The costs of trans visibility

Going back to Albertas suite of new anti-trans laws, it’s worth putting in perspective how big the scale is. Apparently in 2023, a total of 22 people under 18 had top surgery. Here’s the kicker: the government doesn’t know how many of those have anything to do with gender dysphoria.

This is the kind of scale that seems to be more about politicians scoring political points off scapegoating trans people and less because of some major thing actually happening.

I'm pretty sure this isn't true, but if you have a citation I'm open to the idea that you aren't just lying. Regardless, it wouldn't make sense medically and so isn't being done.

I think the other massive leak in this line of thinking is that "the left" isn't monolithic. There are many shades of left at the moment.

There is only one shade of right and that is all in on daddy trump.

I know many moderate republicans struggling right now because they aren't racist homophobes and they want their kids to grow up educated. Who the **** do you vote for with that world view?

I don't see how these numbers make sense. The us has 43 million adolescents. If 3% are self reporting as trans, that should be about 1.3 million adolescents. Yet only 12 -17,000 (different reported numbers over different time frames) are taking hormones and puberty blockers and only 56 genital surgeries in a 3-5 year period.

You don’t necessarily need any surgery to identify as trans or non-binary most don’t.
In regards to the 57 cases of genital surgery they are not typically done under any circumstances for a minor but in those rare instances , and I can’t speak for all 57 cases, but like thousands and thousands of cisgender children, they probably needed those surgeries for life threatening issues. There are many many reasons cisgender people get genital surgery.

Now control for wealth, class, education, language and so on.

There is nothing lol about the 7m slaves in Africa today, the highest rate of slavery in the world.

Doesn't this just show that the right's obsession with teens allegedly "chopping off their penises" and similar expressions are actually extremely rare and this a whole hullabaloo about a few fringe cases that should just be left to doctors and families? It doesn't seem surprising at all that the overwhelming majority of trans teens don't do this.

Political attitude is inheritable, through DNA (like most behavioral propensities)

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23075141

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/...

3% is the number in new York state and is the highest among the 50, states, other states have lower numbers.

17k is the reported number of minors on *insurance covered puberty blockers following a gender dysphoria diagnosis* from 2018 to 2022.

Not sure what isn't making sense for you, given that many medical bodies (in the USA and outside) don't recommend that option, and some states made it illegal.

That number should be 0, instead it's growing fast

Not sure what the source for the 56 is, but in general these statistics are collected starting with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, to eliminate the completely unrelated procedures on hererosexuals

K found the source. It's up to 2021 (and we know the trend is growing massively since then), and it's "only" 776 breast removals (walk me through why I can't call it chopping off?) for non medical reasons (gender dysphoria) covered by insurance + unknown amount paid out of pocket.

How would you feel if you told me that police killed 776 unarmed black people in 5 years, with the amount growing by 50%+ each year, and you wanted to try to significantly reduce that number, and i answered that yours was an obsession about a fringe rare event and that you should just trust the police? Perhaps they had a good reason in each and every one of those killing.

The amount of breath removals for gender dysphoria in minors should be 0. It should be unthinkable to even discuss the idea. And unlike police shooting it can't "just happen in the heat of things". You have to plan it. Just don't do it.

If you agree it's simply something that shouldn't happen at all and it is abhorrent that it does happen, what's the problem to fully criminalize it?

I don't have the exact quote in front of me now, but you said those figures likely included people who just were willing to admit some curious interest about same-sex relations, and even some who just admitted that Chris Hemsworth was an attractive man.

I just don't think those sorts of people should be considered Bisexual, even if they answered as such in a poll. I mean I would say I have had curiosity at some times, and I can see that some men are physically attractive but I certainly would answer a poll as straight, not Bisexual.

I really didn't think many men identified as Bisexual anyway though, even if they effectively are. My best friend when I was playing poker on the east coast was a man who clearly identified as gay, even though he had been married to a woman for a few years in the past (and he was attracted to her). Of course he was 10 years older than me, so technically a boomer. Maybe if he had been born 30 years later he would have identified as Bisexual.

I never said this. care to cite?

I may be confusing someone else's post with yours or combining two. Will try to find it.

*****

In your post I quoted above, you said

" a lot of people have speculated that everyone is at least a little bit bisexual. You think a typical guy who is predominantly attracted to women but has had some gay thoughts was going to publicly label themselves as bisexual 30 years ago?"

Implying that those people (or at least some of them) are labelling themselves as Bisexual now.

The Chris Hemsworth thing was in someone else's reply to you. But regardless, this seems to be implying that some men who have never had sex with another man are being counted as Bisexual.

I'd wonder why you are so hateful and feel free to express bigotry openly. If we don't adapt and change, we die. Some might call it evolution. Change is good, but natural to resist.

Police in the US killed about 1000 people in 2023. Every year they kill hundreds of citizens. Most people glorify and praise them. Most republicans "freedom fighters" literally demonize the people who "burnt cities down" protesting against literal executions. They even made a hero out of the guy who murdered people protesting oppression.

We've always been at war with eastasia.

"Most people" definitely do not glorify killings made by police, and I really don't think most Pele glorify police overall.

The loudest members of the right wing of the republican party are not representative of the population as a whole.

You really think most Republicans don't glorify police overall? Thin blue line?

I'm sure I'd be shocked to hear the evil spewing from the loudest members of the Republican party. I have no desire to.

I'm not sure about that, but your claim was about "most people", not "most Republicans".

I hope you're right. It's my experience, in my part of the US at least, people love the police.

The cost of trans visibility appears too be tens to hundreds of kids getting medical care some people disapprove of. I'm not educated enough in health care and trust experts, so I assume they're getting decent treatment. I'm glad they can access health care in the US. Good for them.

I thought it would be a net benefit for the government to have less data points on citizens. If sex and gender exist on a spectrum, one less metric to be collected. Seems great to me!

It's only "controversial" because you had been arguing that the left was pushing to give the puberty blockers to prepubertal children, but now in this post you are changing it to preteens. These are very much not the same thing. You either confused the two terms or realized you were wrong and are trying to slip this past me.

Excuse but prepuberal means exactly that, the moment in time immediatly preceding puberty. As per article provided there are physicians counseling kids to take those puberty blockers immediatly at the first sign that puberty might be starting. What's that if not prepuberal?

Puberty is a years-long process, can last 4-5 years, taking puberty blockers at day 1 (or even before that, because of "signs") is taking them in a prepuberal stage!

So anyway are you ok with kids taking puberty blockers as soon as 10 for gender disphoria reasons?

edit: As for the non controversial, it's not controversial that the left narrative is ok with those kids taking puberty blockers. You are the first person to contest that i know of, that they want kids with a diagnosis of gender disphoria to be able to avoid *all puberty* with puberty blockers, so they need to start taking them before puberty starts (at the first signs), otherwise they don't avoid it all.

Prepubertal is before puberty starts. "At the first signs of puberty" is after puberty has started. These are very clearly not the same time periods whatsoever. You are arguing the same as someone saying pre-1900s includes January of 1900 -- it very obviously does not.

I am not aware of anyone who has suggested taking puberty blockers before puberty has started. It wouldn't even make medical sense. I think doing so would actually cause a child to start puberty, at least temporarily.

I took the 3% figure from your post. Was your post incorrect?

Because if it were such a fast growing problem, I would expect of the millions of self reporting trans adolescents, more than 3% having a gender Dysphoria diagnosis and only 33% of them being receiving medication and around 800 surgical procedures. It’s as if your belief that this is a massive money making trend in the U.S. is just complete bullshit.