And to see if a child who's having real troubles may have both XX and XY and/or XXY. I'm wondering if there's more kids like this, due to all the pollution, "forever" chemicals and stress in the world and that's why we're seeing more problems with sexual dysphoria? In that case, I still stay say that the dominate sex of a child or adult, with this disability, so to speak, is the one that that person needs to adopt and that's for the best in society too.
Oh, KAM, what a lovely attempt to sound scientific while playing linguistic gymnastics. Yes, sex is observed at birth—it’s biology, not guesswork. “Named or misnamed”? Please. Chromosomes and gametes don’t lie, no matter how many word games you play.
As for “gender is how we manifest sex,” that’s just glitter on nonsense. Gender, as it's used today, is a social construct designed to muddy the biological waters. And calling this biology? Come on. You’re twisting science into pretzels to fit ideology.
But hey, at least you “don’t like to pick nits.” Clearly, you’d rather build haystacks out of them.
A bit more about biological dismorphism. It exists. It's referred to as a DSD...a difference (or disorder) of sex development. It's a genetic mutation and is extremely rare. Its symptom upon birth may be genitalia which appear to be typically female or male but later turn out to have been misidentified. Thus, the term "assigned at birth," which used to be attached only to this rare phenomenon, until trans activists decided to dip its definition in the murky waters of pseudoscience.
Doctors "assign" a sex to all people on the basis of a visual inspection, which rarely turns out to be wrong, unless the dysmorphism is extreme and easy to spot.
People born with a DSD are often in the dark about their condition until the age when puberty is expected to begin, but the appropriate secondary sex characteristics don't materialize. For instance, a person assumed to be female on the basis of a vulva doesn't get a period within the appropriate age range. Testing reveals that this person has XY chromosomes, no uterus or ovaries, and a partially formed internal vagina, but also has internal testes that produce testosterone in the normal male range. (This is a description of the DSD of track and field athlete, Castor Semenya.)
Genetic mutations can occur anywhere in the body. Some people are born deaf or blind, or with limbs that don't develop normally. Other mutations may cause intellectual impairments. Some mutations are more subtle, such as hyper-mobile joints.
Mutations do not contradict the basic biological human paradigm. They are appropriately viewed as abnormalities.
Sex is not a rainbow of types. It is not a spectrum. The survival of a species relies upon a consistent and viable reproductive strategy determined by sex.
Here's an article that discusses the topic through the lens of this summer's Olympic women's boxing controversy:
So how do horses and dogs "manifest sex"? Vaginas vs. penises and XX vs. XY. Just as in humans. Except that only humans are smart enough to be stupid enough to invent an extraneous category "gender".
Yeah, and on my recent online check-in for cleveland clinic, my gender identity was a question. Also my sex at birth. Even the cleveland clinic....and they still wonder why we do not trust the medical profession any more!!
Eight years ago, I signed my brain over to the Brain Trauma Center at Mt Sinai Hospital, in New York City. We donors get a twice yearly e - newsletter. A couple of years ago, hospital personnel discussed in each issue were presented to us with their preferred pronouns. This disgusts me so intensely I have come close to destroying my donor card.
I'm doubtful of the ability of people who think this is a legitimate thing to make much of their study of anyone's brain. In fact, I think it is definitely they who should be making brain donations.
I disenrolled/unenrolled from being an organ donor when I saw that unvaccinated people at the top of the donor list were being bypassed from donation and left to die because they refused the jab.
One doesn't have to be enrolled as a donor in order for a relative to donate your organs in the event of tragedy. My husband and I have not signed as organ donors, but both of us are in agreement to donate, but we will have conditions, such as youngest first, no consideration for vaccine status, etc.
I'm still a general organ donor, and while I understand your disgust, I don't think I would have made the same decision. Why did you? I'm genuinely curious.
The people who got vaccinated were trusting the great majority of scientists, and I don't understand what amounts to a decision to punish them because they did. I think the politicization which has taken place around COVID-19 vaccines is one of the saddest things of our time, and is emblematic of how f*cked up a society we really are. It reminds me of the controversy of thirty five years ago about whether there should be a constitutional amendment against flag burning.
I suspect you voted for Trump. To be consistent, every antivaxxer would have to have voted for Robert Kennedy or stayed home. No antivaxxer could have voted for Trump, under whose aegis the whole Operation Warp Speed deal came into existence. Plus, you are aware that Trump still slips into taking credit for it, aren't you?
Do we know that the vaccines didn't save lives? We know that much was misbegotten about the response to C19, from the confidence in masking, to the lockdowns, especially of children, and to the vaccination of children, but do we know that the vaccines didn't save many lives? It is hard to demonstrate the probability of an unknowable, I do understand. On the other hand, we know that the pandemic killed a million Americans.
I said to my doctor a few years ago that a book about medical mistakes of the twentieth century could be written, would be a thousand pages in length, and that there would be a volume two. He snickered, and nodded.
I wish you would reconsider organ donation. I haven't torn up my donor card to Mt Sinai. I truly do not think that pronouns nonsense ( which I think is dying quickly, having been poisoned fatally by a combination of Leftist overreach, general public weariness and disgust, and the election results ) would affect what they might learn from my brain donation. That's a complaint which I voice to get sour laughter. The government really did fail us on C19, and I am not sure we know the entire story yet.
"The number of deaths that mention one or more of the conditions indicated is shown for all deaths involving COVID-19 and by age groups. For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."
Over a million Americans died with Covid, not from Covid. And as a mortician who signs death certificates for a living, I can tell you that there was all kinds of chicanery in death reporting during 2020-2022.
Probably. I'm not an epidemiologist. I do maintain that there is far more harshness than is warranted against COVID-19 alarmists. Remember how people were about AIDS in the mid - 1980s? Retrospectively, the low level panic was unjustified, but we weren't on the other side of time yet and didn't know that.
Your throwing around "antivaxer" and attributing this to how I voted, amongst other claims/misconceptions, are part of the problem. There is too much to say to answer your why but first I'd have to address all the other errors and misconceptions you've presented in your lengthy post. No time.
Gee, I'm not nearly as hysterical about vaxxing as most Trump voters. I may have said this to you earlier. As for errors and misconceptions, I'm renowned for them.
I write in that I identify as as an "apache attack helicopter" whenever I see that. It's actually a meme. Google it if you're bored, apparently it's "hateful". My doctor got a kick out of it at least. She has a sense of humor.
