Why not pay for gender reassignment for anyone who needs it - in prison or not? Why not actually take care of the citizens of this country fairly?Originally Posted by agamemnus
As for designing prisons that serve the mental health of the prisoners inside, I think that would absolutely be ideal. Prisons should focus on rehabilitation over punishment. Prison reform is a necessity.
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
Well, because it might help bankrupt the country faster, but I suppose there's something to be said for economies of scale...
No it does not. But I'm not arguing about a specific case, I'm arguing about Lewk's fatuous declarations about things he dismisses as not real in the first place.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Why not give boob jobs for 'anyone who needs it.' Because lets face it, if there is money to be made a doctor will say a person needs it. This is especially true when there isn't any provable way to confirm or deny a diagnosis without the patient (who guess what also has an incentive to lie!) assisting.
You don't need a lot of fancy classes to understand logic. And the logic is truly quite simple. Paying for 'disorders' that may or may not exist based on solely patient statements is a recipe for wasting money. You will find a doctor who is in favor of giving things to transgender people. You will find a doctor who isn't in favor. Doctors are people. Simply having a doctor say "yup they need it" is the WORST possible way to determine if someone needs it. This is why tax payer dollars for this kind of thing is asinine. Give me real evidence that this patient needs it beyond what the patient saying they need it.
Certain types of mental health issues can absolutely be evidenced by hallucinations, brain scans ect. I'd even be wiling to consider non-pure evidence if the cost is relatively cheap compared to a 100k surgery. (And there is a large body of history of these types of illnesses and treatments having an impact). Any diagnosis that comes SOLELY FROM THE PATIENT TALKING is insanity. Of course the patient is going to say what it takes in order to get the thing he wants done.
In regards to prison being a punishment - uh yeah it is. Here's an idea... don't kill people. Don't steal from people. Don't rape people. Don't molest little kids. (All real life examples of transgender men who have decided they are actually women). I'm actually OK with prisoners suffering because it has a large number of net benefits, primarily that of being a deterrence factor. This is why I think things like television (which lessens the suffering of boredom) is a bad idea for prisons. I'm not advocating torture (though frankly if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the person molested or killed a kid I wouldn't have a problem) but don't give them EXTRA shit that isn't necessary to *survive*. And no you wanting to be a woman isn't necessary for survival.
Strangely enough I never read an article of a mass die out of trannies because they couldn't go through a sex change in the 1800s and 1900s. Burden of proof lies with the person who wants to take other people's money at the point of the gun to pay for their pet issues.
You mention workings of the brain. Care to show me how brain imaging reveals someone had a 'gender disorder?' You obviously can't. That's because this isn't a biological illness. Dudes wanting to be chicks is a completely CULTURAL thing. It is based on society and how people view genders as a whole and then the individuals perspective. And when we open the huge ass door for cultural perceptions of shit you will see a never ending slew of crap being spouted by doctors as 'necessary' because they'll get paid for it.
Need bigger tits? You can find a doctor who says there is a medical necessity for it. Literally you and the other people on the board refuse, absolutely REFUSE to state where the line is. All you say is that if a doctor says it is 'necessary' then society must do it for the helpless MURDERERS.
Speaking of which is this gender disorder a mental illness or not? If it is a mental illness then you're OK with people calling trannies mentally ill? If it isn't a mental illness then without an illness what need does the prison system have to pay for curing a non-illness?
A whole lot of verbiage which amounts to thinking the entire psych and mental health field is a crock of shit. Which is what I already said you believed. Luckily, not everyone else is ignorant, uneducated, aggressive about the fact, and insisting that everyone else should be too and should make policy from that position.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Once again you're OK with people getting tit jobs as long as a doc says its 'necessary.'
Do you even admit the possibility that doctors can have agendas too?
You realize that these operations are performed by plastic surgeons and the like, not the mental health professionals who have diagnosed issues like gender dysphoria?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
And do you seriously believe you'll never see a mental healthy professional sign off and say a person needs the boob job? And if one did would you be OK with saying 'yah fuck you doc the prisoner is not getting it.'
