Since y'all are in a "banning" mood, ban this:

I'll cut to the chase here:

No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.

A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.

Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children

 

If it's occurring, no it's not okay for children to get gender reassignment surgery. Adults, however, should be able to do whatever suits them best. Clinically, this isn't really a question of what's objectively true so much as how best to handle an unfortunate situation. Once they are adults, should gender dysphoria be fought against as a delusion, or should it be embraced to cause less harm to the individual? The answer really depends on which approach causes more harm. While surgery carries risks, so does being forced not to live as you want to.

 

What????

My main reason for posting this was that atheists come here every day wanting to "ban" things they don't see as "objectively" true. In the case of Christianity, there is no "doing whatever suits them best" as far as that crowd is concerned. There is no "embracing what causes less harm to the individual".

That said, I know I can count on the support of the atheists here when I advocate treating "gender identity disorder" for what it is: mental illness.

 

Do we know for sure that it IS a mental illness or is this just what it's called because it's a deviation from the norm?

 

All I got out of that is that children should take unnecessary drugs. That was the point right?

 

There is a social expectation based on gender that has nothing to do with biological reality. The way people dress and their choices for self expression, and even their choice of sexual partners has nothing to do with biology. It all has to do with their personal taste. The desire to categorize certain behavior by sex is really just a desire for conformity.

The middle ground here would be unisex public facilities. If thats your main gripe. Make private showers and private bathroom stalls mandatory. No one should be checking anyone else's private parts out anyway (without consent I mean).

 

Since you didn't call anyone names, or attack them. There will be no reason to ban.

But what reason do you cite it as a mental disorder? And not a mix up of genes, cells, dna, or whatever else is involved in the development of a child in the womb.
Do you really think a 3 or 4 yr old has had so much outside influence to tell them they are the opposite of their genitalia?
Most want unmovable thinking banned. Although, not much should be banned, but rather a solution reached. But there are some that will never change any thing about what they learned growing up, no matter how incorrect it may be.

FYI - there is no objective truth, especially when it comes to morality.
Some physics and math may be objectively true, but not much, if anything else.

 

What is controversial about that?

 

If you look, you'll see tha the "American College of Pediatricians".....is a rightwing group.


Trying to pass itself off as the "same thing" as the "American Academy of Pediatrics"....the older, much larger, and more mainstream pediatricians' group.


They're like that "conservative alternative to AARP" you hear advertised on Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity.

 

Mental health professionals generally don't consider it one, but religious critics are convinced that because Gender Dysphoria and GID exist, that anyone who is transgendered must have one (or both) of these disorders.

 

I know I can always count on you to represent the fascist world view.

 

We are not talking about "morality", we are talking about biology and genetics. As the good doctors say, there is no such thing as "gender", but there is a biological sex - that is the reality we are talking about, and the objective truth, unless you are anti-science.

 

What EXACTLY did I say in that post that was "fascist"? Be specific.

 

Atheists lack a belief in god and do not necessarily have anything else in common with each other. Not sure what banning you're referring to. If you're talking about religion, while I think many of us wish religion didn't exist most of us would acknowledge that banning it would be ineffective and harmful. Religion is harmful in that it motivates followers to tell other people how to live and bases our morals on outdated texts. It seems gender dysphoria would cause fewer societal problems and is more of an individual struggle, and so is more of a question for psychiatrists.

 

It was just an answer to all the control freaks who want to "ban" religion on this site. I offer you scientific proof that so called gender dysphoria is a mental disorder and allowing kids to believe this stuff and to participate in it is child abuse. This is from pediatricians, mind you, the point being that many of you think something is harmful if you don't like it but there are also things that ARE harmful, and not a word from you.

I'll give you another example of atheistic cognitive dissonance: atheists say there is no such thing as a master designer because there is no proof. Yet, I have lost track of the atheists I have run into who say there is intelligent life elsewhere - with absolutely no proof.

 

If they don't consider GID a mental disorder, why is it in the DSM -V?

- - - Updated - - -

Why does the College of Pediatrics have to be a "right wing group"?

 

It isn't. Gender dysphoria is.

"DSM-5 aims to avoid stigma and ensure clinical care for individuals who see and feel themselves to be a
different gender than their assigned gender. It replaces the diagnostic name “gender identity disorder”
with “gender dysphoria,” as well as makes other important clarifications in the criteria. It is important
to note that gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dys
-
phoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."

Source

 

The American College of Pediatricians is a socially conservative association of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals in the United States. The College was founded in 2002 by a group of pediatricians including Joseph Zanga, a past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), as a protest against the AAP's support for adoption by gay couples.

http://www.citypages.com/news/university-of-minnesota-professors-research-hijacked-6725473

 

I guess you didn't read the statement that the College of Pediatricians put out.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess you didn't read the statement that the College of Pediatricians put out.

 

You didn't ask me about the College of Pediatrics. You asked me about the DSM-V, which is a diagnostic classification tool published by the APA. You are essentially asking, "If it isn't a disorder, why do a bunch of people who don't like it think that the APA should classify it as a disorder?"

 

It's hard to understand what you are getting at here. Treating mental illness is virtually non-existent in the US. It is rarely covered by insurance. Full-fledged schizophrenics wander the streets unable to care for themselves. Waiting lists for treatment centers are months long. What is the point of adding another group to the list for treatment they will never get?

 

If it's harmful, then it's an issue between pediatric psychiatrists and their patients. There's no word from me because I'm not a pediatric psychiatrist and am not sure what management approach minimizes harm. I do not see why it needs to be a political issue, or something to be banned. Is there some epidemic of children getting gender reassignment surgery? Are parents not belittling their children enough if they act like the other gender?

It's a matter of understanding odds. There are 30 billion planets in our galaxy alone (and there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe). So there's something like 3.0 x 10^21 planets out there, an almost unimaginably large number. Many of us also understand how life can come into existence in simple forms and then evolve from building blocks common in the universe. Even if this process doesn't happen 99.99999999999999% of the time, it's going to happen here and there if it can happen at all. So while simple life like bacteria is likely much more common than intelligent life, life that exists for long enough on a planet will eventually become intelligent life, because the ability to change the environment to suit you is the ultimate evolutionary adaptation.

The master designer idea just doesn't fit with what we know about biology. We know that animals and plants didn't just spring from the dirt like the bible implies. There is no god required in the biology equation. So there's all of that in addition to the fact that there is no evidence for a designer. You might as well assert that a leprechaun is responsible for the existence of gold and you'd be on about the same logical footing, while in contrast aliens existing is just highly likely given what we know about the universe.

 

I see, it has to be because they are conservative, it can't possibly be that they are right.

 

I asked you to read the freaking article I posted, that's why I posted it.

 

Then why did you ask me as specific question about the DSM-V and get upset when I answered it? If you wanted to limit the discussion to the CoP alone, then you shouldn't have appealed to other sources.