Hmm

No

So then churches should be taxed?

How about nobody be taxed?

Make em tax exempt, but then, don't use MY TAX DOLLARS to pay for the murders, and the doors will be closed from bankruptcy in a week.

Murders? I said gender affirming care. Like you know hair plugs for middle aged men.

I like your example.

It is not "gender affirming" any more than hair plugs.

Both are merely cosmetic procedures.

Pay for it yourself.

You probably smiled to yourself all day long with that "so churches should be taxed" line making you giddy in anticipation of using it on the first person to disagree with this nonsense.

Tell the truth, you did, didn't you?

Lol...they're so TRANSparent, aren't they?

TRANSliterally so.

Medical science says it is TRANSitory... Leave them kids alone...

Exactly!

Hey, wait a minute!

Are you TRANSplaining to me?!?!?!

😄

😲

Nah. Honestly the hair plug one had me more giggly because people don’t realize how …mundane? Some basic forms of gender affirming car can be. The church one was way to on the nose for me to be proud of.

Like changing brands of lipstick for hetero women or keeping just trying to keep your hair/dying it back to its natural color from 10 years ago.

Those comparisons are TRANSparent attempts to minimize what is meant by "gender affirming care" in furtherance of your idealism.

🦜On the one hand you say gender is a social construct.

🦜On the other hand you say "gender affirming care".

What really must be said in order to meld the two catchphrases is:

Social construct affirming care.

I submit that affirming the social construct would TRANSlate, and what I believe is better for the psychology of the individual, into:

Gender CONFIRMING care.

Race is a social construct, yet anyone desirous of "identifying" as TRANSracial is met with derision and labeled as either simply ridiculous, a cultural appropriator, or oddly enough, a racist.

Ever here anyone marching for Racial Affirming Care?

Yet, sticking to your ideology:

The pay gap - social construct as "men" and "women" do not exist except in the faulty conceptualizations of society.

Misogyny - social construct as "men" and "women" do not exist except in the faulty conceptualizations of society.

Equal Rights Amendment - a faulty legal instrument based on a social construct as "men" and "women" do not exist except in the faulty conceptualizations of society.

I knew you were beside yourself, so excited to have the opportunity to say churches should be taxed, I bet a couple of bourbons couldn't have calmed you down.

If you want to stir the pot - stick to the pork bolognese.

I have said none of those things on this meme though those are “dumbed down” arguments of leftists on those subjects at best or joke arguments made by the right as straw men at worst. Try not to cut your knuckles on that straw btw.

The entire point of this joke or …meme If you will… was just to use a troll science level of legal logic.

And yes there are many faulty concepts of society that do need rectifying or at least easement to make those hurt by those faults able to live more comfortably provided they are not harming anyone. (Ie we’re not gonna ease up on punishing racism because racism hurts people.)

I’m fortunate enough to be a Demi hetero male so I didn’t really have to deal with much other then people assuming I was gay because I didn’t chase women or cat call like most men. Hence why I don’t believe it’s an “ideology” people are just born that way.

The pay gap was never mentioned anywhere in this meme.

The equal rights amendment was also not mentioned nor would I ever describe it as faulty as it gave rights and legal framework to fight for more rights that should have been given from the get go as the constitution was designed for.

If you’re referring to that one dude who got surgery to look Korean and acts like a stereotype of an Asian man then yeah that’s just a minstrel show with extra steps at worst or just a bad faith “counter example” used to mock the lefts support of trans people at best. Either one isn’t a good look for him. (Pun not intended.)

I literally said I wasn’t proud of that one because it was too on the nose.
Maybe I’m not the one who needs a drink to level out tonight…

Some of yall have never heard mulan’s “who I am inside” and it shows.

What? Why stir it? Just throw it in a pressure cooker with some red wine tomato sauce and seasoning after sautéing the ribs. Way easier and keeps the pork tender.

You did type "gender affirming care".

Nowhere in that reply did you address how firmly believing gender is a social construct permits one to believe "gender affirming care" is less than ridiculous since gender is a social construct.

All of the things you pointed out that you had not mentioned were things that I did mention to shed light on the contradictions in the ideology.

I noticed in your defense of ERA you never once mentioned WOMEN who are at the very heart of the constitutional amendment. Curious. Not bi curious, just regular curious.