Since your "boob job" is reassignment surgury, I do expect a mental health professional to sign off on it. More than one, and multiple times. It's required, in fact. It's not something that comes without a lot of examination and counseling beforehand. You're just throwing out armloads of red herrings because you can't come up with a substantive argument on the merits beyond "Fuck you and any health needs you might have, taxpayer money is MY money and I don't tolerate the idea of healthcare for convicts." If it's not someone who looks, thinks, and acts like you, and it's not property, than you don't think it should have anything. No rights, no health, no life. People exactly like you and property are the only things with worth in your world, you've amply demonstrated that time and time again. Which is why it makes me so happy to tell you that you will never get the world you want because the rest of us are at least marginally better people than you will ever be.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
My reference to boob job was for a woman who wants bigger tits not a transgender person.
Also your damned right that I think society should spend less on convicts. And news flash no one ever gets the exact world they want. I'm sure you socialist crazies aren't going to see America (in your lifetime at least) turn into your communist paradise. You'll also never see guns off the streets of America thanks to the good ole constitution.
Your imagination, as usual, is limited, perhaps because your knowledge is inadequate and you're not very bright. You could at least do the bare minimum of due diligence by taking a look at Wikipedia, but no, you think it's more useful to compose rants that contain nothing of substance.
LET ME HELP YOU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claustrophobia#Treatment
And that's just the short list.
Lewk, don't be a retard. Give us specifics. You were quick to bitch about Enoch asking you a far more specific and relevant question because you [said you] felt it wasn't specific or grounded in reality. You were wrong then but since you appear to be interested in keeping discussions rooted in the real world you'll have to give concrete examples backed up by real facts and pref. from the real world.Boob job - meh could be lots of bull shit liberals will think up. Could go with the claim of gerascophobia and say that saggy tits makes her feel old and she's scared of that. Alternatively you could go with the argument that the person's appearance is critical to her well being and that's why she needs the boob job. We aren't far from it - for the transgender folks the gender reassignment surgery is probably only the first step. Next they'll be demanding makeup
If someone has a shady agenda then that may be cause to doubt his work. However, that is not sufficient to disprove him. You assess the truth of a scientist's claims by looking at his methods, by examining his reasoning, by evaluating the theoretical basis of his study, by checking his data, by attempting to replicate his findings repeatedly in different ways and by putting his findings into a broader context of good research.
See you're so dumb that you think critical analysis involves saying things like "ha ha this guy works for Coca-Cola". No, that's not how it works. You still have to put in the work and you still have to know what you're talking about. Clearly you fail at both, which is also why you generally are not taken seriously when you attempt to air your opinions on things like evolution, medicine, psychology, anything that has anything to do with science, etc.
See above re. second opinions, diagnostic criteria, systematic evaluation. If you think it's enough for one doctor to say, "This person needs us to chop off her dingdong and give her breasts so let's do it!" then you're deluded and may need to see a doctor. This is an expensive and complicated process and involves those on the lowest rungs of the social ladder. The decision has to be carefully examined because no-one is inclined to give inmates anything, ever, for free or otherwise. The research in this field has previously been lacking because of scummy people like you who serve to make transgender persons invisible at best or threatened at worst, but it's catching up. Medical decisions still need to be based on the best available knowledge.Why do you think it is so easy to file for FMLA? Why do you think it is so easy to get doctors saying "medically required" on every little thing. Does a 2nd doctor not chosen by the inmate get a 2nd look? Do they need the backing of studies to look at real biological consequences for doing something or not doing something to inmate? Nah just need the one doctor's A-OK! Completely stupid.
Go on, find me a doctor worth taking seriously that will disagree. I'll guarantee you that the best you'll be able to find will be the equivalent of a biologist saying the universe is 6000 years old or a physicist saying that all species were created in seven days by God. Ie. the best you'll be able to find will be probably be someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. However, you should bear in mind that it is possible for reasonable people to disagree. You may for example also find someone who'll tell you that someone who's in jail is actually innocent. You may find someone who'll tell you the opposite of pretty much everything you believe to be true. How do you propose to deal with that problem in general?