I want to come up with an answer that says, in effect: "Well, as you see, if you weren't so obtuse and quarrelsome. Duh. Why should I have to answer such a stupid question, just to satisfy the fantasy that it's NORMAL to contest the obvious, just to conform to an ideology that's 15 minutes old, for the first time in the history of the world!?"
(But that doesn't have the same ring as "apache attack helicopter." [sigh])
When I come across a question that asks gender/sex and it has more than male or female as options, I refuse to answer. If I can I select other and then leave a note that there are two sexes and I refuse to answer if they try to act as if there are more. It is incumbent on reasonable people not to play these games. I have never offered my "pronouns" nor will I. Look at me - it's clear I am a dude and that's all the guidance you need on my pronouns.
There are rare cases where a child is born with 2 types of genitalia or ambiguous sexual characteristics. In my experience, the parents and doctor then decide which gender to raise the child as. Surgery is not automatic. I think the idea of “gender assignment” came from this, but I’m not sure. It fits in this situation, not the typical one.
Those are almost always still one gender with XY or XX chromosomes. That boxer who was allowed to punch a woman in the Olympics is male: XY. While he may have appeared female, he went through male puberty. Lady Collin Campbell was raised as a male, but shocked everyone by going through female puberty. She had corrective surgery. XX chromosomes.
That male boxer did not appear female, imo. He was likely born with ambiguous genitalia, but otherwise a normal male and went through male puberty. He was likely given estrogen to try and feminize his face, but it couldn't cover up the fact that he is a male. Same with the Thai boxer.
I agree he did not look female. Someone got on my case for suggesting otherwise and I kept saying: LOOK at this person! Obviously male! But what I meant was whatever was in his pants that might have appeared to be female.
But there are some who have both XX and XY and either do or don't have both genitalia. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more of this than we think, due to all the pollution, chemicals and stress in the world today.
Yes, and some people are born with one sexual type of genitalia, but have XY and XX both in their genes, which maybe why they have homosexual tendencies and/or gender dysphoria.
I think most things are multi-factor when it comes to cause. And there is no evidence that genes are the sole determinant of inherited traits, or have anything to do with heredity at all. It’s all theory rather than proven fact. I’m referring to a male’s proclivity for feminine characteristics not physical gender, in other words, personality.
And wouldn't it be a good thing if we respected all different types of personalities? As long as the personality wasn't harmful, mean, detrimental to society, etc.? The Apostle Paul said that he learned how to get along with rich, poor, anybody.... It's called agape in the Bible; it means "God's unconditional love". Christ said to be "As wise as a serpent and as harmless as a dove". Not an easy task.
Personality is complicated. It’s largely driven by the unconscious and includes parental projections. I don’t think “respecting” personalities is what’s needed as much as understanding where they come from and responding appropriately. For example, to let or worse encourage a child who identifies as a cat, dress like a cat and behave like one at school, etc. is encouraging mental illness. To allow the child to play cat while setting boundaries re where such play is appropriate would imo be the way to respect the child which is probably what you’re referring to. Similarly, if I have a suicidal client, respecting the person would not include paving the way for them to act out their ideation, nor would it include ignoring it. Specific action is called for in order to create safety (as much as that is possible), until the suicidal ideation has been successfully dealt with.
I guess I meant "respecting where a person is at, as a person", more than "personalities", because people have the ability to change their personality, (as I tell my young adult child!!), although the state of one's health certainly does factor into the state of a person's personality. I love the Louise Bates Ames' books, as they cover what's cognitively and physically happening for each age of children. And yes, "playing cat" is a part of growing at certain ages, and it's different than "I am a cat, so treat men like a cat" with an older child. As for suicidal client, I know of many cases where childhood encephalitis caused suicidal thoughts and to the point of making plans to commit suicide. In the case of the brain inflammation being from infection, post-infection and/or auto-immune reasons, healing can happen through IVIG, auto-immune drugs and/or inflammation drugs, etc., although depression/anxiety often remains, but if the body and brain can become healthy, CRT,ERP can help at that point.
A friend was recently telling me that a child was born with this condition and the parents decided to place the child for adoption. The friend is a foster parent so she was on call to possibly care for the child while they found an adoptive parent, which they did quite quickly.
If you think that's bad try going to some of the elite medical institution websites like Cleveland Clinic or American Medical Association (or any of hundreds of others). There you will not find traditional labels like man or woman, male or female, but "male assigned female at birth" or some other twisted, perverted nomenclature. Once the pride of science and medicine in the world, our institutions have degenerated into a cesspool of rot.
Kev, I think you mean sex is determined at conception, not “gender.” Biology 101: chromosomes don’t care about your social constructs. Gender is the cultural theater that came much later. Let’s not confuse science with semantics.
"what's with the "gender assigned at birth" in the GMA clip? "
It's the ideological and intellectual underpinning of their discrimination argument. If sex isn't a biological reality but rather an arbitrary assignment, then any attempt to differentiate between the sexes or between trans and cis is just unlawful discrimination.
The recent Vox article on the court arguments shows the thought process:
"The most important thing to understand about Tennessee’s law is that it explicitly draws lines based on a patient’s sex assigned at birth. If a child who is assigned male at birth is prescribed testosterone by their doctor, Tennessee permits that child to receive that treatment. But a child who is assigned female at birth may not."
Yes, unless you are hermaphrodite, where there's both XY and XX and some have XXY. With all the pollution and chemicals and stress in the world, I think there are more than we think.
In order to get a grasp on reality, it is a rule of thumb to disregard legacy media altogether. Using Big Lie techniques their primary purpose is to brainwash citizens into believing fantasies.
All of this is leading to one place: a rampant pedophilia nightmare. They are trying to get rid of consent laws by pretending kids are actually “little adults” so when they are raped by adults its “consensual”. That’s what this is all about. That’s all its ever been about. Destroying the world with Sodom and Gomorrah 2.0. Here is how horrific it is getting, the WHO is teaching children to masturbate from birth via the school system, meanwhile pedophilia is being piecemeal decriminalized:
Actually what I think it’s all about is transhumanism, that’s the end goal. First they blur the lines between male/female (i.e. they/them), next they blur the lines between human/a.i. They’re after our souls.
I fill out surveys for YouGov. Last week's survey, sponsored by PennState, had some very strange questions. "If you are unhappy with the recent election result (ie Trump winning), would you prefer to be governed by AI instead?" and there were numerous questions regarding how people felt, in general, about being Governed by AI. That really freaked me out. I voted for Trump, but they asked many strange questions like this.
