There is nothing dicredited about it but tons of subjectivity. If you can't see that the foremost leader in the field pulled the plug on the program as a collective group of psychologists then I have no reason to continue debating what you will refuse to see when it is staring you in the face.
OT Kaitlyn Jenner on the Espys
- Thread starter menahog
- Start date
There is nothing dicredited about it but tons of subjectivity. If you can't see that the foremost leader in the field pulled the plug on the program as a collective group of psychologists then I have no reason to continue debating what you will refuse to see when it is staring you in the face.
Even the studies that McHugh and you have cited do not support what you are saying? Can you honestly not see that? Both of those studies clearly conclude that you and McHugh are incorrect. I have put the conclusions of both in this thread. Are you really just going to ignore the FACTS of those studies because you don't like what they say?
And you didn't answer my question. What is the point you are trying to make with this? There could literally be 1,000,000 studies saying that it is without a doubt great for trans people and you would still not support.
There has been scientific evidence suggesting it isn't a choice for two decades. That evidence has been supported and expanded upon by many studies since.
Why in the hell would someone openly choose to be ridiculed and oppressed?
I had a gay aunt on my mom's side and my dad has a gay brother. I've been around them my entire life. I love them both. Both are my favorite aunt and uncle. I know neither one of them chose to be gay.
My aunt was shipped off to a private catholic high school in LR when she came out to my grandfather. My uncle grew up in the country on a farm. Imagine the things he had to deal with. Both went through things that we will never face. But then again... I'm sure it has to do with them choosing to be that way, right?
Is there scientific consensus that being gay isn't a choice? That was the question. I think the correct answer is no. Th issue is quite complex and studies contradict one another. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-homosexuality-a-choice/
Last edited:
What is your point? I think most intelligent people would tell you it isn't a choice. I think pretty much every single gay person would tell you it isn't a choice.
Regardless of all that, why do you care if it is a choice or not? Why care either way? What is your reason for being against it?
Last edited:
Most intelligent people? LOL that's rich. Most would agree with me, the jury is still out. In many cases it is a flat out sickness, a perversion. Oh hell it does not matter what facts are presented to you, you only accept the one's you like. Useless convo. Here is why this is important to me, I do not want my grand kids taught that this aberration by 3% of the population is normal. Gender isn't fluid. You were born with certain parts that define if you are male or female. There are unusual circumstances where there is gender ambiguity, that is not the norm. It is not normal for a man to want another man's penis isn't his anus. That is an aberration. Why would anyone want to teach that it is normal or ok to decide you want to change your gender today? How I'm feeling all girly today give me some tits!
I'm glad we have you here to tell us what is normal and what we should accept. I don't know how old your grand kids are but there is a pretty good chance that they will be very accepting of all people despite your best efforts. Discrimination is taught, and as our society continues to make progress the number of those teachers will decline.
That's exactly what you are trying to do to us. You are telling everyone here what they should and should not accept. How about this the next time someone doesn't agree with something skip talking down to them and calling them ignorant? The more you talk the more people can see who is ignorant.
Ignorant means lacking knowledge or awareness. There is a lot of that in this thread. I was specifically talking about the ignorance that seems to exist with some people when it comes to gender and sex.
I'm not telling anyone what they should and should not accept. However, I continue to find it insulting that you equate the acceptance of an entire group of human beings with the acceptance of an idea or belief. I would think that most adults could differentiate between the two. Apparently not.
So let's be clear,you find it perfectly normal to stick a mans penis in the anus of another man? You think that normal despite the fact that less than 3% of the population identify as homosexual? You will tell your kids it is ok if the want to do this? Really?
Yes, homosexuals are a minority. Does that mean they shouldn't have rights or be accepted? Since when does something have to be "normal" to be okay or to be accepted? You have pretty much proven my point with this post. It seems abnormal or gross to you so you won't accept it. You'll speak out against them. You'll call them names. You'll treat them as if they are in some way less than yourself. Even worse you think everyone should do the same. That is a pretty shitty thing for one human being to do to another.
Aside from that, what the hell do you care who anyone has sex with? It has no impact whatsoever on you.