This is just really retarded. Are you really an educated man? I get the distinct impression you are neither educated nor intelligent. Get back to me when you've actually done your work and looked at the research that forms the basis of whatever evidence there is. You may also spend some time thinking about what someone's desire to have parts of their body removed or severely altered in such a way as to consign them to one of the most reviled and mistreated groups in society may say about who they are and what they want/need. God Lewk, how dumb are you?But this is a MENTAL issue. They aren't doing a CT/MRI to determine he 'needs' this. There is absolutely no evidence that this will 'fix' him. Its not a broken leg where there is plenty of evidence. Just like the claustrophobia and boob job examples - both are mental issues that you can't substainally prove. Its all based on what the inmate is saying - and if the inmate says something that gets them what they want why the hell wouldn't they lie?
See above re. your dumbness.Yes the doctor should be investigated. Sadly that rarely happens. Only in out and out blatant medicare fraud (ie saying a visit or procedure happened when it never did) doctors are rarely prosecuted in criminal law. That's why a doctor's word should never be enough. There needs to be proof - ie real proof not someone saying they feel something.
This sort of thing is certainly a problem with your healthcare system but it's one that you have chosen for yourself and you'll have to find a better way of dealing with that problem than saying, "Medical problems don't exist." Your country has chosen to utilise the expertise of doctors that are to some extent regulated by their professional organisations, by ethical guidelines, by their training, by research and by their own consciences. Obviously there are many doctors who will respond inappropriately to the perverse incentives your broken healthcare system has established. However, overall, your doctors will do better at determining the truth of a person's medical claims than you as the dumbest insurance claims processor whatever it is you are will ever do.You're not completely ignorant Rand - you know people work on incentives. If no one punishes doctors for filling FMLA paperwork for 'headaches' or 'back pain' without substantial physical proof outside of the patient's word why wouldn't they? They CHARGE for filing FMLA paperwork. It makes them $$. And if the patient is denied they just go right next door and the next person does it.
You may have gotten the impression that, because you're good at your job, you're also good at everyone else's job. You're not. You're governed by crappy financial, social and psychological incentives to an even greater extent than the medical professionals you distrust and it is your judgement that is the more suspect of the two.
Well yeah, but that's because you're scum. You have to realise that this viewpoint of yours doesn't carry much weight here.Doctor's word isn't instant evidence. And no doubt this is the inmates personal physician. As a whole I'd absolutely err on the side of NOT PAYING FOR TREATMENT OF MURDERS than error on the side of wasting tax payer money on scum.
Or it may pay for itself in better health for a number of transgender people.
Yes I can see how much better my life would be if I went from being a man to being a MtF transsexual, a group widely known for having all sorts of advantages in life. God, how dumb are you?
If you actually knew how to use logical thinking you would have by now looked into the matter and discovered that, indeed, "Simply having a doctor say, 'yup they need it,'" isn't how it's done. How have you not learned by now that your limited imagination and unlimited ignorance are the WORST possible tools for determining what the facts are? God. The only thing asinine here are your posts on the matter. As for evidence, give me a fucking break. You don't know how to assess evidence. You're a grown man who believes that Santa created the world and all the species in it over the course of a week ca. 600 years ago. What do you know about evidence?
See above re. how dumb this statement is.Certain types of mental health issues can absolutely be evidenced by hallucinations, brain scans ect. I'd even be wiling to consider non-pure evidence if the cost is relatively cheap compared to a 100k surgery. (And there is a large body of history of these types of illnesses and treatments having an impact). Any diagnosis that comes SOLELY FROM THE PATIENT TALKING is insanity. Of course the patient is going to say what it takes in order to get the thing he wants done.
There are several problems with this statement.Strangely enough I never read an article of a mass die out of trannies because they couldn't go through a sex change in the 1800s and 1900s.
First of all, you don't really read much of relevance.
Secondly, you don't know anything about transgender persons today. If you did, you would perhaps have thought twice about using a term that is basically worse than calling a black person a 'nigger' and then spitting on them.
Thirdly, your knowledge of the 18th and 19th centuries is far, far more limited than your already limited knowledge of the 20th and 21st centuries.