But which AI? Mo Gawdat is the former chief business officer for Google X and is an AI researcher. What he’s saying here is quite astonishing. Democrats want to get control of AI to use it as a weapon against their enemies such as Trump/MAGA or Putin/Russia or simply anyone who opposes them. Elon is working to stop that and it seems AI is advancing so rapidly that it will also oppose that. The best of times. The worst of times. This will greatly help us all but especially those stressed out by health or financial problems which are usually closely related. If you have one you most likely also have the other.
Hope, if it’s based on facts that you can really believe rather than hope just based on wishful thinking, will noticeably improve your mental health which will then improve your physical health. It has to fact based belief though which can in fact easily be gained by following AI online on YouTube.
“Those machines are learning their intelligence from mimicking us. They are basically us on steroids.”
Mo Gawdat on AI: Will We End Up in Utopia or Dystopia? (6 min)
“The Billionaire Family Pushing Synthetic Sex Identities (SSI).”
The wealthy, powerful and sometimes very weird Pritzker cousins have set their sites on a new God-like goal: using gender ideology to remake human biology.
They are not doing away with the consent doctrine, they are taking it away, first from the parent and next from the individual and assigning all consensual authority to the State.
I think that there’s a reason that Trump was elected in 16 and again now. I really wasn’t worried about this election….just believed he’d win for bigger reasons than I can fully grasp. And I think the same will be true here too given that it’s a conservative court. I don’t think they want a repeat of other really atrocious court rulings. Thank God for people like Justice Thomas.
We've been down this road before. Like abortion, there is no way that this should be a federal issue, and that is the only decision the Court can legitimately make. A state may rule on this one way or the other, but the national government has no business here.
The Constitution is entirely silent on this topic. Go figure? Not a big topic in the late 1700s? Wasn’t the Revolutionary War won by brave transgender children? No? What the Constitution is silent on gets remanded to the states for them to decide. This should be open and shut, unless the court decided to get active again. Ugh!
You’re absolutely right. I admire what Matt Walsh does, but he’s wrong about making this a national issue. Leave the trans issues at the state level. The Fed. Gov. Is too damn big and intrusive - it needs to to mind its own constitutional business.
Just like abortion back to States to decide, so is this issue of gender affirmative care/puberty blockers/chem altering of biological parts also relegated to the States. This is our system of federalism. The States only gave specific powers to the Federal government to begin this Republic - and those specific powers are defined in the Constitution. If not defined, then the matter is up to each State to decide/determine.
Child mutilation is beyond serious, it’s abominable, but pushing everything up to the Feds is how we created the DC monster that we now have. And we want the S/C to sustain the state’s law; the appellate wants to overturn the existing state law, so that they can make money by sexually mutilating troubled minors. These same people would bring back lobotomies, if they could, and make it a package deal. Just because you’re a sociopath, doesn’t mean that you can’t be charming, intelligent, persuasive, and have a medical degree.
INFORMED consent. That is a legal term meaning all information of possible and likely outcomes including death,and risk to benefit had been explained in a way that the patient signifies they understand and are willing to take the associated risks freely and willingly.
This is an legally enforceable contract the government can close your hospital down for violating!
INFORMED consent cannot truly be elicited to a minor by law. Parents consent for surgery for minor patients. Period.
How planned parenthood has skirted this law for decades is beyond me.
IMHO informed consent can't really be given on sexual transitions because even their own governing body has about zero idea what will happen to these patients 5 10 20 years down the road. From their own meetings( Michael Schellenberg did a piece on this) speaking amongst one another admit this. Not only that, I sincerely doubt any doctor leads with" your new penis/ vagina/ breasts will not be like a natural one. You will like never experience an orgasm. You will be sterile and will never be able to naturally create your own children. You will not have sperm/eggs. You will not be able to breastfeed. You will not be able to carry a child or give birth. These created organs are for visual enhancement only and will serve little to no function. You will be on medication daily for your entire life It may not change your mental outlook, and cure your depression or change your suicide risk. It may increase your mental distress and may increase your suicidal ideation."
From what little we do know there are many risks associated with hormone treatment that are life alternating and permanent.
But there is so much more we do not have any clue about.
It's not hard to imagine that children and even adults imagine a newly constructed penis will look, behave and feel like a natural penis. If these kind of blunt and uncomfortable conversations are not able to be had, it will remain in darkness the real and disappointing truth that becoming the opposite sex is as real as becoming a unicorn.
If you're an adult and you can pay for your own surgery have at it. There is absolutely no excuse for mutilating a child or consenting to mutilate your child because they say they want it.
If your 5 year old says he'll kill himself because he's a pirate and wants a peg leg and one eye gouged out you don't rush him off to surgery.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments here, Sue Kelly — particularly your thorough “full disclosure dialogue” that physicians & medical facilities would need to have, unless full disclosure is also now slated to be a legal step of the past!
Ask a parent if a 5 year old should get full breast implants. Tattoos. Drink alcohol. Smoke. Have sex. Work in a factory. I personally think even the craziest among woke trans parents would say no to most of those and more. If parents won’t take care of their kids, sometime has to. And imo the left failed.
It occurs to me, as someone who raised 5 kids and one foster child:
Raising kids is among the hardest jobs in the world. How nice to delegate that job to the Professional Managerial Class and a range of experts who first tell you what to do with your child, and then what you can and can't do with your child.
The welfare state first encouraged and sustained the destruction of the Black family that began under slavery, making single head of households ("HOH") the default for ALL American families as a control and dependency mechanism.
They tell my kids not to hold their infants too much so they can go back to their jobs serving corporations and the government sooner and won't become too attached.
What? Slaves had no rights and their children could be sold at the master's whim. Black women had no right to refuse to have sex with their owner and slavery passed through the maternal line so the owners were not responsible for their offspring. Before the Civil rights act of 64, blacks could mainly find work doing low paying menial job. A woman's aid could be cut if there was a man in the home.
You need to read more Thomas Sowell. He has shown conclusively the black family was improving tremendously in the 1950s and had a lower divorce rate and fewer unwed babies. The civil rights era destroyed all that progress.
And it has been decisively proven that the Welfare Laws beginning in the 1960s, which told Black women that they had to be Single to receive Aid, began the destruction of the Black family. It began in the 1960s with the mass promotion of Welfare & restriction to only Single Black mothers who were forced to divorce to receive aid.