Straw men? 😄 You just applied a social construct to straw. The only straw here is the straw at which you are grasping.

I have no idea who the Asian person is to which you refer.

Yes, racism bad.

And you provided evidence to support my statement.

The ridicule you expressed in describing another's identifying as an Asian as a "stereotypical, minstrel show with extra steps" is contradictory to your views on social constructs.

One can put on women's clothing, wear women's make up, wear women's size 15 stiletto heels, have breast implants, take estrogen pills, speak with an artificial voice...even remove one's p**is and will not, even after all that, be a woman. Even if everyone around you is cheering "you go girl". At best one has become similar in comparison to your less than accepting description of transracial Korean man.

🦜🦜 I am sure a cartoon song is riveting and life changing yet I do not regret having never heard it.

Meh, fancy Hamburger Helper.

The point was I expect better from you gish galloping from several topics in one comment I didn’t even cover especially if it’s one giant strawman fallacy since I never made those arguments.

So either I caught you on a bad day or you really knee jerk reactions to a joke. Like a snow flake.

Me thinks you protest too much. 🦜🦜

Every example stated is strongly related to the topic.

Are you of the incorrect opinion that gender is a social construct?

Well the problem is that construct you gave is an example of what was ONLY acceptable for quite a bit now despite it not being the case for most of world history dating back to Alexander the Great.

In fact I didn’t chase women or one night stands in my younger days because I was demi I’d just never knew it. But I was treated as being gay because I didn’t act like other boys and men my age. My own Kingdom Hall and elders disfellowshipped me under the assumption I was just like other boys for dating a non witness despite NO evidence.

All the lgbtq are asking for is to be accepted as they are especially since they are not harming anyone. When before Christian chokehold on politics were mostly accepted throughout human history.

Well that’s not a f**king loaded phrase at all.

Yes i am of the opinion gender is in fact a social construct and have no qualms with people living as the gender they choose provided it is not causing harm to anyone else around them.

Okay. That is settled.

Gender (a social construct),

Affirming (state as fact, assert strongly and publicly, offer emotional support or encouragement),

Care (the provision of what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance, and protection of someone or something).

Combined:

What is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance and protection of someone is to state as fact asserting strongly and publicly, offering emotional support and encouragement, that gender is a social construct.

Sounds purty.

Also meaningless.

So I ask, what exactly is the social construct?

I mean beyond boys play with trucks and girls play with dolls.

Bullshit!
None of those so-called “gender affirming” items necessitate the hacking off of pee-pees or creating hoo-hahs.

"gender affirming" is an impossibility as they are of the mind that gender is a social construct.

Are we to affirm the social construct?

Well, that is exactly what society has been doing for ages.

Girls have innies, boys have outies.

As I mentioned with regular sometimes they can be something “mundane” for lack of a better word.

As some people don’t feel like men without a full head of hair. Even Trump.

For some people it does require a lot more cosmetic surgery but hetero women get enlargements and reductions all the time to fit their needs/comforts. Botox is no different either and that’s used universally across sexes and genders to maintain “youthful” looks. Wouldn’t use it myself but I’ve been blursed with a baby face.

haha, I used to call an ex of mine a "naturally dyed blonde" because she bleached it to that on account of that was her color when she was younger but it turned darker when she grew up.

And my father used to dye his hair black because he was a server and no one wants an old dude serving their table.

Eventually he accepted having some grey to help sell it better but he did that not just for affirming himself but his very lively hood.

https://i.imgflip.com/8j6vwx.gif

False... again...

Noted American Psychiatrists have called it a Mental Disorder.

How dare you prove my point... LOL

Imagine being so lazy you need someone else to attempt to validate your own argument.

Imagine... you can't even refute his comment either... LOL

Scroll down.

From the NIH

Wow a cherry picked statement from a report that I have no idea who wrote…unless it’s from that grainy report you posted then by all means just send the link so I can read the damn thing proper.

I posted that it was from the NIH.

You errantly say cherry picked, I say that is the conclusion drawn from the analysis of studies.

I have said a million times. I post information and my independent thoughts. Links are not a statement. Links are not rebuttal. Links are not debate.