Fourth, everyone's knowledge of sexuality in general and transsexuality etc in particular in the 18th and 19th centuries is fairly limited. This is because there is very little data available that is of good quality. That is true not only of sexuality but also of a host of other things that we take for granted today.
Fifth, even today in our modern and supposedly enlightened society, the prevalence of transsexuality and associated identities is at most 1 in a few thousand. Of these, only a portion are dysphoric and desire surgical treatment. It is a small and invisible group that is at best ignored by society and at worst hunted and killed. Since you read so many articles about transgender persons no doubt you are aware of the epidemic of deadly or otherwise gruesome hate-crimes against transgender persons in the US. You know about that, right? You've read about that stuff? Yeah?
Putting all of that together, duh you haven't read about "mass die outs of trannies" 200 years ago. Transgender persons were often grouped together with homosexuals in general. Not all of them were "out". Not all of them were dysphoric.
You are both dumb and ignorant.You mention workings of the brain. Care to show me how brain imaging reveals someone had a 'gender disorder?' You obviously can't. That's because this isn't a biological illness. Dudes wanting to be chicks is a completely CULTURAL thing.
http://www.journalofpsychiatricresea...158-5/abstract
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0070808
+ related and cited articles.
Obviously the evidence is of necessity limited. These are still just the earliest days of research.
However, I must point out just how retarded this statement of yours is:
"Care to show me how brain imaging reveals someone had a 'gender disorder?' You obviously can't. That's because this isn't a biological illness."
This is actually a really dumb thing to say. Just think about it for a moment and perhaps you'll realise why it's dumb to say that not finding something using an imperfect method is conclusive evidence that there is nothing to be found. By that reasoning there were almost no planets a thousand years ago, galaxies were stars at best (if they even existed), cells and atoms did not exist, viral and bacterial illnesses were actually caused by vapors or demons or sinning, DNA was a myth etc etc. Do you now realise how fucking dumb that statement of yours was? Do you?
Yeah because "society" looooooves transgender people, right? Just luuuuurvs them.It is based on society and how people view genders as a whole and then the individuals perspective.
See above re. your ignorance.All you say is that if a doctor says it is 'necessary' then society must do it for the helpless MURDERERS.
This is also retarded. First of all you have to stop calling people niggers, it's actually distasteful and I believe even you are better than that no matter how dysfunctional your frontal lobe and your upbringing may be.Speaking of which is this gender disorder a mental illness or not? If it is a mental illness then you're OK with people calling trannies mentally ill? If it isn't a mental illness then without an illness what need does the prison system have to pay for curing a non-illness?
Secondly, being transgender doesn't have to be a disorder any more than being a homosexual is a disorder. If you can lead a healthy life despite having the "wrong" gender and sexual orientation then whose business is it to say you're sick? However, gender dysphoria may reasonably be considered a disorder according to various definitions. If someone has gender dysphoria, it may be appropriate to classify them as suffering from a psychiatric condition, specifically dysphoria caused by eg. having the "wrong" body for your gender. The treatment for that dysphoria may require surgical and medical intervention. Not all transgender persons suffer from gender dysphoria. Not all people with apparent gender dysphoria are dysphoric for only one modifiable reason.
However, in no case does that mean it's okay to stigmatise a person for having an illness. You're such a dumb and distasteful person that you don't seem to understand that you should not stigmatise people for having mental illnesses any more than you should stigmatise people for having cancer. It's frankly kind of disgusting.
Lewk, your posts in this thread constitute what must be the greatest display of your many intellectual and moral faults so far in the history of this community. Like, what the fuck man. Use your goddamned brain. If that isn't working for you, use someone else's brain, just don't say really dumb things all the time. Jesus.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Perhaps you can do yourself a favour by keeping it simple:
"Hi! I am Lewkowski. I hate people who are in jail. I also don't care about transgender people but when I think about them they disgust me. Therefore, I don't want people who are in jail to be treated for gender dysphoria. I am saddened by the fact that others on this forum do not share my views."
