I'm simply pointing out that if you want to use psychiatry to legitimize derision towards these people then you could just as easily use psychiatry to legitimize the equitable treatment of these people, being that gender reassignment is one treatment option.

 

What other treatment exposes children to issues they probably shouldn't be exposed to , meaning the classmates ?

 

So if you are a parent of a daughter who is of elementary or middle school age and don't what your child exposed to a boy changing next her who thinks he's a girl. You should have no recourse ?

 

 

 

I j

Related: Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

I'm simply pointing out that if you want to use psychiatry to legitimize derision towards these people then you could just as easily use psychiatry to legitimize the equitable treatment of these people, being that gender reassignment is one treatment option.

 

I also just want to point out how insane our priorities have become. Our Justice Department is now telling us it's a Civil Rights violation to tell a boy he must use the boys locker room. Read that back to yourself a few times.

 

It's against the law to tell a BOY to use the Boy's locker room.

Related: Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

 

The most interesting study from that article was from Vanderbilt. 80% of children who say they are Transgender spontaneously stop.

 

If that is that case why as a society would we promote it by allowing boys to go in a girls locker room?

12 pages on what bathroom someone should use. Let this sink in. 12 pages.

What other treatment exposes children to issues they probably shouldn't be exposed to , meaning the classmates ?

 

So if you are a parent of a daughter who is of elementary or middle school age and don't what your child exposed to a boy changing next her who thinks he's a girl. You should have no recourse ?

 

 

 

I j

 

I'm pointing out if you're going to jump in and say that these people are mentally ill because "science" says so and are therefore deserving of pariah status that it's just as reasonable that you'd support gender reassignment therapy as legitimate because "science" prescribes it.

 

rjs4470 has exhaustively explained the superfluity of this new law. It's a solution in search of a problem. I'm inclined to believe the law's existence is owed not to any real problem stemming from transgenderism, but because the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell eliminated a reliable election-year issue and politicians are in search of a replacement. With gay marriage off the table, transgender dignity is the new wedge issue.

 

The controversy and civil rights implications surrounding this new law are that it criminalizes a daily function of transgender individuals. If you believe that transgender is a legitimate identity - and one endorsed by psychiatrists, which you seem to revere as the representatives of "science" - then a law that singles them out makes them unequal. Most of the rationalizations for this new law are hyperbole (that men will pretend to be transgender to commit felonies?), but even in messier cases like a middle school locker room I don't believe anyone would ask for anything other than reasonable accommodation rather than a rigid adherence to a new black and white rule.

Edited May 12, 201610 yr by Habib

I'm pointing out if you're going to jump in and say that these people are mentally ill because "science" says so and are therefore deserving of pariah status that it's just as reasonable that you'd support gender reassignment therapy as legitimate because "science" prescribes it.

 

rjs4470 has exhaustively explained the superfluity of this new law. It's a solution in search of a problem. I'm inclined to believe the law's existence is owned not to any real problem stemming from transgenderism, but because the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell eliminated a reliable election-year issue and politicians are in search of a replacement. With gay marriage off the table, transgender dignity is the new wedge issue.

 

The controversy and civil rights implications surrounding this new law are that it criminalizes a daily function of transgender individuals. If you believe that transgender is a legitimate identity - and one endorsed by psychiatrists, which you seem to revere as the representatives of "science" - then a law that singles them out makes them unequal. Most of the rationalizations for this new law are hyperbole (that men will pretend to be transgender to commit felonies?), but even in messier cases like a middle school locker room I don't believe anyone would ask for anything other than reasonable accommodation rather than a rigid adherence to a new black and white rule.

 

But again pointing to your second paragraph it's flawed. I don't believe anyone is searching for a new problem. There were and are actual examples posted of the federal government telling school districts they must allow boys to enter a girls locker room.

 

So I'm confused entirely by your point. These laws were not spontaneously created that is the fallacy of your post and others . These laws for better or not were created because pepole want others to to accept that all genders should go to the same restroom.

 

So again if you have a daughter are you cool with it.

12 pages on what bathroom someone should use. Let this sink in. 12 pages.

 

I was thinking the same thing the other day when it hit 10 pages... Very surprising

^ That's because it's the new wedge issue, as Habib correctly pointed out.

I'm pointing out if you're going to jump in and say that these people are mentally ill because "science" says so and are therefore deserving of pariah status that it's just as reasonable that you'd support gender reassignment therapy as legitimate because "science" prescribes it.

 

rjs4470 has exhaustively explained the superfluity of this new law. It's a solution in search of a problem. I'm inclined to believe the law's existence is owed not to any real problem stemming from transgenderism, but because the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell eliminated a reliable election-year issue and politicians are in search of a replacement. With gay marriage off the table, transgender dignity is the new wedge issue.

 

The controversy and civil rights implications surrounding this new law are that it criminalizes a daily function of transgender individuals. If you believe that transgender is a legitimate identity - and one endorsed by psychiatrists, which you seem to revere as the representatives of "science" - then a law that singles them out makes them unequal. Most of the rationalizations for this new law are hyperbole (that men will pretend to be transgender to commit felonies?), but even in messier cases like a middle school locker room I don't believe anyone would ask for anything other than reasonable accommodation rather than a rigid adherence to a new black and white rule.

 

What is unreasonable about males using male facilities and females using female facilities?

What is unreasonable about males using male facilities and females using female facilities?

 

EQUALITY!!!!!!

 

See my new thread concerning the possible re-transitioning of Jenner. Is gender now fluid?

EQUALITY!!!!!!

 

 

Nothing more equal than the same facilities for men and women.

Nothing more equal than the same facilities for men and women.

 

I was being sarcastic. In no way, shape or form should there be shared bathrooms.

I'm feeling a bit fluid today. Think I'll try using a ladies room.