The costs of trans visibility
Yesterday, Dylan Mulvaney broke her silence: https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/vi....
For context, this is a trans influencer who built a 10 million strong following on TikTok. She took a brand deal with budweiser to post an ad on an instagram, and the anti-trans right went absolutely ballistic, calling for a boycott, condemning the company, and to some perhaps unknowable degree it influenced that Budweiser sales dropped by a 1/4 and
. Dylan speaks more personally about the effect of the hatred on her.
What strikes me about this story is that it is just about visibility. This isn't inclusion in sports or gender-affirming care for minors, it was just that a trans person was visible. This wasn't even visibility in a TV commerical that a poor right-winger is forced to see, it was an ad on her own instagram page. We're all in our own social media algorithm influenced bubbles, but from my vantage point it really has seemed that in the last year or so things have just gotten worse for trans people and the backlash to even minor visibility is growing.
We need to do better.
No, my point there are choices that are transparently exceptionally less relevant for life outcomes, and requiring less maturity than permanently modifying your own body parts and internal chemistry, that we don't allow to minors.
You didn't give examples of minors able to get a beer in normal settings without parental approval.
And the tatoo thing still stands (and it's a minor body modification at that).
It's incredible to take arms against
No, I think your focus on the bright line age rule applying to every decision of a minor is just simplistic and stupid, given that it doesn't even exist in the manner you believe.
People need to make medical decisions that may have a permanent effect all the time, independent of their age. We trust the patient, their family and their treating doctors to arrive at the best decision in every (?) other case. But regarding this one area, you inexplicably believe you know better than the patient, their family and doctors, without ever any explanation but "we need save the children from evil money making doctors."
You offer no acceptable alternative other than bans or criminalization as if such a simplistic and relatively unilateral answer could possibly be the actual solution to such a complex problem.
I know what you mean. My high school girlfriend had a breast reduction surgery when she was 17. It was the most traumatic medical event I suffered through as a minor. Imagine her nerve, not wanting back pain for the rest of her life.
No, I think your focus on the bright line age rule applying to every decision of a minor is just simplistic and stupid, given that it doesn't even exist in the manner you believe.
People need to make medical decisions that may have a permanent effect all the time, independent of their age. We trust the patient, their family and their treating doctors to arrive at the best decision in every (?) other case. But regarding this one area, y
My alternative solution is to wait, given it's not a medical emergency that requires fast intervetion.
And btw no i don't trust doctors in "any other case" as well lol. But at least if all civilized countries did X for decades there is a decent chance X isn't too terrible. As i said anyway i am against aestethical surgery to minors as well.
The problem is made complex by a tragicomical set of beliefs that were recently invented by the radical left.
We were all young and most of us never met a single kid who believed consistently he was of the opposite sex in our life when young. It's an exceptional rare condition, and it's exceptionally rare to appear before puberty.
We could totally disregard the issue before puberty in the totality of the population and the affected people (ie the people suffering from our total disregard of purported pre-puberal trans-ness) would be a fraction of the people who are pushed toward trans ness as prepuberal homosexuals, suffering immensely in the process.
The left "research" about the existence of abundant numbers of pre puberal trans is all fraud. They made up the concept. It almost never existed before. There is no problem to solve other that stop inventing the idea that a 8 y old can be trans, and stop acting to "affirm" that folly.
During and after puberty a tiny, very small amount of people might feel their body doesn't reflect at all what they think of themselves as persons. That can happen. It's not even a medical condition until and unless that feeling becomes damaging to quality of life. Unfortunately that often happens (in those very rare cases), so it's acceptable for them to recur to physicians to alter their body toward something that resembles their own self identity more. But those modifications will create them a lot of problems in life anyway, and a "full transition" isn't necessarily what they need to feel good. Given each case is different, i am not going to tell them what would be optimal for them, because i don't know and i can't know. Nor can doctors.
I will let them be free to investigate the matter and self modify their bodies, but that's about it. And only when they are fully mature to take those decisions. If we want an age of consent that varies depending on the nature of the maturity required (ie some things we allow at 14, some at 16 and so on), permanent self body modification for mental health issues should be like the last thing we allow, the one requiring the most maturity.
So a survey that published it's results and methods to allow anyone who cares to critically evaluate the validity is a worse scientific method than *checks notes* your memory of a TV show you once saw that did a show of hands.
Okay.