There, problem solved.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Lewk, how are you simultaneously claiming that gender dysphoria is a mental illness and that it has no biological component?Do you also think people choose to be depressed, to be bipolar, to be schizophrenic?
Hope is the denial of reality
Claustrophobia - you're right I don't have a clue about treatment for it. The point is that it is an example. IF a doctor says that the patient needs a bigger cell because of their claustrophobia should the state comply just because the doctor says so? Just a clear yes/no here.
Boob job - I'm being specific. Say an inmate is a real woman and has 'image issues' and wants a boob job. A doctor says she needs it for some mental health mumbo jumbo nonsense. Should the state pay for it? Yes or no. Does the state pay for the boob job if the doc says they need it. Let's use UK as an example where this has happened. (Hey learned something from this thread already.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...operation.html
Some are thought to have been encouraged by internet sites which explain how women need to demonstrate emotional distress to get the operations signed off by doctors.
Women can receive implants on the NHS if they can prove their breast size is responsible for mental conditions such as depression.
Here is a REAL LIFE example of this kind of shit happening in an even more liberal part of the world. This is what liberals want, more dependency on the government, more goodies for everyone!
Regarding the Coke guy... you're proving my point. My entire point is that just because someone is a 'doctor' or 'scientist' doesn't mean they should be listened to - and liberals across the board slam this guy for being a corporate shill. Hell just look at the competing claims in the nutrition world. It sounds like you agree there should be evidence before the state pays money. So pray tell what is the evidence that this person needs a gender change operation? Evidence - not the patient's word. In other words...
HOW DO YOU DETERMINE IF THE PATIENT MERELY WANTS THE SURGERY AND DOESN'T ACTUALLY NEED IT? What criteria would you use?
So you want a doctor who disagrees? Sure I can find a respect one too.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mich...der-sex-change
"Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder."
"The transgendered person’s disorder, said Dr. McHugh, is in the person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh."
Should all prisons use this extremely qualified doc when making the decision? I actually have no idea if he is accurate or not but again - my point is you can't just go by the word of the doctor because doctor's have wildly different opinions on things. You need things like actual evidence BEYOND what the patient tells you (who btw has every incentive to lie).
Oh please trannie is no way worse than nigger. That's a massive joke. It's just a shortened version of transsexual which is longer and more annoying to type out. Now if you'll find me a smaller word to use in place of trannie I'll consider using it if it offends your oh so delicate sensibilities.
Regarding galaxies and not being able to see stuff so it doesn't exist... two things. One - you should err in the side of not costing tax payers money. Especially since it might cause more harm than good. Two - there was evidence of a lot of those things. People were aware of Mars since the 1500s at least. But anyway - you need solid proof not a bunch of patients who clearly *want* something and are willing to say they want it. Give me something - genetics, brain scanning, SOMETHING that is tangible and not subject to the obviously clear bias.
In regards to 'life being better as MtF transsexual.' I'm fully willing to admit that objectively it obviously isn't better AT ALL! However subjectively the patient *believes* it will be and that is why they are pushing for it.
Who is stigmatizing mental illness? Isn't the tran community stigmitizing it by being so offended at it being called a mental illness?
I'm not. I'm offering a classic if/then scenario where both items offend Aimless. Note how the reply didn't answer my question if it was considered a mental illness just a lot of blah blah about not being mean to people.Lewk, how are you simultaneously claiming that gender dysphoria is a mental illness and that it has no biological component?
Are you illiterate? How can you both participate in written discussions while being illiterate? Answer the question.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Not illiterate. Not feel free to answer my questions.
I'm glad you brought up Paul McWrong btw because that is basically who I was thinking of. Let's talk about Paul.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2...tq_issues.html
Still, it’s more effective to debunk his claims than to censor the op-ed. Genetics researcher Mari Brighe has done a great job of this over at TransAdvocate, so I’ll simply summarize her capable take-down: The single study McHugh cites for opposing gender-confirming surgery is nearly 40 years old, and he misreads its conclusions, failing to note that its authors explicitly state that “no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment” in improving the lives of transgender people; McHugh ignores a growing (though still small) body of evidence suggesting that medical transition has a positive impact on the wellbeing of transgender people; and he ignores the most obvious reality that would explain why post-operative transgender folks might still struggle with mental health challenges: the ongoing prejudice, stigma, discrimination, economic instability, and violence they face as transgender people. None of this is helped by McHugh’s careless and groundless generalizations.