Do you think life exists in a vacuum? Of course you never answered my question but avoidance seems to be your best friend. So let me get this straight, you think it perfectly ok for a man to stick his penis in another mans anus? You will teach your kids this is OK and normal? Try answering. Please note at no point in this convo did I mention taking away anyone's rights nor did I call anyone any names. It is sad when you have to make up shit to try and support your opinion. So answer the questions will ya? Doubtful
It is perfectly normal for people who are gay, yes. It would be just as abnormal to stick a penis into a vagina for them. It also has nothing to do with you. If you're an actual heterosexual, you should be glad there are gay guys; it's less competition for you. But the people who bark the loudest usually have homosexual tendencies they are struggling with so......
Nice try and no it isn't normal. If it were more than 3% of the population would be identifying as gay. It isn't normal, it is an aberration. IT has much to do with the society in which I live. Is this the gay hog website now?
What about a man sticking his penis in a woman's anus? Is that normal or ok for you? You've established yourself as the authority on what can go in who's butt here so I just wanted to check.
I won't have to teach my kids anything. They will be raised by people that are open-minded and caring just like I was. I won't attempt to brainwash them with antiquated views of how the world works or how you wish it did.
In this convo you have referred to homosexuals as abnormal and specifically described their lifestyle as not being ok. That is pretty tame. You've also referred to homosexuals and transgenders in other threads as morally corrupt and deviant. As being "sick". I consider that to be name calling. At the very least it is offensive.
I'm guessing you are pretty old. You speak of grand kids and generally everything you post comes off as older. I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, but it seems that this really is a generational thing. Even in a place like Arkansas, the vast majority of young people are very pro gay and trans rights.
It seems to me that your feeling on this issue must be rooted elsewhere. It's probably a pretty safe bet that you are a Christian, despite your demand for scientific consensus. That may have nothing to do with it but there is a common theme there.
Open minded? So you will let others raise your kids for you? Nice. It is a perversion and yes I am a Christian and no I do not hate gays. How they choose to live is a perversion of what God created. Hedonistic lifestyles do not make for succesful societies. And again there is no scientfic consensus. Choice plays a major part in homosexauality. Put another way, I may have a desire for a woman other than my wife. The question is do act upon the desire or do the right thing? You may feel an attraction to a man no where are you required to act upon it are you?
Clearly the only time you seem to like science is when it supports your postition and as we both know there is no consensus on homosexuailty being much more than choice. Had you read the article I posted I think you would have seen a very balanced commentary but I'm quite certain you are not open to anything that upsets your personal applecart. When I see the moral decay in our society I cannot help but grieve for the nation. Homosexuality is only a part of the problem. I have no idea how it can be antiquated to believe that the moving parts God can each of us for procreation are better used to follow our hedonistic desires.
Clearly the only time you seem to like science is when it supports your postition and as we both know there is no consensus on homosexuailty being much more than choice. Had you read the article I posted I think you would have seen a very balanced commentary but I'm quite certain you are not open to anything that upsets your personal applecart. When I see the moral decay in our society I cannot help but grieve for the nation. Homosexuality is only a part of the problem. I have no idea how it can be antiquated to believe that the moving parts God can each of us for procreation are better used to follow our hedonistic desires.
Haha. That is incredibly antiquated. Have you ever had sex for pleasure? Ever had oral sex? I guess not since that isn't what God intended us to use our moving procreation parts for.
Speaking of God. Feel free to post the scientific consensus on the God created man theory that clearly has shaped your entire view of this. Does that scientific consensus exist? Is there scientific consensus that there even is a God?
Scoffers and mockers, you were spoken of thousands of years ago.. 2 Timothy 4:3 nails you.
Last edited:
Look I'm really sorry you cannot support homosexuality as being normal using science. I'm not quite sure why you think I need to prove anything to you? Clearly you cannot support your position , all you can do is attack. Sorry bout your luck bud
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mic...atrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change Hmm I thought you said this had been debunked YEARS ago. The dateline on this is 6-2-1015
Can you support your religious beliefs using science? Clearly you cannot. Sorry.
What you deem natural is shaped by your religious beliefs. Can you come up with any reason that this isn't "ok" other than religion?
