Old Enough for a Sex Change but Not Old Enough for Sex?

don't hold your breath

 

I haven't defended Trump for God's sake. I've pointed out that additional parties SHARE blame. As in: Stop concentrating on the cheeto scented distraction and realize that many more persons are blameworthy and going unblamed. They're flying under the radar because you're so focused on Pvt bone spurs you're practically frothing at the mouth.

 

No. The statement is ALL cosmetic surgeries. Then it goes on to break down other numbers for breast problems.

Regardless, these cosmetic surgeries are mostly to FIX abnormalities and bring about normal functioning/appearance.

Transgender double mastectomies are creating abnormalities and destroying function/appearance.

Yes. Double mastectomies are surgeries. They are done to stop cancer, not to affirm delusions.

The basis of your argument is ridiculous.

Since you're going to spend zero actual effort backing up your argument, and have not actually looked into it other than one initial hastily researched and 1st-link-clicked example, I'll expound on it FOR you to put an end to this nonsense. There have never been 76,000 breast surgeries for minors in ANY year, let alone 76,000

https://www.plasticsurgery.org/docu.../2020/cosmetic-procedures-ages-13-19-2020.pdf

 

If I misread that, then so be it. At this point, we're not going to agree on what it says.

Most breast augmentations are not about bringing abut normal appearance. They're about making breasts bigger than they developed. Do you have something that breaks the numbers down even further to show which are for balancing out size as opposed to just increasing size?

Transgender double mastectomies are also what is needed to alleviate the GD, with no other procedure to date able to do so. Ultimately, they bring back function to the person's total life.

Now these are some interesting numbers and procedures. Looks like most of these are things that change what a person is born with or develops naturally, exactly what opponents say shouldn't be done to a transgender person, yet alone a transgender child. While granted some of this would have to be for injury correction, or maybe even birth defect correction, is a tuck or lift ever actually corrective? Can you show the separation between corrective and pure "I think I should look like this" reasons? And aren't the adolescents, at least in the younger ages still developing, and these surgeries alering that development? For the ones that are purely cosmetic, is that not also delusion in that they think they should look different than they do? If any of these procedures, remove healthy functioning tissue, how is that any better than the same being done to transgender people?

 

The only person not involved in the decision is the adult having to live with what was done to them before they had the ability consider the long term consequences.

Absolutely. Teachers have no business using their influence to push their personal beliefs, like an imaginary deity or that a boy can be a girl.

 

LoL.

Let me paraphrase your first couple sentences in this response.

"If I'm wrong I don't care, I'm still going to pretend I'm right."

I didn't even bother reading the rest of it.

 

Translation: I can be wrong about my numbers, but I'm going to dismiss anyone else who is wrong about their numbers.

It's also obvious that you only object to those surgeries for reasons you disagree with, but anything that does the same thing, but if you agree (or at least don't disagree) with the reasons, you don't want it allowed.

 

In its most BASIC definition, sure. Piercing ears can be considered mutilation by THAT standard

Trying to intelligently argue that circumcision is in any way comparable to sex change surgery or removing breasts is laughable and idiotic.

 

Indeed, but that is the standard that many opponents are using, rather hypocritically.

The argument by opponents is that the procedure is mutilation because it's removing healthy functioning tissue and is supposedly being done to children who can't give consent. But if they want to do it for religious reasons then that's alright. We're not the ones using that definition as an argument.

 

Yeah except I wasn't wrong about the numbers. All the numbers so far were presented by me.

Yes, I agree with double mastectomies to stop cancer. Don't you?

I don't agree with "gender affirming care" for minors that sterilizes them and removes perfectly functioning organs in order to appease a mental illness. Do you?