"A woman's aid could be cut if there was a man in the home." No no. This is the Current Policy. Women's aid IS cut if there is a man in the house. Because the Democratic Party aims to keep Black people poor, suppressed & victimized. That is the goal of the Democratic Party. They want Black people to be victims. To feel like they can't do anything on their own. No use even trying to get a job because you can't get it anyway due to systemic racism. And yes, take away aid if someone dares to marry the person they love. They want Black mothers to be single mothers. Because the Democratic Party wants to maintain Control of Black women, to keep them dependent on the Democratic Party.
I grew up poor in the 1960s-70s. The system was designed to keep you poor and engender dependency on the state, regardless of race. The Democrats just used the Civil Rights Act to justify their modifications to the established welfare state.
Kruger wrote: "The welfare state first encouraged and sustained the destruction of the Black family that began under slavery, making single head of households ("HOH") the default for ALL American families as a control and dependency mechanism." There was no welfare under slavery.
So when my 5 year old wanted to fly, did i take him to the top of a 10 story building and tell him to jump? Or if my child wants to identify as an amputee, is there a doc willing to cutting off one or two limbs? I just saw a post that i can't find anymore on instagram of one of these mutilator-doctors explaining how they finally realized that their patient-base was in the schools and that THAT was where the "education" needed to take place...yep follow the money. These people are monsters.
My stepdaughter is 45, happily married with 3 beautiful children. When she was 5, she insisted that she was a boy and wanted to be called Joe. We didn’t make a big deal of it. We called her Joe occasionally, but only if she corrected us for using her real name. Oops, sorry Joe, I forgot kind of thing. It lasted a few months, then we never heard of Joe again.
I shudder to think what could have happened to her if today’s schools and doctors had been around then.
If I had been born fifty years later, I would have been a victim of the lunatic Left, since my mother saw no evil in letting her adventurous daughter push social boundaries (within reason). Knowing that makes me break out in hives.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson cannot even define what a woman is which does not give me much confidence that we can count on her to help protect the nations children. Let's hope the remainder of the court knows the difference between male and female.
Watching my college roommate go through this (no surgeries or puberty blockers at their insistence) with their daughter and seeing her come "out of it" after 6 very long years was heart wrenching. My friend says she could have a Ph.D. on this subject after all of the research she's done.
I could not watch the Good Morning American piece. It's heinous how the media normalizes it.
That’s right! When I was growing up you would see girls playing sports with the boys, but to my knowledge ever changing their body to be the opposite sex. At that time “in history” transitioning wasn’t an option. There were people who were gay and lesbians but not the in between
Well, now I feel really bad for unloading on you above as this take seems much more considered. That's correct, it wasn't an option, and never should have been. I apologize for venting on you above.
I blame much of the madness on bad therapy which, unfortunately, is common. Inadequately trained therapists who have not dealt with their own issues unknowingly engage in projection and push an agenda. This is not therapy. Worse, most seem to have adopted the conventional medicine model: biology rules and psychology is a by product which can be manipulated with chemicals. Or, if the “bad feelings” don’t go away with altering body chemistry, then cut the offending parts off. This is also the rationale for cutting off people, including family members, who make you uncomfortable or have done something unforgivable. God forbid you talk to them and try to understand each other. There are of course abusive situations and abusers who are not amenable to changing behavior where this prescription is appropriate. But I’ve seen it become the go-to solution for every conflict. My family as well as nearly every family I know has experienced being cut off by an adult child or sibling for unclear reasons. Most have no idea what happened.
In my opinion, professional and otherwise, this way of thinking and being is not in anyone’s best interest, and the only certainty in adopting it is a sea of regret that lies ahead.
Very thoughtful comments, and I like the comparison to cutting off family members. I'm sure you, like me, continually espouse to their family members, 'if as a family, we can't consistently engage in the respectful exchange of ideas, what hope do we have as a Republic!' God bless
If young people want to change themselves, they can do it when they’re 18. Parents and the courts shouldn’t allow them to do it before that age. Period.
There are 3 factions on the court. The 3 leftists and the 3 conservatives are predictable, mostly. Occasionally, Kagan or Gorsuch will go off the reservation but not very often. It is the 3 Republican squishes that are of concern. Both ACB and Kavanaugh seem to be under the thumb of the awful Robert's who will torture the Constitution to avoid making a decision that might make someone mad . In the end he makes everyone mad and undermines the legitimacy of the Court which is exactly what he is trying to avoid.
I hope enough of them will be able to understand that the question they face is similar to the one they faced in Dobbs and that they should affirm the right of states to enact these laws.
what's with the "gender assigned at birth" in the GMA clip? What the hell does that even mean? You're born a male or female. Full stop.
Indeed. Gender is observed at birth, not assigned. That bit of slippery language is infuriating.
The left are the masters of appropriating language for their cause and the dumb assess in Republican positions of power allow them to do it.
And the commentariat plays along.
And easy enough to get a DNA sample to "assign" XY or XX chromosomes!
And to see if a child who's having real troubles may have both XX and XY and/or XXY. I'm wondering if there's more kids like this, due to all the pollution, "forever" chemicals and stress in the world and that's why we're seeing more problems with sexual dysphoria? In that case, I still stay say that the dominate sex of a child or adult, with this disability, so to speak, is the one that that person needs to adopt and that's for the best in society too.
Exactly.
Well, SEX is observed at birth, and named (or misnamed), according to biological dimorphism, either/or.
GENDER is how we manifest sex.
(I don't like to pick nits, but this isn't actually nit-picking. It's biology.)
Oh, KAM, what a lovely attempt to sound scientific while playing linguistic gymnastics. Yes, sex is observed at birth—it’s biology, not guesswork. “Named or misnamed”? Please. Chromosomes and gametes don’t lie, no matter how many word games you play.
As for “gender is how we manifest sex,” that’s just glitter on nonsense. Gender, as it's used today, is a social construct designed to muddy the biological waters. And calling this biology? Come on. You’re twisting science into pretzels to fit ideology.
But hey, at least you “don’t like to pick nits.” Clearly, you’d rather build haystacks out of them.
Great response and agree 100%
A bit more about biological dismorphism. It exists. It's referred to as a DSD...a difference (or disorder) of sex development. It's a genetic mutation and is extremely rare. Its symptom upon birth may be genitalia which appear to be typically female or male but later turn out to have been misidentified. Thus, the term "assigned at birth," which used to be attached only to this rare phenomenon, until trans activists decided to dip its definition in the murky waters of pseudoscience.
Doctors "assign" a sex to all people on the basis of a visual inspection, which rarely turns out to be wrong, unless the dysmorphism is extreme and easy to spot.