The difference is that the page you linked to has headlines and talking points that claim that those percentages pertain to all the American students. Online polls are notoriously bad at being scientific samples of any population because the participants self select themselves, among other problems.
In my example no claim was made byme or the speaker at the seminar as that result being representative of any other population than the people in that room. That's the big difference.
In my example no claim was made byme or the speaker at the seminar as that result being representative of any other population than the people in that room. That's the big difference.
Then what was the point you were trying to make? "Oh hey, here's a room full of people that thought this"?
My point was that Luciom's belief that we have a bright line rule that kids don't get to make their own choices until they are eighteen is incorrect. He keeps saying why should we let them making choices about their bodies when we won't let them drink a beer or get a tattoo. I gave four examples of them being able to drink a beer, obtain meds, have medical procedure, input where they live despite them being below that age. He had alrea
I have knowledge and cited a reference, which you could not do.
You are absolutely wrong about your main point - minors cannot do any of those things in the US without parental permission. If you want to claim any different, you're going to need to back it up.
Becoming emancipated would allow a minor to do some of these things, but those are extremely rare and generally only done for young actors or pop stars so they can make a lot of money.
There isn't an economic incentive for the treatment providers. Doctors get paid the same amount whether they write a prescription or not. Psychologists and other mental health providers get paid the same amount whether they suggest one thing or another. School staff are salaried and there isn't a shortage of kids with all sorts of problems to keep them busy.
I don't know if it happens for these drugs but doctors have often gotten lots of gifts and other incentives from drug manufacturers for pushing certain medications. That's what the whole controversy about the overuse of addictive painkillers was about.
I know what you mean. My high school girlfriend had a breast reduction surgery when she was 17. It was the most traumatic medical event I suffered through as a minor. Imagine her nerve, not wanting back pain for the rest of her life.
I don't think that should be allowed for minors either. One year is not the rest of her life.
I don't know if it happens for these drugs but doctors have often gotten lots of gifts and other incentives from drug manufacturers for pushing certain medications. That's what the whole controversy about the overuse of addictive painkillers was about.
They are generic drugs so this particular concern is somewhere between zero and non-existent.
I don't think that should be allowed for minors either. One year is not the rest of her life.
And again you prove my point. Nobody cares about your opinion. She made the decision with her parents and medical providers. You were never even a consideration. The only difference is there is no posse of bigots to join you in preventing big breasted teens from having reduction surgeries.
You are absolutely wrong about your main point - minors cannot do any of those things in the US without parental permission. If you want to claim any different, you're going to need to back it up.
I can only easily speak to the ability of a minor to consent to certain medical care in New Jersey, so I don't know if this is just an exception (in terms of activity and state) or just an example of something more broad.
https://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/nxt/gatewa...
"The consent to the provision of medical or surgical care [...] when executed by a minor who is or believes that he or she may have a sexually transmitted infection [...] shall be valid and binding as if the minor had achieved the age of majority."
"When a minor believes that he or she is adversely affected by a substance use disorder [...] the minor's consent to treatment [...] shall be valid and binding as if the minor had achieved the age of majority."
"When a minor who is sixteen years of age or older believes that he or she is in need of behavioral health care services for the treatment of mental illness or emotional disorders, the minor's consent to temporary outpatient treatment, excluding the use or administration of medication, [...] shall be valid and binding as if the minor had achieved the age of majority."
Note that no age is actually listed for a minor to consent to their own treatment for a suspected STI or substance use disorder. Of course, it's always up to the discretion of the doctor whether or not to involve the parents, but the law allows the treatment to be kept confidential from parents.
So would you ban teachers to suggest to a kid they might be trans, if they show any behavior stereotypically linked to the opposite sex?
Has this literally ever happened?
Being trans VS being "just gay" is definitely rewarded socially right now in schools with strong "gender affirming" policies and a body of teachers on the extreme left.
The reward is being treated as a special person in need vs not being considered as anything particularly worthwhile of special attentions by teachers.
We are talking school settings
Have you spent any time in a US high school in the past 5-10 years? This does not match the experience of anyone I know.
I don't know if it happens for these drugs but doctors have often gotten lots of gifts and other incentives from drug manufacturers for pushing certain medications. That's what the whole controversy about the overuse of addictive painkillers was about.
You mean the biggest genocide of american history, more YLL than COVID, more YLL than the civil war, more YLL than the trail of tears.
It wasn't the "overuse of painkiller". It was (and still is) the willful assassination of young adults / middle aged working class Americans (mostly whites but not exclusively)
That is not the only reward.