More research is needed. But anyone interested in the truth about transgender experiences should read Brighe’s response, along with other transgender voices like this one in the New York Times, and not rely on the biased assertions of someone clearly incapable of even-handedly processing new information.
http://www.bilerico.com/2014/06/lies...der_people.php
http://www.transadvocate.com/clingin...re_n_13842.htm"Dr. Paul McHugh, retired from psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital..."
Yes, let's talk about Dr. Paul McHugh.
He's an octogenarian, self-described orthodox Catholic whose anti-LGBT bias is well documented. He spent years defending the Catholic Church from sexual abuse allegations. In his role as part of the USCCB's Review Board, McHugh pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about "homosexual predation on American Catholic youth."
McHugh refers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire," filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 and making the erroneous claim that homosexuality is a "choice." Additionally, McHugh defended forcing a pregnant ten-year-old girl who'd been raped by an adult relative to carry the pregnancy to term. He describes post-surgical transgender women as "caricatures of women."
If you want a detailed analysis of how Dr. McHugh has misrepresented data, rigged studies, left out significant details in his research, and is nothing more than a poorly-regarded fringe element in his own field, you can read about it here, here, here, here, here, and here. No secular medical or mental health organization agrees with him, because every other available study shows that access to health care improves outcomes for transgender patients.
Even McHugh's own (former) academic department denounced his anti-trans stance in testimony before the Maryland Senate this past year, stating that they follow the WPATH Standards of Care. Court cases looking at transgender medical issues have consistently found his work unpersuasive.
In short, Paul McHugh is the Mark Regnerus of transgender issues.
Unfortunately, it appears that McHugh has decided to ignore the growing body of neurological and genetic research providing evidence of a biological basis for gender dysphoria. A 2009 study found a correlation between an increased number of a certain kind of sequence repeat in the Androgen Receptor gene and gender dysphoria. Another study in 2009 identified significant differences in cerebral grey matter structure in trans women who had yet to start hormone therapy when compared to cis men. In 2011, researchers noted that the structure of a sexually-dimorphic region of the brain, known as the intermediate nucleus, of trans women fell somewhere between cis men and cis women, while a similar difference was not noted castrated cis men. A 2013 functional brain imaging study of adolescents with gender dysphoria demonstrated a tendency for trans teens to perform more similarly to their identified sex (as opposed to their assigned sex) in a verbal fluency assessment, with similar correlation in brain activity during the assessment. Lastly, in 2013, a large study of monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins where at least one twin was transgender showed a far higher concordance of a diagnosis of gender dysphoria among monozygotic than dizygotic twins (33% vs 2.6%), which is strong indicator the existence of a biological factor in a trait. While much of the research into the biological aspects of trans people is still very new, Dr McHugh’s assertion that no evidence for a biological basis for trans identities demonstrates a deplorable ignorance of current medical research.
McHugh then goes on imply that transgender surgeries do not improve the lives of trans people, and are actually causing harm:
“It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.”McHugh, again, appears to selectively reading the literature to support his own agenda. It is first important to note that Dr McHugh is grossly misconstruing the findings of the Karolinka study. The study compared the mental health of post-surgical trans people with age-matched cisgender controls. The study itself posits absolutely zero link between gender confirming surgery itself and the mental health of these people, and the authors themselves caution against interpreting the data in such a way:
“It is therefore important to note that the current study is only informative with respect to transsexuals persons health after sex reassignment; no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism. In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit.”Again, returning to the available medical literature on the subject, research seems to actually indicate that medical transition (including hormone therapy) has positive effects on the psychological states of trans people. A study published earlier this year found significant reductions in all comorbid anxiety and depression, as well as lowered overall functional impairment in trans individuals just 12 months after initiating hormone therapy. A study released in late 2013 showed that individuals on hormone therapy have both lower-levels of self-reported stress and lower blood cortisol levels (a key physiological marker of stress). Given the known effects of stress on physical health, this could also translate to risk reduction for a number of chronic illnesses. Even breast augmentation, often maligned as a particularly “cosmetic” intervention, demonstrated significant increases in sexual and psychosocial well-being. Other studies in 2009 and 2011 have shown similarly positive responses in both trans men and trans women who underwent gender-confirming surgeries. While it might be understandable (though not excusable) for Dr McHugh to be unaware of the genetic and neurobiological research on trans people, it is inexcusable for a lauded psychiatrist to be either so woefully ignorant or deliberately deceptive in his presentation of the state of psychological research regarding the transgender population.
