Before modification by TyrReborn at 14/08/2023 06:04:22 PM
Really? I like how you added 'this one is a bit of a parody' for the last one, as if the other ones weren't.
Well, sorry, I really don't see how you consider this one parody, as the last one was the only one I actually meant in jest. I see no difference in artificially preventing teething, and artificially preventing puberty. They're both natural processes of our bodies, natural parts of development, natural parts of living.
For those unfortunate enough, through some genetic quirk or physical injury, who cannot go through natural development, we should absolutely do what we can to help them develop normally.
It is anathema to me, that one would purposefully prevent an entirely natural, normal part of human development, because of mental illness. It just seems insane to me. And I don't see a distinction between teething and puberty.
You're right that corrective procedures are carried out on kids. Correcting teeth and etc. But those are corrective procedures. What is "corrective" about puberty blockers?
~~EDIT~~ You never did respond to this, btw.
How are teething and puberty different? I would really like your train of thought on this. They both cause permanent changes, they're both very uncomfortable, they're both natural development. I'm not even being sarcastic here, I legitimately do not understand how you see them as different, and would appreciate an explanation.
Because, from what I understood, once they're 18 you would actually allow them to decide for themselves? What about when they're minors but their parents are in fact on board with the puberty blockers? Or is your position that not only puberty blockers but quite simply all hormone treatment and surgery for trans people should be banned, even for adults?
Well I'm of the opinion that being a "minor" should extend to 25, because that's roughly when the brain stops developing. But once they're adults, yes, they can do what they want.
I suppose puberty blockers would go away, as they should, but sure, if a man wants to lop his dick off and call himself Caitlyn, more power to them. But if saying "leave kids alone" is an "attack", maybe those who would mislead children deserve to be "attacked".
Although you do need to be open-minded enough to consider the possibility of people thinking very differently from how you do and them not being automatically wrong on that account...
When I was a child, I was often asked "if everyone jumped off a bridge, would you too?" Now, everyone says "that person with XY genes and an inverted penis is a woman!"
Just because everyone else is "open-minded", that doesn't mean they are right. Granted, just because I am "closed-minded", that doesn't mean I am right.
But I know that ain't a woman.
As you mentioned above, you can't understand how it feels to carry a child in a womb either, but nevertheless you are aware that many people do carry children in their wombs and that it's generally desirable for them to have medical support in that process. This argument isn't making any sense to me.
See above - it was never meant to be a full analogy, but it was to gauge your views more generally on how much decision power children should have in difficult medical situations.
Then why bring it up? I mean, seriously. If you want to compare a "trans" youth to a suicidal vet, do that. If you want to compare a detrans'ed youth, now with no genitals and their body fucked up from years of experimental procedures, to cancer, then do that. But comparing a "trans" youth to a cancer victim is not a fair comparison. Mental anguish has nothing on physical suffering.