Although it would be enough already.
IT is the the reward of " solution" to the Problem. To a temporary problem.
I have knowledge and cited a reference, which you could not do.
You are absolutely wrong about your main point - minors cannot do any of those things in the US without parental permission. If you want to claim any different, you're going to need to back it up.
Becoming emancipated would allow a minor to do some of these things, but those are extremely rare and generally only done for young actors or pop stars so they can make a lot of money.
It’s not my fault you can’t Google very well.
About 130,000,000 results (0.38 seconds)
Search Results
Featured snippet from the web
California law allows those under 21 to consume alcohol in a private location. Only if a parent, guardian, or relative is present and above the age of 21. It is illegal for a minor to have a BAC of . 01% and operate a vehicle.
California Alcohol Laws
Planned parenthood site
If abortion is legal in your state, or if you're traveling to another state where abortion is legal, there may still be other laws that affect you if you're under 18. The exact rules are different in different places. Find information on your state below.
Some states say you have to get permission from a parent or older family member to have an abortion. Other states don’t make you get permission, but your parents will have to know that you’re getting an abortion. And some states don't have any laws about telling your parents or getting their permission.
If your state does have parental involvement laws, you may be able to get a judge's permission to have an abortion without telling your parents. This is called "judicial bypass".
You’re not alone. If you’re pregnant and want to have an abortion, call your nearest Planned Parenthood health center as soon as possible. They can help explain the laws in your state, let you know what your options are, and give you tips on talking with your parents. You can also visit AbortionFinder.org.
And Google
consent
Search instead for states that allow teens to obtain birth control wothout parental consent
Search Results
Featured snippet from the web
Anyone under age 18 can receive contraceptive services without informing or involving a parent, legal guardian, or other caregiver in the following states:
Alaska.
Arizona.
Arkansas.
California.
Colorado.
District of Columbia (Washington, D.C.)
Georgia.
Idaho.
More items...•Sep 20, 2023
Do You Need Parental Consent for Birth Control? It Depends
Healthline
https://www.healthline.com › health › do-you-need-pare...
Then what was the point you were trying to make? "Oh hey, here's a room full of people that thought this"?
You need to read my entire post to see the context. I was addressing the idea stated that trans people are treated special and better than straight people, and so people want to claim to be trans just for the "benefits".
My reference to the TV show was simply that almost everyone in the room said they thought blacks were treated equally to whites in our society. But when asked who would be willing to switch roles and be treated as blacks are, no one raised their hands. So they all claimed that blacks were treated the same as whites, but wouldnt want to actually be treated as blacks are.
I believe those claiming that being transgender is considered cool and they get special treatment would never actually want to be treated as transgender people are in real life, because they know deep down it isnt true.
You need to read my entire post to see the context. I was addressing the idea stated that trans people are treated special and better than straight people, and so people want to claim to be trans just for the "benefits".
My reference to the TV show was simply that almost everyone in the room said they thought blacks were treated equally to whites in our society. But when asked who would be willing to switch roles and be treated as blacks ar
All the cool kids belonged to satanic cults in the 1980s, so there is precedence for this sort of freaking out over nothing.
Teachers can't even get kids to read The Great Gatsby, the idea that they're going to hypnotize their students into becoming LGBT is one of the dumbest ideas the bigots have ever come up with.
40% of Gen Z identifies as LGBT. Are you claiming that's a wholly natural phenomenon?
40% of Gen Z identifies as LGBT. Are you claiming that's a wholly natural phenomenon?
What are you claiming to be a 'natural phenomenon'? I would think the true figure in the past was also unnaturally suppressed. In any case, there are a ton of logical reasons you can point to to note an increase in young people who identify that actually exist. People are pointing to 'indoctrination' by educators with no actual examples. All it really takes is one example to bring an angry old to orgasm anyway
For clarity's sake it would also seem important to me to note that there should clearly be many degrees of separation between those who identify and those who are transitioning. I could see the two things being conflated by many who wish to without clarification
And again you prove my point. Nobody cares about your opinion. She made the decision with her parents and medical providers. You were never even a consideration. The only difference is there is no posse of bigots to join you in preventing big breasted teens from having reduction surgeries.
I'm pretty sure just as many people care about my opinion as about your opinion.
I didn't bring up that as an example, you did, apparently thinking it was some kind of gotcha, but it's not. Didn't prove anything, except that you don't have to be a bigot to oppose these kinds of surgeries for minors.