McHugh is fond of mentioning how he shut down JH's SRS programme in the '70s. What he never clarifies and what idiots like and those who follow him never stop to think about is that he has chosen to ignore decades of better research in favour of citing a flawed study from the '70s that he also interpreted incorrectly and a more recent one that he has also objectively misinterpreted. Ie. this man really does not know what he's talking about when he talks about transsexuality.
For a brief overview, see: http://crystalgaze2.blogspot.se/2009...ul-mchugh.html
He also likes to imply that 70-80% of transgender children grow out of it. Unfortunately, what he's thinking of are not transgender children specifically. The factoid is about children whose parents have sought medical help due to gender-variant behavior, ie. boys who like to do things that society feels are girly and girls who like to do things that are boyish. In other words, this does not refer exclusively to children who self-identify as having a gender different from that implied by their physical appearance. A number of studies suggest that many boys who display gender variant behavior are homosexual, but that is beside the point except to McHugh who is convinced that transsexuality doesn't exist and that transsexuals are in fact just gay guys.
McHugh likes to compare transsexuality to things like anorexia while disregarding the fact that the comparison is basically dumb due to clear differences between the two when it comes to characteristics, clinical course and types of treatments that have been demonstrated to work or fail.
There is no denying that the research on transsexuality and related phenomena is plagued by the problems that come with researching something that is poorly understood, complex, relatively uncommon, heterogenous, stigmatised etc. but none of the research really points towards McHugh being correct and most of it points directly towards him being wrong. So congratulations, it seems you succeeded in finding the equivalent of a biologist who believes all species were created 6000 years ago by God, ie. someone who does not know what he's talking about.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I did.
So either you're illiterate or just not very good at reading. Which is it?This is also retarded. First of all you have to stop calling people niggers, it's actually distasteful and I believe even you are better than that no matter how dysfunctional your frontal lobe and your upbringing may be.
Secondly, being transgender doesn't have to be a disorder any more than being a homosexual is a disorder. If you can lead a healthy life despite having the "wrong" gender and sexual orientation then whose business is it to say you're sick? However, gender dysphoria may reasonably be considered a disorder according to various definitions. If someone has gender dysphoria, it may be appropriate to classify them as suffering from a psychiatric condition, specifically dysphoria caused by eg. having the "wrong" body for your gender. The treatment for that dysphoria may require surgical and medical intervention. Not all transgender persons suffer from gender dysphoria. Not all people with apparent gender dysphoria are dysphoric for only one modifiable reason.
However, in no case does that mean it's okay to stigmatise a person for having an illness. You're such a dumb and distasteful person that you don't seem to understand that you should not stigmatise people for having mental illnesses any more than you should stigmatise people for having cancer. It's frankly kind of disgusting.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I just keep thinking of Bruce. He had no signs and expressed no desire to be woman until he found how difficult it is keeping up with the Kardashians. Seriously, is he transgender or is he seeking a way to keep up?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
And once again Aimless you miss the forest for the trees. My entire point in bringing in another doctor was to showcase how any doctor can put something down. And the standard of proof on this board seems to be 'a doc said it was necessary.' Frankly based on your own admission more research should be done... meaning it would be foolish to expect tax payers to pay for shit that we don't fully understand. (Note - I still think most of it is still quackery in the first place. It's like expecting the government to pay for homeopathy cures.