People born with a DSD are often in the dark about their condition until the age when puberty is expected to begin, but the appropriate secondary sex characteristics don't materialize. For instance, a person assumed to be female on the basis of a vulva doesn't get a period within the appropriate age range. Testing reveals that this person has XY chromosomes, no uterus or ovaries, and a partially formed internal vagina, but also has internal testes that produce testosterone in the normal male range. (This is a description of the DSD of track and field athlete, Castor Semenya.)
Genetic mutations can occur anywhere in the body. Some people are born deaf or blind, or with limbs that don't develop normally. Other mutations may cause intellectual impairments. Some mutations are more subtle, such as hyper-mobile joints.
Mutations do not contradict the basic biological human paradigm. They are appropriately viewed as abnormalities.
Sex is not a rainbow of types. It is not a spectrum. The survival of a species relies upon a consistent and viable reproductive strategy determined by sex.
Here's an article that discusses the topic through the lens of this summer's Olympic women's boxing controversy:
https://quillette.com/2024/08/03/xy-athletes-in-womens-olympic-boxing-paris-2024-controversy-explained-khelif-yu-ting/
So how do horses and dogs "manifest sex"? Vaginas vs. penises and XX vs. XY. Just as in humans. Except that only humans are smart enough to be stupid enough to invent an extraneous category "gender".
Quite right.
Twisting language is very Orwellian. It's not the only Orwellian thing from the left. They apparently think that book was a handbook, not a warning.
Infuriating because it's insane!
Yeah, and on my recent online check-in for cleveland clinic, my gender identity was a question. Also my sex at birth. Even the cleveland clinic....and they still wonder why we do not trust the medical profession any more!!
Eight years ago, I signed my brain over to the Brain Trauma Center at Mt Sinai Hospital, in New York City. We donors get a twice yearly e - newsletter. A couple of years ago, hospital personnel discussed in each issue were presented to us with their preferred pronouns. This disgusts me so intensely I have come close to destroying my donor card.
I'm doubtful of the ability of people who think this is a legitimate thing to make much of their study of anyone's brain. In fact, I think it is definitely they who should be making brain donations.
I disenrolled/unenrolled from being an organ donor when I saw that unvaccinated people at the top of the donor list were being bypassed from donation and left to die because they refused the jab.
One doesn't have to be enrolled as a donor in order for a relative to donate your organs in the event of tragedy. My husband and I have not signed as organ donors, but both of us are in agreement to donate, but we will have conditions, such as youngest first, no consideration for vaccine status, etc.
I'm still a general organ donor, and while I understand your disgust, I don't think I would have made the same decision. Why did you? I'm genuinely curious.
The people who got vaccinated were trusting the great majority of scientists, and I don't understand what amounts to a decision to punish them because they did. I think the politicization which has taken place around COVID-19 vaccines is one of the saddest things of our time, and is emblematic of how f*cked up a society we really are. It reminds me of the controversy of thirty five years ago about whether there should be a constitutional amendment against flag burning.
I suspect you voted for Trump. To be consistent, every antivaxxer would have to have voted for Robert Kennedy or stayed home. No antivaxxer could have voted for Trump, under whose aegis the whole Operation Warp Speed deal came into existence. Plus, you are aware that Trump still slips into taking credit for it, aren't you?
Do we know that the vaccines didn't save lives? We know that much was misbegotten about the response to C19, from the confidence in masking, to the lockdowns, especially of children, and to the vaccination of children, but do we know that the vaccines didn't save many lives? It is hard to demonstrate the probability of an unknowable, I do understand. On the other hand, we know that the pandemic killed a million Americans.
I said to my doctor a few years ago that a book about medical mistakes of the twentieth century could be written, would be a thousand pages in length, and that there would be a volume two. He snickered, and nodded.
I wish you would reconsider organ donation. I haven't torn up my donor card to Mt Sinai. I truly do not think that pronouns nonsense ( which I think is dying quickly, having been poisoned fatally by a combination of Leftist overreach, general public weariness and disgust, and the election results ) would affect what they might learn from my brain donation. That's a complaint which I voice to get sour laughter. The government really did fail us on C19, and I am not sure we know the entire story yet.
"On the other hand, we know that the pandemic killed a million Americans."
That is simply not true. From the CDC website:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Comorbidities
"The number of deaths that mention one or more of the conditions indicated is shown for all deaths involving COVID-19 and by age groups. For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."
Over a million Americans died with Covid, not from Covid. And as a mortician who signs death certificates for a living, I can tell you that there was all kinds of chicanery in death reporting during 2020-2022.
Probably. I'm not an epidemiologist. I do maintain that there is far more harshness than is warranted against COVID-19 alarmists. Remember how people were about AIDS in the mid - 1980s? Retrospectively, the low level panic was unjustified, but we weren't on the other side of time yet and didn't know that.
One doesn't have to sign a donor card in order for a relative to donate your organs.
And I am sure mine would be eager to do it.
Your throwing around "antivaxer" and attributing this to how I voted, amongst other claims/misconceptions, are part of the problem. There is too much to say to answer your why but first I'd have to address all the other errors and misconceptions you've presented in your lengthy post. No time.
Gee, I'm not nearly as hysterical about vaxxing as most Trump voters. I may have said this to you earlier. As for errors and misconceptions, I'm renowned for them.
I write in that I identify as as an "apache attack helicopter" whenever I see that. It's actually a meme. Google it if you're bored, apparently it's "hateful". My doctor got a kick out of it at least. She has a sense of humor.
You have a fan in me! A wonderful idea! I think I will start to identify as a ferret. As you can see from my photo, it isn't that improbable.
That's funny and good.
But I don't.
I want to come up with an answer that says, in effect: "Well, as you see, if you weren't so obtuse and quarrelsome. Duh. Why should I have to answer such a stupid question, just to satisfy the fantasy that it's NORMAL to contest the obvious, just to conform to an ideology that's 15 minutes old, for the first time in the history of the world!?"
(But that doesn't have the same ring as "apache attack helicopter." [sigh])
When I come across a question that asks gender/sex and it has more than male or female as options, I refuse to answer. If I can I select other and then leave a note that there are two sexes and I refuse to answer if they try to act as if there are more. It is incumbent on reasonable people not to play these games. I have never offered my "pronouns" nor will I. Look at me - it's clear I am a dude and that's all the guidance you need on my pronouns.
