I compare Transgenderism to Diabetes

Well, I compare a fig tree to the Château de Versailles.

Doesn't make that any more an apt comparison than yours.

WHO and NIH and others have published peer reviewed academic papers on transgender for years.

if people posting anti trans threads were interested in the scientific reality, they would not be posting anti science theories.

[quote]WHO and NIH and others have published peer reviewed academic papers on transgender for years.

Okay, I'll bite.

Please post links to the most significant ones. The academic papers that come back after searches from either WHO or NIH do not address anything remotely resembling your point.

While I normally suggest that the lazy people who start threads asking others to do research and find information for them should do it themselves, in this case you've made a point that requires substantiation, and I'm not going to do the work for you.

Don’t feed the anti-trans troll.

The GOP is desperately trying to break up the LGBT political coalition.

[quote]Don’t feed the anti-trans troll...The GOP is desperately trying to break up the LGBT political coalition.

A pro-T troll started this thread by proposing an unsupported opinion. Is it really anti-T to ask that OP provide links to the studies that ostensibly support that position.

He has equated being anti-T to being against science.

Finally, I would note that studies that support an opposing view are discounted for being anti-T, rather than finding flaws in data, methodology, or interpretation - "Parent reports of adolescents and young adults perceived to show signs of a rapid onset of gender dysphoria" is one such study. The primary criticism is that it's transphobic, rather than bad science.

Also, "The GOP is desperately trying to break up the LGBT political coalition" is a convenient trope, except when "cis gay men" don't do what you want.

This is a much more nuanced discussion than "us" and "them" and needs to be separated from the hysterics coming from both sides. Unlike GWB, "if you're not with us, you're against us" is not a sound approach.

I will just leave this here.

The federalist is alt right propaganda.

As I said WHO and NIH gets you to a treasure trove of scientific, peer reviewed articles, like the one i found in NIH search engine by tying transgender.

R5, so , the study you linked to is an 80 question survey of on line forums asking parents questions for a total of 285 completed surveys.

That's a great social science paper for an undergrad. It's not hard science,

Op, a more apt comparison would be anorexia.

Either way, T has nothing to with the gay community.

But diabetes is real, and tranny shit is a sad mental fantasy

R3, R5 and R9's posts win.

Yes, the entire medical community disagrees with you. But, I bet you think you're the smart one. R11, you must believe the earth is flat. R5 s "science" is a tabulation of forum responses. Social science, not hard science.

Global warming is real, transgender is real, the earth is not flat, and Muslims aren't invading.

[quote][R5], so , the study you linked to is an 80 question survey of on line forums asking parents questions for a total of 285 completed surveys.

[quote]That's a great social science paper for an undergrad. It's not hard science,

The first study listed by r7's search is not "hard science" either:

[quote]Public policy documents on gender and health mostly rely on categorical understandings of gender that are now inadequate. Poststructuralist thought is an advance, but relational theories of gender, treating gender as a multidimensional structure operating in a complex network of institutions, provide the most promising approach to gendered embodiment and its connection with health issues. Examples are discussed in this article.

What is needed is a rigorous examination, not crap like what the Federalist posts. As a practical matter, we aren't likely to find "hard science" studies that support either position.

But, the point I was making was that we ought not prevent people from engaging in research just because it supports an opposing view. Frankly, I WANT scientists to attempt to disprove climate change because their inability to do so convincingly just goes to support the affirmative case.

As for that particular study, while it's findings and conclusions would require significantly more research to validate, it won't even be pursued due to the backlash it received. As for the actual methodology, it's limited in scope, but sound. You're always going to have a ridiculously small data set because there are not hundreds of millions of transgender people, nor has there been sufficient time elapsed to obtain any type of conclusive long-term studies on the effects of early childhood transition, nor sufficient numbers of people for later in life transitions.

Also, r11 - while I appreciate your support, your signature line tells me that we don't approach this from the same perspective.

Enough of this garbage. We have a new transgender debate thread everyday now.

No one who doesnt already believe in gender will be convinced by you, OP. You're painfully misjudging your critics.

R13 No proof, no cocks cut off, is that fair>?

Not only do I not buy "transgender", I do not buy "gender dysphoria."

The T is using the words "science" and "peer-reviewed."

How laughable. The t hoax is complete anti-science insanity.

R16 Same here. "Gender Dysporia" is just self-hatredbor delusion, there's no sincere confusion.

[quote][R13] No proof, no cocks cut off, is that fair>?

[quote]—fucking enabler

Really, that's what your takeaway from my posts at r3, r5, and r13 is.

R19 You demand something that does not exist? That was my takeaway

I am for an UNMUTILATED PENIS, unless you want to LOP the whole thing OFF!

Because I am a modern Social Justice Warrior!

