’s core transphobic.  Cheshire’s concern is that the child might be making a life-altering mistake.  Why is being trans a “mistake”?

In the current ‘prudish kinda-protestant/kinda-catholic’ culture, it seems to be.  Some cultures have treated their two-spirit folks with more respect and dignity.

 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 >