There are rare cases where a child is born with 2 types of genitalia or ambiguous sexual characteristics. In my experience, the parents and doctor then decide which gender to raise the child as. Surgery is not automatic. I think the idea of “gender assignment” came from this, but I’m not sure. It fits in this situation, not the typical one.
Those are almost always still one gender with XY or XX chromosomes. That boxer who was allowed to punch a woman in the Olympics is male: XY. While he may have appeared female, he went through male puberty. Lady Collin Campbell was raised as a male, but shocked everyone by going through female puberty. She had corrective surgery. XX chromosomes.
That male boxer did not appear female, imo. He was likely born with ambiguous genitalia, but otherwise a normal male and went through male puberty. He was likely given estrogen to try and feminize his face, but it couldn't cover up the fact that he is a male. Same with the Thai boxer.
I agree he did not look female. Someone got on my case for suggesting otherwise and I kept saying: LOOK at this person! Obviously male! But what I meant was whatever was in his pants that might have appeared to be female.
But there are some who have both XX and XY and either do or don't have both genitalia. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more of this than we think, due to all the pollution, chemicals and stress in the world today.
Yes, and some people are born with one sexual type of genitalia, but have XY and XX both in their genes, which maybe why they have homosexual tendencies and/or gender dysphoria.
I think most things are multi-factor when it comes to cause. And there is no evidence that genes are the sole determinant of inherited traits, or have anything to do with heredity at all. It’s all theory rather than proven fact. I’m referring to a male’s proclivity for feminine characteristics not physical gender, in other words, personality.
And wouldn't it be a good thing if we respected all different types of personalities? As long as the personality wasn't harmful, mean, detrimental to society, etc.? The Apostle Paul said that he learned how to get along with rich, poor, anybody.... It's called agape in the Bible; it means "God's unconditional love". Christ said to be "As wise as a serpent and as harmless as a dove". Not an easy task.
Personality is complicated. It’s largely driven by the unconscious and includes parental projections. I don’t think “respecting” personalities is what’s needed as much as understanding where they come from and responding appropriately. For example, to let or worse encourage a child who identifies as a cat, dress like a cat and behave like one at school, etc. is encouraging mental illness. To allow the child to play cat while setting boundaries re where such play is appropriate would imo be the way to respect the child which is probably what you’re referring to. Similarly, if I have a suicidal client, respecting the person would not include paving the way for them to act out their ideation, nor would it include ignoring it. Specific action is called for in order to create safety (as much as that is possible), until the suicidal ideation has been successfully dealt with.
I guess I meant "respecting where a person is at, as a person", more than "personalities", because people have the ability to change their personality, (as I tell my young adult child!!), although the state of one's health certainly does factor into the state of a person's personality. I love the Louise Bates Ames' books, as they cover what's cognitively and physically happening for each age of children. And yes, "playing cat" is a part of growing at certain ages, and it's different than "I am a cat, so treat men like a cat" with an older child. As for suicidal client, I know of many cases where childhood encephalitis caused suicidal thoughts and to the point of making plans to commit suicide. In the case of the brain inflammation being from infection, post-infection and/or auto-immune reasons, healing can happen through IVIG, auto-immune drugs and/or inflammation drugs, etc., although depression/anxiety often remains, but if the body and brain can become healthy, CRT,ERP can help at that point.
A friend was recently telling me that a child was born with this condition and the parents decided to place the child for adoption. The friend is a foster parent so she was on call to possibly care for the child while they found an adoptive parent, which they did quite quickly.
There is a natural occurrence of perhaps one in ten thousand with that physiology at birth. Check the google.
If you think that's bad try going to some of the elite medical institution websites like Cleveland Clinic or American Medical Association (or any of hundreds of others). There you will not find traditional labels like man or woman, male or female, but "male assigned female at birth" or some other twisted, perverted nomenclature. Once the pride of science and medicine in the world, our institutions have degenerated into a cesspool of rot.
Gender is almost always assigned at conception, not birth.
Kev, I think you mean sex is determined at conception, not “gender.” Biology 101: chromosomes don’t care about your social constructs. Gender is the cultural theater that came much later. Let’s not confuse science with semantics.
"what's with the "gender assigned at birth" in the GMA clip? "
It's the ideological and intellectual underpinning of their discrimination argument. If sex isn't a biological reality but rather an arbitrary assignment, then any attempt to differentiate between the sexes or between trans and cis is just unlawful discrimination.
The recent Vox article on the court arguments shows the thought process:
"The most important thing to understand about Tennessee’s law is that it explicitly draws lines based on a patient’s sex assigned at birth. If a child who is assigned male at birth is prescribed testosterone by their doctor, Tennessee permits that child to receive that treatment. But a child who is assigned female at birth may not."
https://www.vox.com/scotus/389737/supreme-court-transgender-us-skrmetti-health-care-tennessee
Whenever I see the phrase, it's tell that the person using it has already bought into to the ideology.
Yes, unless you are hermaphrodite, where there's both XY and XX and some have XXY. With all the pollution and chemicals and stress in the world, I think there are more than we think.
In order to get a grasp on reality, it is a rule of thumb to disregard legacy media altogether. Using Big Lie techniques their primary purpose is to brainwash citizens into believing fantasies.
All of this is leading to one place: a rampant pedophilia nightmare. They are trying to get rid of consent laws by pretending kids are actually “little adults” so when they are raped by adults its “consensual”. That’s what this is all about. That’s all its ever been about. Destroying the world with Sodom and Gomorrah 2.0. Here is how horrific it is getting, the WHO is teaching children to masturbate from birth via the school system, meanwhile pedophilia is being piecemeal decriminalized:
https://tritorch.substack.com/p/demons-disguised-as-guardians-philanthropic
This cannot stand. We’re going to have to get in this fight to stop this.
Actually what I think it’s all about is transhumanism, that’s the end goal. First they blur the lines between male/female (i.e. they/them), next they blur the lines between human/a.i. They’re after our souls.
I fill out surveys for YouGov. Last week's survey, sponsored by PennState, had some very strange questions. "If you are unhappy with the recent election result (ie Trump winning), would you prefer to be governed by AI instead?" and there were numerous questions regarding how people felt, in general, about being Governed by AI. That really freaked me out. I voted for Trump, but they asked many strange questions like this.