Last edited:
Hahahaha. You keep posting the same bullshit article from some hack conservative website. This is the exact same article that Boss posted. It has been debunked by over 15 different studies. McHugh himself cites a study in that article that goes against his main point. McHugh himself has been discredited by many peers. The fact that you continue to post this garbage tells me a lot about your knowledge of this subject.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120 religion isn't the argument but I can understand why you would want to change the discussion. By all means continue to shoot the messenger, you really don't have anything else do you?
How many times can you post the same thing? That is an op ed by Paul McHugh. Yes the exact same Paul McHugh that you and your buddies keep posting about. Do you really not understand that you are posting the same thing over and over? It isn't that complicated.
You didn't answer my question though. What you deem natural is shaped by your religious beliefs. Can you come up with any reason that this isn't "ok" other than religion?
Actually not the same WSJ you didn't seem to like CSN so I thought I'd give you another option. Clearly you have nothing to refute this? I've not seen you post a thing. The discussion is about transgender, transexual and gays not religion But I do understand your desire to change the subject. Unless you can offer some evidence to support your position this is pretty much a waste of my time. Fortunately it is Friday and things are pretty much wrapped up for the week. What I deem natural is shaped by how our bodies are made. My penis was designed with a purpose. That purpose has nothing to do with another mans anus.
It is entertaining to see an intelligent poster absolutely OWN a couple of idiots in this thread. hpharri is on fire.
P.S. - hey wallyhogg you perv, show me the excerpt from the Bible that says it is OK for a grandfather to be checking out 17 year old girls' asses and commenting on how good they are. I'll hang up and listen.
P.S. - hey wallyhogg you perv, show me the excerpt from the Bible that says it is OK for a grandfather to be checking out 17 year old girls' asses and commenting on how good they are. I'll hang up and listen.
I have refuted McHugh's stance on the position a dozen times in this thread. You have ignored those posts. You don't care about facts. All you care about is anything, no matter how incorrect it may be, that allows you to justify your feelings about people that are different than yourself.
You asked for scientific consensus for my point, yet you can't come close to providing it for yours.
You talk about homosexuality not being normal because a penis should only be used to procreate. That isn't normal. About 99.9% of the population would disagree with you.
Bottom line Wally is that you've managed to post about 20 times in this thread without making a single point other than basically saying you think gay sex between two men is weird. That is perfectly fine for you to think. You say it isn't normal, which is true statistically speaking. The problem is you are attempting to assign morality to normality. That is not only dangerous but an incredibly flawed argument.
This is like watching a college professor trying to teach senior level physics to a class of 2nd graders. Damn entertaining to watch the teacher's presentation skills while admiring their level of expertise but very sad to look at the confused faces in the classroom staring back at him who keep asking the same questions over and over after they have already been answered.
hpharri on fire.
Hey Master, I'd don't recall having to check id's on a girls butt to say she has a nice ass. Your argument is an ludicrous as you. Since you wish to resurrect a long dead thread let me ask you, was there anything in the video to indicate she was underage? Why no! She was most likely above the age of consent in Arkansas which is 16. I would further suggest that most healthy males would have said she had a cute butt as well, given she did not have a name tag attached that said "HEY I'M UNDERAGE!" Further I would suggest that anyone who attaches "Master" to their handle has some very serious ego issues that need addressing. But then again you have Ozzy as your role model.
As for HP, I've posted facts regarding transgender, transexual and gay, you've posted nothing but your opinions HP, if you have some scientific data that supports your position why not provide it rather than trafficking in jr. high level taunts and insults. If you'd like to have an adult convo on the matter please provide some substance. All you have done so far is play shoot the messenger the tactic employed when you have no data to support your position. Some more data that does not support your position and McHugh nowhere in sight http://www.eje-online.org/content/164/4/635.full.pdf
As for HP, I've posted facts regarding transgender, transexual and gay, you've posted nothing but your opinions HP, if you have some scientific data that supports your position why not provide it rather than trafficking in jr. high level taunts and insults. If you'd like to have an adult convo on the matter please provide some substance. All you have done so far is play shoot the messenger the tactic employed when you have no data to support your position. Some more data that does not support your position and McHugh nowhere in sight http://www.eje-online.org/content/164/4/635.full.pdf
Last edited:
Gosh I hate to keep dealing in facts http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
Conclusions
Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.