* I DO NOT POST OR ACCEPT LINKS*

The American Journal of Psychiatry

He does not state whether or not transgenderism is made up but rather critiquing a study by mentioning it didn’t include anyone who’d committed suicide before 2014…

Which without context doesn’t really mean that much? I’d have to read the study in its entirety.

But it also seems this researcher seems to be focused on the study of genealogy and not therapy with the exception of one article in 2011 and this letter to the editor…at least at a cursory glance.

But to be fair this is way more credible then the last guy that made me think you were gonna quote Jared from subway next.

I posted the gist.

If you wanna read more before you say "nuh uh" do the work yourself.

Like I said, 3 sources, 3 "nuh uhs".

This is why nobody else would bother with you.

You could gave just as easily looked all these up yourself.

But then, YOU ignore the articles that do not agree with your ideology.

Bear in mind your "nuh uhs" and opinions are equally as weightless as you are not a renowned, published, credentialed, peer reviewed psychiatry expert.

Come on. Get interesting.

F**king finally at least I have enough info to reverse search that…

You had enough every time.

Just not the gumption.

Do your own research.

It's bad enough you cannot admit that there exists volumes of expert opinions contrary to your own.

Liberal kool aid.

Psst... the OP in OP-ED means an opinion, from an expert in psychiatry in this instance.

No it’s because the link was embedded in the freaking pdf this time.

You unwittingly gave me the link.

You could have typed a browser search all on your own and had all of these studies reports, op-eds, etc., at your disposal.

But what's the fun of arguing with yourself, huh?

Stop it.

You have yet to argue the science with anything more than a nuh uh.

Stop it.

You keep reverting to attacking the man rebuttals.

If Einstein was a pedophile that makes then naming of the theory of relativity suspect not the science.

Yes, an op-ed is an opinion.

This opinion happens to be topic centered and written by an expert.

Either throw some second opinions from professionals at me or go away birdybirdy.

I can’t believe this but that third posting you put isn’t arguing against trans people at all. The op Ed was criticizing the very report transphobes use to claim it causes trans people to want commit suicide more post surgery.

Because it didn’t include any people from before 2014 when anti trans rhetoric began ramping up.

Meaning not only did you fail to put up an expert who agrees with you but he points out a valid point of how suicide in Trans people have gone up with increase in anti trans rhetoric and increased risk of community rejection post op.

Meaning you have put up 1 pedo defender with only an opinion and no data.
1 screenshot of something allegedly from NIH, and 1 person who said y’all’s data was skewed in your favor and directly contradicts your first and second opinion.

Might be hard to read on a phone but here's a noted psychiatrist's opinion.

And just like that you’ve done more to validate a point than Viking.

I’m still at work so give me a bit to look this up and read it because you’re right it’s very grainy.
If you have a link the of article id happily take that as well.

Take it easy.

Nobody wants to go to the least bit of effort just to get "nuh uh" as a reply.

Me...I give zero 💩💩💩

And just like that... they couldn't refute you either.... LOL

There will be refutations. I just don't believe they will rise to the level of disproving.

😄👍

😄 An' I'm never gonna care 'bout my bad reputation!

There. Fixed it. 😄🇺🇸

He probably should mite cost him the election…and it’s already cost him 500 million…and his businesses in New York…and another 91 million…

Don't you have renowned psychiatrists' opinions to debunk?

Yeah until you do refute or disprove something and Vikings response is always “nope, false, fake next one.”

Your entire rebuttal on the posted opinion of a noted, credentialed, peer reviewed, published competent psychiatrist was wholly ad hominem.

That's lousy.
🦜🦜

Isn't that what you just did?

I have posted 3 published articles including one from the NIH and one from the American Journal of Psychiatry and so far I have received 2 "nuh uhs" and 1 awaiting response.

You haven’t posted a single study just opinion pieces.

Yup... I've posted countless stuff before like that and these deniers still can't refute... LOL

I posted 3 items - received 17 "nuh uhs".

I knew how it would go from the start.

Even posted that it would go that way from the start.

😄

I’ll start off that Paul McHughs work in establishing questionnaires for preliminary diagnosis of dementia was a boon to the medical field and have been used to this day. Were we speaking on the subject of dementia I’d be willing to hear him out.