But which AI? Mo Gawdat is the former chief business officer for Google X and is an AI researcher. What he’s saying here is quite astonishing. Democrats want to get control of AI to use it as a weapon against their enemies such as Trump/MAGA or Putin/Russia or simply anyone who opposes them. Elon is working to stop that and it seems AI is advancing so rapidly that it will also oppose that. The best of times. The worst of times. This will greatly help us all but especially those stressed out by health or financial problems which are usually closely related. If you have one you most likely also have the other.
Hope, if it’s based on facts that you can really believe rather than hope just based on wishful thinking, will noticeably improve your mental health which will then improve your physical health. It has to fact based belief though which can in fact easily be gained by following AI online on YouTube.
“Those machines are learning their intelligence from mimicking us. They are basically us on steroids.”
Mo Gawdat on AI: Will We End Up in Utopia or Dystopia? (6 min)
Mo Gawdat. Dec 3, 2024
https://youtu.be/-GZiIXvq1ss?si=CQqc-G882Zhy70JC
“Open AI’s Sam Altman: Musk’s xAI is a serious competitor” (3 min)
CNBC Television. Dec 4, 2024
https://youtu.be/RcOEdHOZRkQ?si=foT4_WAGgLzUc5-P
True, there is ample evidence to support this
I recommend Jennifer Bilek’s Substack page for anyone looking to research this subject further …
“The Billionaire Family Pushing Synthetic Sex Identities (SSI).”
The wealthy, powerful and sometimes very weird Pritzker cousins have set their sites on a new God-like goal: using gender ideology to remake human biology.
Tablet. By Jennifer Bilek. Jun 14, 2022
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers
“The Billionaires and Organizations Funding the Transgender Movement Today.” (8 min)
Megyn Kelly interviews Jennifer Bilek. Oct 13, 2023
https://youtu.be/eNq7dYOdQyQ?si=Zd9OgHqgg_rNx-7p
It really comes down to consent. And children are incapable of it. Parents have limited rights in this regard.
They are not doing away with the consent doctrine, they are taking it away, first from the parent and next from the individual and assigning all consensual authority to the State.
I have to believe that's what the court will find. It's a really, really slippery slope and I think they realize that.
I find myself feeling really nervous about this this morning! I really hope the court sides with Tennessee.
I think that there’s a reason that Trump was elected in 16 and again now. I really wasn’t worried about this election….just believed he’d win for bigger reasons than I can fully grasp. And I think the same will be true here too given that it’s a conservative court. I don’t think they want a repeat of other really atrocious court rulings. Thank God for people like Justice Thomas.
We've been down this road before. Like abortion, there is no way that this should be a federal issue, and that is the only decision the Court can legitimately make. A state may rule on this one way or the other, but the national government has no business here.
The Constitution is entirely silent on this topic. Go figure? Not a big topic in the late 1700s? Wasn’t the Revolutionary War won by brave transgender children? No? What the Constitution is silent on gets remanded to the states for them to decide. This should be open and shut, unless the court decided to get active again. Ugh!
You’re absolutely right. I admire what Matt Walsh does, but he’s wrong about making this a national issue. Leave the trans issues at the state level. The Fed. Gov. Is too damn big and intrusive - it needs to to mind its own constitutional business.
I disagree. This is a serious issue and child mutilation should be federally overruled by the Supreme Court. All children must be protected.
Just like abortion back to States to decide, so is this issue of gender affirmative care/puberty blockers/chem altering of biological parts also relegated to the States. This is our system of federalism. The States only gave specific powers to the Federal government to begin this Republic - and those specific powers are defined in the Constitution. If not defined, then the matter is up to each State to decide/determine.
I disagree. This is a serious issue and child mutilation should be federally overruled. All children must be protected.
Child mutilation is beyond serious, it’s abominable, but pushing everything up to the Feds is how we created the DC monster that we now have. And we want the S/C to sustain the state’s law; the appellate wants to overturn the existing state law, so that they can make money by sexually mutilating troubled minors. These same people would bring back lobotomies, if they could, and make it a package deal. Just because you’re a sociopath, doesn’t mean that you can’t be charming, intelligent, persuasive, and have a medical degree.
Abortion is child mutilation and it’s now decided at the State level.
INFORMED consent. That is a legal term meaning all information of possible and likely outcomes including death,and risk to benefit had been explained in a way that the patient signifies they understand and are willing to take the associated risks freely and willingly.
This is an legally enforceable contract the government can close your hospital down for violating!
INFORMED consent cannot truly be elicited to a minor by law. Parents consent for surgery for minor patients. Period.
How planned parenthood has skirted this law for decades is beyond me.
IMHO informed consent can't really be given on sexual transitions because even their own governing body has about zero idea what will happen to these patients 5 10 20 years down the road. From their own meetings( Michael Schellenberg did a piece on this) speaking amongst one another admit this. Not only that, I sincerely doubt any doctor leads with" your new penis/ vagina/ breasts will not be like a natural one. You will like never experience an orgasm. You will be sterile and will never be able to naturally create your own children. You will not have sperm/eggs. You will not be able to breastfeed. You will not be able to carry a child or give birth. These created organs are for visual enhancement only and will serve little to no function. You will be on medication daily for your entire life It may not change your mental outlook, and cure your depression or change your suicide risk. It may increase your mental distress and may increase your suicidal ideation."
From what little we do know there are many risks associated with hormone treatment that are life alternating and permanent.
But there is so much more we do not have any clue about.
It's not hard to imagine that children and even adults imagine a newly constructed penis will look, behave and feel like a natural penis. If these kind of blunt and uncomfortable conversations are not able to be had, it will remain in darkness the real and disappointing truth that becoming the opposite sex is as real as becoming a unicorn.
If you're an adult and you can pay for your own surgery have at it. There is absolutely no excuse for mutilating a child or consenting to mutilate your child because they say they want it.
If your 5 year old says he'll kill himself because he's a pirate and wants a peg leg and one eye gouged out you don't rush him off to surgery.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments here, Sue Kelly — particularly your thorough “full disclosure dialogue” that physicians & medical facilities would need to have, unless full disclosure is also now slated to be a legal step of the past!
Ask a parent if a 5 year old should get full breast implants. Tattoos. Drink alcohol. Smoke. Have sex. Work in a factory. I personally think even the craziest among woke trans parents would say no to most of those and more. If parents won’t take care of their kids, sometime has to. And imo the left failed.
It occurs to me, as someone who raised 5 kids and one foster child:
Raising kids is among the hardest jobs in the world. How nice to delegate that job to the Professional Managerial Class and a range of experts who first tell you what to do with your child, and then what you can and can't do with your child.