Conclusions
Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/p...fically-there-is-no-such-thing-as-transgender
Dr. Joseph Berger has issued a statement saying that from a medical and scientific perspective there is no such thing as a "transgendered" person, and that terms such as “gender expression” and “gender identity" used in the bill are at the very least ambiguous, and are more an emotional appeal than a statement of scientific fact.
Berger, who is a consulting psychiatrist in Toronto and whose list of credentials establishes him as an expert in the field of mental illness, stated that people who identify themselves as "transgendered" are mentally ill or simply unhappy, and pointed out that hormone therapy and surgery are not appropriate treatments for psychosis or unhappiness. oops ANOTHER ONE!
Dr. Joseph Berger has issued a statement saying that from a medical and scientific perspective there is no such thing as a "transgendered" person, and that terms such as “gender expression” and “gender identity" used in the bill are at the very least ambiguous, and are more an emotional appeal than a statement of scientific fact.
Berger, who is a consulting psychiatrist in Toronto and whose list of credentials establishes him as an expert in the field of mental illness, stated that people who identify themselves as "transgendered" are mentally ill or simply unhappy, and pointed out that hormone therapy and surgery are not appropriate treatments for psychosis or unhappiness. oops ANOTHER ONE!
https://daleoleary.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/the-“transsexual”-delusion/ Now please come back with some FACTS ok?
You posted two studies that have already been referenced in this thread. Both of them measure mortality rates against the general population and NOT against a trans control group. The fact that you still posted them tell me all I need to know about how much you understand this issue.
You managed to sneak another article about Paul McHugh in there too. Haha. You just can't quit him can you?
"For social conservatives, however, Paul McHugh represents a distinguished “medical professional.” “He’s a giant,” Anderson boasts. Even though he is one of the only doctors willing to endorse their rejection of transgender people, they still take his word over the consensus of doctors who have helped thousands of transgender people live happier, healthier lives."
The study that you posted a conclusion for is one of the ones that did not use a trans control group. We know that trans people have higher mortality rates than the general population. Neither of the studies you posted do anything to prove the point you are trying to make. Do you honestly not understand that? At first I thought you were playing dumb, but I'm starting to think it isn't an act.
The conclusion you posted:
"Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."
This conclusion clearly states that sex reassignment surgery alleviated gender dysphoria but didn't suffice as treatment for transsexualism. It does not find that it makes anything worse. It states that it helps but further treatment is needed. You just posted a conclusion to a study that disproves your whole point. I mean, come on dude. You are using a study that pretty much concludes the opposite of what you are claiming and acting like it proves your point. You should probably stop.
The fact of the matter is those studies DO NOT PROVE YOUR POINT. They use the general population as a control group. Trans people as a whole have a higher mortality rate that the general population. Homosexuals do as well. Do you know why? A big reason why is they have higher suicide rates. It's almost as if having
s telling them they are depraved, immoral, unnatural and abnormal all the time makes life pretty hard.
You managed to sneak another article about Paul McHugh in there too. Haha. You just can't quit him can you?
"For social conservatives, however, Paul McHugh represents a distinguished “medical professional.” “He’s a giant,” Anderson boasts. Even though he is one of the only doctors willing to endorse their rejection of transgender people, they still take his word over the consensus of doctors who have helped thousands of transgender people live happier, healthier lives."
The study that you posted a conclusion for is one of the ones that did not use a trans control group. We know that trans people have higher mortality rates than the general population. Neither of the studies you posted do anything to prove the point you are trying to make. Do you honestly not understand that? At first I thought you were playing dumb, but I'm starting to think it isn't an act.
The conclusion you posted:
"Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."
This conclusion clearly states that sex reassignment surgery alleviated gender dysphoria but didn't suffice as treatment for transsexualism. It does not find that it makes anything worse. It states that it helps but further treatment is needed. You just posted a conclusion to a study that disproves your whole point. I mean, come on dude. You are using a study that pretty much concludes the opposite of what you are claiming and acting like it proves your point. You should probably stop.
The fact of the matter is those studies DO NOT PROVE YOUR POINT. They use the general population as a control group. Trans people as a whole have a higher mortality rate that the general population. Homosexuals do as well. Do you know why? A big reason why is they have higher suicide rates. It's almost as if having
s telling them they are depraved, immoral, unnatural and abnormal all the time makes life pretty hard.
Last edited:
