Insanity

It's a helluva lot worse than that. Those kids are gonna know somethng's wrong from the moment they can make out their "parents'" faces, if not before.

I've already provided more facts than are necessary to anyone with a lick of sense. You're welcome.

That makes one of us.

I'll take your word for it, but it's only impresssive to the gullible.

 

I’m speaking of 6-10 year olds. They tease any chance they get. What you call novel others call irrational. It’s pretty difficult to consider a lifestyle “novel” when that lifestyle warrants a suicide rate 5700% higher than average.

The suicide rate among transgender adults in an international study was almost 800 per 100,000. In comparison, the suicide rate in the U.S. for all people is 14 per 100,000.

 

They are trying to make their respective lives normal even with their uniqueness, They are still human beings with special characteristics and special needs. For us straights they are quite odd but same as our face almost all of us do share the same countenance. All of us are still quite different.

 

Kneejerk denialism does not alter FACTUAL REALITY one iota!

 

The LBGT people are NOT the cause of YOUR PROBLEM.

If STRAIGHT people would just CEASE and DESIST from giving birth to LBGT children there would no longer be any problem for you to be upset about.

So YOU need to sort out all of those STRAIGHT people that are CAUSING YOUR PROBLEM.

 

The problem stems from the BIGOTED parents who brainwashed their own children into believing that BULLYING other kids "makes the world a better place".

 

Did it ever occur to you that BULLYING is a major cause of SUICIDE?

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying-suicide-translation-final-a.pdf

The ANTISOCIAL BULLIES are the PROBLEM, not the kids who are being maltreated by them.

 

Excuse me but to quote your previous comment regarding my query about what facts you had to support your case. 'Doesn't matter whether I can or not, because it's true.' So you have facts now? That's a turn-a-round, please bring them on.

Also your selective quoting of my comments is becoming almost childish. You want to refute my arguments? Very well then 'man up' and refute them in their entirety. Show some intellectual integrity for once, do the work and refute the point being made in its entirety. Don't select the odd one word here and there because its easier. Not only is it intellectually lazy it demeans your own side of the argument.

See the above

So, to be clear you regard the collective opinion of the Worlds medical profession as 'only impressive to the gullible.' I can only assume that (again) this is because professional or academic opinions that oppose your world view are irrelevant - given (also again) because your knowledge of the subject is greater than the collective knowledge of the worlds medical professionals.Good to know.

As an aside what exactly are your qualifications in mental health (other than as potential case study that is)?

 

Too bad you didn't apply that idea when you voted for president.

 

it's sad that kids get wrapped up in this insanity but it doesn't keep that child from becoming a good and productive member of society, it just makes it harder

 

Are you referring to Trump and his offspring?
I didn't know the poor guy had AIDS besides.

 

Well it didn't involved an invisible God impregnating an unwed teen girl...

 

I understand we will soon have to technology to weed out LBGT fetuses.

 

Links?

 

Will get asap.

 

Here you go. The first is a meta study which shows a smaller % about .04% which is lower than the .06 I quoted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5227946/

The second is to a NYT article reporting on a 2016 study that claimed a rate almost double other research. This article has a link to the study in question.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/health/transgender-population.html

This second was the figure I quoted - but only because it quoted the largest figure I found (most were in the .03-.04% range.) As such it set an upper limit on the possuble number of the type of relationships under discussion.

 

I had them from the beginning, as you know perfectly well.

Dunno who the hell you think you're kidding.

You're entitled to that opinion, but it's not interesting.

I'm not nearly gullible enough to attend to every imbecility I encounter, so I offer my most insincere apologies for any inconvenience.

Show me how.

As to the opinion cited by you, no sane person can do otherwise, obviously.

You're under the impression, perhaps, that Galileo's knowledge was greater than the collective knowledge of the religionists of his day? Of course not. He just knew a few things they found inconvenient.

I'm not insane, which makes me infinitely more qualified than any idiot who thinks "transgender" people are competent to rear children. You're welcome.

 

NCBI concludes increase in trans among young portion of the population, those numbers will drop when the next cool thing comes along. I don't do the NYT not a reliable source but makes a great liner for a litter box.

 

Yere, in fairness to the NYT though regardless of what you think of their politics they can generally get their facts strait when reporting on studies done by various. scientific bodies etc. Either way the the % of trans in the community is small. The percentage raising kids smaller still. So as I noted previously whether they do a good job or bad such families will always be statistical outliers.

 

Maybe so but there shouldn't be even one child used as a guinea pig in such perverse experiments.

 

The same goes for kids and religion they should be older and not be brainwashed with religion as an indoctrination to collect followers.

 

We let millions of families with documented histories of domestic violence, addiction and mental health issues etc raise children. How many of those 'experiments' work out well?

In this case until such time as we see the results no-one will know. Could be bad, could be good. If pushed IMO the best yardstick would probably be an analysis of outcomes re; children raised in gay households and I don't know if anyone has done that yet. And even then if there do turn out to be significant negative consequences for children raised by such families they will be dealt with by local community services the same as other cases. Yeah (not)!

In the end it comes down to the simple fact that there are a whole lot of people out there who have children and probably shouldn't and just as bad a whole lot of people who would make wonderful parents but can't have any. (Life sucks.) I can see where the fact one or both members of the family are trans may have negative/adverse impacts on a child but again it might not. It will all come down to the attitude of and example set by the individual parents. Hopefully if they are raising a 'gendered' child (i.e. one who actively expresses a preference for one particular gender from an early age through play and behavior etc) they will be astute enough not to try to force that child into living a 'trans gender life.' i.e do the child exactly what so many trans state society has tried to do to them.

Again and sorry to be repetitive on this point - only time will tell.

 

So I went back and checked your posts on this topic from the beginning. Surprise, surprise, nada, zip, nil, facts. Following that more put downs and insults rather than addressing the points I raised (as always apparently). And then we come to....

A false equivalency. Galileo, as a self trained expert in astronomy was subjected to 'trial' by a group of non-experts in that field with strong religious, political and economic agendas that favored finding him guilty regardless of any facts/observations mustered in his defense. The question of whether or not trans gendered people are by default clinically insane (your claim as a lay person) has been judged by a 'jury' of the worlds clinically trained medical professionals. There may be a tiny minority of psychologists / psychiatrists who disagree but if so they haven't put forward a case and can therefore be discounted. So once again we are back to 'you' know better than all the experts in the field' which seems to be your default position in the case of physics and mathematics etc (based on past posts on other topics) whenever someone threatens your world view.

Perhaps, but given the above you might want to get yourself checked out for symptoms of grandiose delusions and/or illusory superiority etc. (You can check out the definitions if you want). If nothing else unless you exercise caution you might be well on your way to becoming the poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger effect and nobody wants to be that. So look after yourself.

 

I don't suppose it occurs to you that the same can be said for children reared by pedophiles.

lol

On the contrary, they were the recognized experts of the day. Didn't bother reading the rest of the paragraph, but experience indicates it may be confidently written off as pure drivel anyway.

The vision of the one-eyed man is superior to that of any who refuse to open their eyes. Deal.