The welfare state first encouraged and sustained the destruction of the Black family that began under slavery, making single head of households ("HOH") the default for ALL American families as a control and dependency mechanism.
They tell my kids not to hold their infants too much so they can go back to their jobs serving corporations and the government sooner and won't become too attached.
What? Slaves had no rights and their children could be sold at the master's whim. Black women had no right to refuse to have sex with their owner and slavery passed through the maternal line so the owners were not responsible for their offspring. Before the Civil rights act of 64, blacks could mainly find work doing low paying menial job. A woman's aid could be cut if there was a man in the home.
You need to read more Thomas Sowell. He has shown conclusively the black family was improving tremendously in the 1950s and had a lower divorce rate and fewer unwed babies. The civil rights era destroyed all that progress.
Yes.
And it has been decisively proven that the Welfare Laws beginning in the 1960s, which told Black women that they had to be Single to receive Aid, began the destruction of the Black family. It began in the 1960s with the mass promotion of Welfare & restriction to only Single Black mothers who were forced to divorce to receive aid.
So things like birth control had nothing to do with it...
"A woman's aid could be cut if there was a man in the home." No no. This is the Current Policy. Women's aid IS cut if there is a man in the house. Because the Democratic Party aims to keep Black people poor, suppressed & victimized. That is the goal of the Democratic Party. They want Black people to be victims. To feel like they can't do anything on their own. No use even trying to get a job because you can't get it anyway due to systemic racism. And yes, take away aid if someone dares to marry the person they love. They want Black mothers to be single mothers. Because the Democratic Party wants to maintain Control of Black women, to keep them dependent on the Democratic Party.
I grew up poor in the 1960s-70s. The system was designed to keep you poor and engender dependency on the state, regardless of race. The Democrats just used the Civil Rights Act to justify their modifications to the established welfare state.
Baloney
What's that have to do with putting children on puberty blockers and cutting off their body parts?
Kruger wrote: "The welfare state first encouraged and sustained the destruction of the Black family that began under slavery, making single head of households ("HOH") the default for ALL American families as a control and dependency mechanism." There was no welfare under slavery.
I see that the sentence structure is confusing.
I think we can assume that Kruger meant 'the destruction of the black family' began under slavery - NOT 'the welfare state'.
Yeah, you'll get a lot more grant money with that take.
Yeah. ICYMI, Pat Cross on "Progressive Parenting":
https://patcrosscartoons.com/2019/10/08/progressive-parenting/
Exactly!
So when my 5 year old wanted to fly, did i take him to the top of a 10 story building and tell him to jump? Or if my child wants to identify as an amputee, is there a doc willing to cutting off one or two limbs? I just saw a post that i can't find anymore on instagram of one of these mutilator-doctors explaining how they finally realized that their patient-base was in the schools and that THAT was where the "education" needed to take place...yep follow the money. These people are monsters.
"My kid identifies as a pirate. We're taking him Tuesday to have one eye and one leg removed, so he can live his full truth."
My stepdaughter is 45, happily married with 3 beautiful children. When she was 5, she insisted that she was a boy and wanted to be called Joe. We didn’t make a big deal of it. We called her Joe occasionally, but only if she corrected us for using her real name. Oops, sorry Joe, I forgot kind of thing. It lasted a few months, then we never heard of Joe again.
I shudder to think what could have happened to her if today’s schools and doctors had been around then.
Your stepdaughter may have been enamored with The Facts of Life TV show? ‘Jo’ was Nancy McKeon’s character.
If I had been born fifty years later, I would have been a victim of the lunatic Left, since my mother saw no evil in letting her adventurous daughter push social boundaries (within reason). Knowing that makes me break out in hives.
It is pedophilic child abuse - plain and simple.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson cannot even define what a woman is which does not give me much confidence that we can count on her to help protect the nations children. Let's hope the remainder of the court knows the difference between male and female.
Watching my college roommate go through this (no surgeries or puberty blockers at their insistence) with their daughter and seeing her come "out of it" after 6 very long years was heart wrenching. My friend says she could have a Ph.D. on this subject after all of the research she's done.
I could not watch the Good Morning American piece. It's heinous how the media normalizes it.
That’s right! When I was growing up you would see girls playing sports with the boys, but to my knowledge ever changing their body to be the opposite sex. At that time “in history” transitioning wasn’t an option. There were people who were gay and lesbians but not the in between
Well, now I feel really bad for unloading on you above as this take seems much more considered. That's correct, it wasn't an option, and never should have been. I apologize for venting on you above.
I blame much of the madness on bad therapy which, unfortunately, is common. Inadequately trained therapists who have not dealt with their own issues unknowingly engage in projection and push an agenda. This is not therapy. Worse, most seem to have adopted the conventional medicine model: biology rules and psychology is a by product which can be manipulated with chemicals. Or, if the “bad feelings” don’t go away with altering body chemistry, then cut the offending parts off. This is also the rationale for cutting off people, including family members, who make you uncomfortable or have done something unforgivable. God forbid you talk to them and try to understand each other. There are of course abusive situations and abusers who are not amenable to changing behavior where this prescription is appropriate. But I’ve seen it become the go-to solution for every conflict. My family as well as nearly every family I know has experienced being cut off by an adult child or sibling for unclear reasons. Most have no idea what happened.
In my opinion, professional and otherwise, this way of thinking and being is not in anyone’s best interest, and the only certainty in adopting it is a sea of regret that lies ahead.
Very thoughtful comments, and I like the comparison to cutting off family members. I'm sure you, like me, continually espouse to their family members, 'if as a family, we can't consistently engage in the respectful exchange of ideas, what hope do we have as a Republic!' God bless
If young people want to change themselves, they can do it when they’re 18. Parents and the courts shouldn’t allow them to do it before that age. Period.
There are 3 factions on the court. The 3 leftists and the 3 conservatives are predictable, mostly. Occasionally, Kagan or Gorsuch will go off the reservation but not very often. It is the 3 Republican squishes that are of concern. Both ACB and Kavanaugh seem to be under the thumb of the awful Robert's who will torture the Constitution to avoid making a decision that might make someone mad . In the end he makes everyone mad and undermines the legitimacy of the Court which is exactly what he is trying to avoid.
I hope enough of them will be able to understand that the question they face is similar to the one they faced in Dobbs and that they should affirm the right of states to enact these laws.
Well put.
Yes it’s a big day.
The ACLU is a joke as are the NAACP, ADL, southern poverty law Center, and countless other groups.
These are “science experiments” being sold to parents and the public as health care.