And for the record that doc isn't the only one a simple search will find you more such as: http://arpacanada.ca/attachments/art...0re%20c279.pdf
None of that matters however since, again, you state that there are a number of problems with researching the issue. Until it is far more settled I don't think tax payers should pay for it.
I'd also like to see when you would consider the difference between a 'want' and a 'need' and how medical experts would be able to tell the difference with someone who has every incentive to say whatever it takes to get a free ride.
My wife said she thought he was transitioning years ago. There were signs.
Lewk is all about vindictive punishment, even though that's been proven to be a bad motivator.
When it boils down to "who is paying for it"....then who is "paying" for the Pope's upcoming visit to Philadelphia? Several train and subway routes have already been 'closed' in anticipation of the Papal visit. That will only hurt poor people. But the city has decided that a papal visit will be good for the state of PA, and the nation at large.
Who pays the *real* costs for that decision?
Last edited by GGT; 08-18-2015 at 02:31 AM.
Based on your wife's thoughts you believe he had both a dick and vagina at birth? Just wanting to be something else doesn't qualify with me.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
Anecdote warning.
I have a very small extended family, with just two cousins, both second, and both of whom I have known since childhood.
Growing up, I always adored the elder of the two. A fabulously bright lad, always up to something incredibly interesting, building tree-houses and amazing dens, setting up abseil routes and bike-courses and things, creating incredible little working machines and devices out of anything and everything he could find. Visiting where he lived was always an adventure. I loved those visits.
It was no surprise he went on to achieve an excellent engineering degree from a top university, to then follow it up with an early military career in the Royal Engineers. That this was put to a slightly early end by a parachute jump which ended badly and gave him a slight limp only added to his allure, and growing list of remarkable life stories to tell.
His injury led him toward an interest in military injuries and into prosthetics, which he studied and this became his next career move.
One random day I clearly remember receiving a phone call from my father, telling me to switch on the tv to a particular channel, only to see my cousin on a programme chatting amiably to some presenter about something he'd built, some project he was working on.
And onward. Prosthetics gave way naturally to medicine, and he studied further, eventually qualifying as a doctor. After establishing himself there, his interests turned to obstetrics and gynaecology, further study, and he qualified as an obstetrician.
A quite remarkable career span.
He'd taken a wonderful wife and had had two intelligent young sons by this point too.
The reason I'm bringing this story here? Three years ago my father called me up, after a recent visit he'd had to his cousin's out in the south-west of the country. His cousin had received a letter from his son; the chap whose tale I'm touching upon.
The letter started with "Dad, this is the hardest letter I have ever had to write. I am going to become a woman."
This to his father, a proud and charismatic university academic, also a remarkable man with his own stories to tell.
A lengthy and heart-breaking letter followed, detailing to his father how he had never been happy with who he was. There was something, always something, missing in his life. Something not quite right. And it was only in recent times that he'd found out what it was; he wasn't happy being a man.
I had not seen my second cousin in many years, long before any of this came to light, but I understand from my father that he undertook a full course of gender reassignment surgery, to the extent of facial bone restructure. A rather extreme set of procedures for anyone to consider.
~
So when you say "Just wanting to be something else doesn't qualify with me", I think I have to agree. It's not a choice, really, it's not a case of just wanting to be, if my cousin's story tells me anything it's more that it's a case of having to be. Or perhaps just, is.
Last edited by Timbuk2; 08-18-2015 at 04:36 AM.
What counts in your book rarely seems to have any association with what is. Jenner started the process a long time ago. It is implied that this was part of the reason why he ultimately divorced.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I see no qualification here. It is simply a desire.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
See above re. who cares what your standards are. Agenda rejected, tah
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I do want to make something clear. I don't hate your cousin - what I feel for him is pity. He is obviously deeply confused and troubled.
Unlike a criminal he hasn't done anything wrong against society, he clearly wanted a procedure and paid for it with his own money. Me, being the freedom loving guy I am, have no problems with this. Again I feel sorry for him but to each his own. Why do you think a convicted murderer has any more right to this elective procedure than your cousin?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote