Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "" video.

How does this relate to someone being transphobic? This is a complex issue as it does involve kids.
8
@TheEarthRealm it goes both ways. I have friends who are trans, great people overall. One was one of the smartest individuals I know. I know one that I hated. It wasn't because they were trans, they were just a crap person. To me there is concern about doing these form of health practices on kids. Not saying I oppose them. I see why some do want them. I also see the opposition. However, for those that oppose them and calling them transphobic does nothing to progress the issue. In fact, it chases people away. And on that, the people who suffer the most are trans people. When I hear of the high suicide rates of trans people I feel that some of it is because when anyone expresses concerns or doubt on the issue and get called transphobic, it really chases them away to where they do not want to sympathize with trans people. What helps is a discussion. But how do you think others feel when they are called transphobic by people? They will just say "heck with it, screw all trans people". I am not that way. Again, I know several trans people who are great. I just feel the action on the left of calling anyone they disagrees with names need to stop as it does way more harm than good.
6
@Dynamic_Editor it is along the same lines as why kids can't drink.
5
@Dynamic_Editor what care did those kids lack? As for hormone blockers, they are not always reversible and do hold people back.
5
@Dynamic_Editor again, there is no consensus. That is why a debate exists to begin with. My apologizes, but you know nothing of the medical field.
5
@Dynamic_Editor as a nurse told me when she left medical school. A speaker told her that 50% of what she was taught in nursing school is wrong. As in, the medical field changes so much over the years what you learn will be irrelevant very quickly.
5
@KARKAT420 not defending the bill. What I am saying is that calling it 'transphobic" does not progress the debate. You really do not know my stance on this issue. The fact that you make an immediate conclusion proves my point.
5
@Dynamic_Editor no, again, it is that the medical field changes drastically.
5
@Dynamic_Editor there is no consensus though. Also, if there were does not make it correct. Science is not dogma.
5
@dragonic1731 I agree that more research needs to be done. Where have I ever said I supported banning it? Never. However, there are ethical concerns as well as in should we be doing such experiments on kids? "the study you refer to only advocates for more research into its subject matter and doesn't take a side in this debate" Actually it sides with my 100%. What do you think my side is? I have said at the very beginning that this issue is complex and up for debate. Thus, calling those that oppose gender reassignment on kids, or oppose puberty blockers as transphobic and does not progress us as a society. It appears you feel I support banning puberty blockers on kids. I never gave a stance either way. My stance at the very beginning was that this issue is complex and still up for debate. And that dismissing the other side is dangerous.
5
@TheEarthRealm exactly, people here immediately feel I opposed puberty blockers on kids. What I opposed was calling people transphobic as in the issue is still up for debate. But when I say that their immediate reaction is that I oppose puberty blockers. When someone has that immediate stance that is not good.
5
@dragonic1731 so point to me where in that article it disagrees with what I am saying? Again, my stance is that this issue is up for debate and complex. And thus, you guys dismissing the other side as transphobic does no good. You seem to think that I oppose puberty blockers when I neve once made a stance either way. So again, show me where that paper disagreed with anything I said? That paper is no my side and not yours.
5
@Dynamic_Editor how so? I did watch the video. Right away calling it transphobic is going too far.
4
@Dynamic_Editor there is no consensus. This is a very debatable issue. Again, we are dealing with kids. This is not like the gay issue, we are talking about kids doing permanent damage to their bodies physically.
4
@lukaswithakay ok, what peer reviewed consensus? Give me articles.
4
@z3romx to add, when I was studying education at one point I took a special ed course. One student there was a pharmacist. The topic turned to medication and children. This pharmacist said point black, the second you place your kid on medication you are opening a door that will never be closed. The same applies here. There is a debate. You are dealing with kids and the second you go down that path with these kids the chances of turning out is low.
4
@dragonic1731 what am I wrong on though? As I said in one comment, a pharmacist was telling us you have to be very careful in giving any kids treatment, especially some sort of medication as reversing is very difficult. As I said, this is not transphobic thing at all. Those saying it is is dismissing the legit argument.
4
@dragonic1731 you do know that peer reviewed studies can give different viewpoints? The field of medicine is always changing which is why more studies are published. And also, people in the medical field get their opinions from peer reviewed studies. And what studies have people linked? Here is a title of one in Journal of Adolescent Health "Early Medical Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Gender Dysphoria: An Empirical Ethical Study" They say "As long as debate remains on these seven themes and only limited long-term data are available, there will be no consensus on treatment. Therefore, more systematic interdisciplinary and (worldwide) multicenter research is required." Again, this issue is not settled and debatable. Calling those who disagree with you "transphobic" does nothing to progress and is dangerous.
4
@dragonic1731 I am typically the one the cites studies just like I did now.
4
@dragonic1731 if a study is faulty it gets retracted from the journal. The one I gave you has not been so it is relevant and has a lot of value in it. "so since your stance is based on one person's opinion" I never told you my full stance on this. You are assuming I am against. What I am saying here is that calling people who support this law transphobic dismisses the complex argument that exist.
4
@dragonic1731 to a degree, yes. But not completely. It really depends on the area and culture of that area. These issues are complex with subjective and objective sides to them. With this issue it is more subjective. But either way, this is an issue that should be left up to the states and local governments. And you, as an outsider, have no say in that at that point. I will have too look why the judge squashed this as I see no constitutional violation. But the fact remains, giving treatment like this to kids is very debatable and some areas do not want to use their kids, or allow other as experiments.
4
@stylis666 I just referenced a paper saying there is no consensus and more data is needed. There is still evidence of permanent damage. Not every kid experiences puberty at the same time and rate. And if taken too long there is a point of no return. Also, psychological damage is an issue as well. From a doctor at UCSF "Many of the effects of hormone therapy are reversible, if you stop taking them. The degree to which they can be reversed depends on how long you have been taking them. Some breast growth, and possibly reduced or absent fertility are not reversible." So yes, it can cause permanent damage in ways. "While gender affirming hormone therapy usually results in an improvement in mood, some people may experience mood swings or a worsening of anxiety, depression, or other mental health conditions as a result of the shifts associated with starting a second puberty. If you have any mental health conditions it is recommended you remain in discussion with a mental health providers as you begin hormone therapy." Where some have argued that some trans people have a mental disorder when they deny their actual gender. Not saying that is bad, many people have one. The issue with mental health is that so much is unknown. It isn't like diabetes where you can take blood sugar readings. There is essentially zero quantitative test to look for mental health issues. So I suggest you do listen to the experts. So much is unknown and there are risks.
4
@stylis666 this is not a black and white issue which brings me back to my original point, just dismissing a bill like this by calling it transphobic does no good.
4
@Dynamic_Editor again, this involves kids. The issue is complex. Screaming "transphobic" does nothing to progress the debate.
3
@Liliputian07 being religious is a complex, psychological issue. Even those who are "non religious" still possess religious like tendencies. Just look at the political left right now and how dogmatic they are.
2
@cymtastique hate speech is speech that you hate
1
@TheHumanistReport well you are a bigot so there is that.
1
@terrystevens3998 here is the problem with the left and why we are divided and cannot progress here. Going immediately to labels like "transphobic" does nothing to progress on these issues. The concept of giving kids medication of any kind, especially dealing with mental issues, is highly debatable to this day. When I was taking a course in special education one topic that came up was medication for kids that have ADD or depression. A pharmacist said the second you open that door with a kid it is almost impossible to shut. Same with this issue here with trans kids. When people like you immediately say "they are transphobic" you are completely ignoring the complexity and risk of the issue in medication and kids as a whole and how dangerous it is. So I am sick of people like you immediately placing hateful labels
1
@terrystevens3998 also, a lot of times I do cite relevant work, in Journal of Adolescent Health a paper entitled "Early Medical Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Gender Dysphoria: An Empirical Ethical Study " Says "As long as debate remains on these seven themes and only limited long-term data are available, there will be no consensus on treatment. Therefore, more systematic interdisciplinary and (worldwide) multicenter research is required." The trans kids issue is far from settled. Just dismissing the other side as "transphobic" does not work.
1
@Roland D 1. Youtube never fully watches videos. The topic is considered based on the title and a few key words and thus an add related to that is shown 2. How am I harassing? My point at the beginning is that by calling these bills a "transphobic" dismisses the argument that is complex. I literally cited a peer reviewed paper on this saying more data is needed. What is harassment, arguably, is calling your opponent transphobic when there is way more to it than that. The fact you want to silence others is alarming. Not only do you want to do so by calling them names, now you want it to be forced. Again, I cited a paper on this issue. Someone opposing something like puberty blockers on kids does not make them transphobic. You calling them that is you dismissing the argument.
1
@Roland D you are the problem bud. Again, I cited a peer reviewed paper on this issue. This is a very debatable issue. You just dismissing the other side divides us and does not progress us at all. The irony of you talking about using facts, I literally cited a peer reviewed paper by experts on this topic. And that paper I support that, guess what, does not say we should either ban or push gender reassignment in kids. Just simply more data needs to be collected.
1
@Roland D " Not directly replying is the equivalent of saying go to your room the adults are speaking" Just like the adults on that publication I cited that says more data is needed?
1
@Roland D read the UCSF article entitled "Information on Estrogen Hormone Therapy" There the risks are laid out and it does state there is possible long term damage. Not saying we should ban it. But in the end, when you just call others transphobic for wanting to ban it is dismissing the argument on a complex issue.
1
@Roland D so I cite a peer reviewed paper and thus I am a white supremacist? I guess all with PhDs are ones as well. Did not know Cornel West was a white supremacist
1