R3, R5, I linked to a peer reviewed study by googling WHO gender issues. I did this because you R3 said you couldn't find any thing. I showed you 1 example. Go to WHO or NIH website, to the search bar and type in transgender. You will get 100s if not 1000s of links to peer reviewed scientific academic papers.

I'm sorry I did not explain that fully in my post.

It's pretty clear science and research aren't your thing.

R17, i know high school science is out of your grasp, also.

Ahem, do you hillbillies not read?

I 👏 SAID👏SCIENCE 👏

R22 Hehe 'peer reviewed', 'scientific'. you are hilarious

Repeat after me:

PIECES 👏 OF 👏 PAPER 👏 MATTER 👏 MORE 👏 THAN 👏 REAL 👏 LIFE.👏

The T game is to take everything that questions their bs and pretend, by parroting it, they can somehow attack reality. They can't and they show how insane they are.

Are they misogynists? What about TRANSMISOGYNY!

After they attack feminists and lesbians, they call themselves "feminists" and "dykes.' I saw one call himself a "radical feminist" and another called himself "an adult woman female" (a dictionary definition of woman they actually tried to ban)

The cruel needless experiment on children? T: I support transkids!

The trans madness is a cult? T: gender critical is a cult!

It's anti-science. The t, with their usual "big lie" tactics say it is "science" and "peer-reviewed". There was even one on DL pushing his "peer-reviewed" science and it was from a "transgender" "journal."

[quote]It's pretty clear science and research aren't your thing.

R2 / r22 - it's pretty clear that reading comprehension is not your thing either.

[quote]You will get 100s if not 1000s of links to peer reviewed scientific academic papers.

And no, you won't. You'll get mountains of articles that approach it from from multiple vectors, but you use the term "scientific academic papers" rather loosely.

You are as bad as r20 - thus proving Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

A person may think they are X but if they are genetically Y — they are Y. And using chemicals and plastic surgery does NOT change this fact. This is a freedom gone too far c

...unt

R27, sure buddy, you're the person posting a survey as research. And your buddy R28, who thinks external genitalia and internal sexual identity are the same, just chimed in. So I guess the heterosexual 4chan kids have arrived

As a Type 1 diabetic for over forty years, don't you dare bring your horse shit theory into my house. Get the fuck outta' here.

[quote][R27], sure buddy, you're the person posting a survey as research. And your buddy [R28], who thinks external genitalia and internal sexual identity are the same, just chimed in. So I guess the heterosexual 4chan kids have arrived

You do realize that surveys are a valid form of research, don't you.

You also seem unable to comprehend the point I made in r13: "that we ought not prevent people from engaging in research just because it supports an opposing view...As for that particular study, while it's findings and conclusions would require significantly more research to validate, it won't even be pursued due to the backlash it received. As for the actual methodology, it's limited in scope, but sound. You're always going to have a ridiculously small data set because there are not hundreds of millions of transgender people, nor has there been sufficient time elapsed to obtain any type of conclusive long-term studies on the effects of early childhood transition, nor sufficient numbers of people for later in life transitions.

Or, do you think that Kinsey's work is also rubbish and should be ignored?

R32 said "You do realize that surveys are a valid form of research, don't you.".... FFS never breed ya drongo

Mayhaps, perchance, you mouth-breathing lesbians are uneducated cretins?

I am exhaustively familiar with the work of Kinsey, myself.

R32, you dismissed the entire catalogs of the WHO and the NIH and are defending an undergrad social socials survey. Buddy, the earth isn't flat. But do you

[quote][R32], you dismissed the entire catalogs of the WHO and the NIH and are defending an undergrad social socials survey. Buddy, the earth isn't flat. But do you

You are too stupid to live.

I neither dismissed the entire catalogs of the WHO and NIH nor defended a social studies survey.

[quote][R32] said "You do realize that surveys are a valid form of research, don't you.".... FFS never breed ya drongo

So, I take it that you don't believe any of the earlier work Kinsey did based on self-reported behavioral surveys upon which he built the later body of his work. Got it.

"Are you a girl trapped in a boy body'? - Yes OFF WITH HIS COCK.

R35 YOU IGNORANT SLUT

KINSEY, I mentioned KINSEY

Why? FIGURE IT OUT

I compare transgenderism with a stomach churning amoebas explosive diarrhea from eating the wrong cisgendered ass

Here is an excellent video on the problems with transgender theory. It’s a long lecture, but worth the listen.

And remember, according to the American Psychiatric Association, 70-80% of young people suffering from gender dysphoria grow out of it and grow up to be gay.

Stop trying to turn potential gay hotties into transgender women!!

I compare transgenderism to body dysmorphia or schizophrenia. Little kids taking knives and scissors to their genitalia shouldn't be socially acceptable.