However…in regard to his character and other fields his opinions/stances were antiqued then and only have aged more horridly now. Which is unsurprising given he is 92.

He defended the priesthood of the Catholic Church in court against “naughty” abuse cases and wrote opinions on repression of child hood memories being false Or machinations. He was then appointed to a panel to investigate child “naughty abuse” in the church. Much to the condemnation of other survivor organizations. So…YIKES.

He also has been active in politics since 2001 as he had a stance in the bush administration similar to the Alabama ruling recently on IVF. He supported the ban on gays in 2008. He shut down the gender affirming clinic at John Hopkins 1975 comparing it to allowing anorexic patients to indulge in purging. And has multiple times try to prover there could be a genetic reason for gayness much to the outcry of his colleagues in the field of dna research.

To make this simple he was a bigot in the 70s and he is a bigot now who also happens to defend pedophilia within the church and is quick to disavow and claims of child assault as mere hallucinations or false/implanted memories.

Yeah, McHughs is yucky.

Your Googled talking points, which are suspiciously "plagiarismy" sounding, do not refute the opinion of a noted, published, peer reviewed, qualified psychiatric expert.

You have attacked the man, not the science.

Even the most racist, misogynistic, bigoted, unlikeable man on earth can have a correct scientific opinion.

When German scientists stopped killing masses of people they were taken to the US by the US government to develop ways of killing America's enemies.

Most would say they were evil, deplorable men.

However, their science was sound.

H-Bomb go BOOM !

Lots of scientists used to say the earth was flat.

Buy only one man stood up against them and said the earth is "round" despite the risks to life, liberty, and limb...

Was he wrong though the consensus was that the earth is flat?

Next time read his research, not an autobiography written by one that is obviously not a fan.

And also yucky doesn’t even begin to describe it…

In order to “defend children from the lefts woke transgenderism ideaology.” You went to a known pedophile defender as your expert witness on the subject who also claims that childhood repressed trauma of abuse was just made up bs…a field of psychology that is widely accepted and proven. (Except medicated repressed memory recovery that’s an exception that gets dicey based on case by case basis of the medication.)

That is hypocrisy so grand I don’t have the words to describe it and yet here you are making the argument of “yeah he was a pedo lover so what your just making ad hominem attacks instead of his work.”
Calls into question how much you actually knew about him and if you didn’t just grab the first thing you could find that agreed with you off google or bing.

As opposed to his own biography where I got most of my information of him from.

Ad hominem.

Does not refute the science.

I just want you to know I’m not mad at you. I’m just disappointed.

You gonna keep pretending where I point out he’s dead wrong about repressed assault memories….

Aww. That's sweet.

I'm not mad at you either.

I am not even disappointed in you.

I already know how you are and I accept you. 🦜🦜

Now, can you post a qualified article that disputes the science of the psychiatrists in the articles I posted?

Preferably one that does not come from a biased source such as some gender affirmation organization.

They just want to sell pills, irreversible body modifications, sterility, and life long services to their victims

You have posted nothing to refute the experts.

Go search the NIH database.

Unless you fear the truth.

You have posted nothing you claim exists.

It is out there. You just do not want to see it.

For young men struggling mentally with their sexuality putting on lipstick is less effective than chewing bubble gum.

For young women struggling mentally with their sexuality putting a wallet with a chain in their back pocket is less effective than chewing bubble gum.

My expert advice is to tell them to go get mega pack of hubba bubba and get to chompin'.

That one was free.

You're welcome.

To which I gave him credit on his work with dementia.

But his track record with both lgbtq work can mostly defined as opinions looking for research to back his opinion rather then the other way around of forming an opinion from research and will blindly defend the church and its views regardless of who gets in the way.

His work on anything but dementia has been widely discredited, disavowed, or dismissed if not all 3 unless it was a Christian backed think tank.

It is also entirely possible for someone to know what they are talking about in one field but have zero credibility in another. I may be a medical tooling tech but that doesn’t make me an expert on plane parts much less an engineer.

You are just repeating yourself while offering no expert denunciation of his opinion based on science.

All you posted was character assassinations...

And yall haven’t posted a single study.

Yes... I already know you don't know anything about the UK NIH position... backed by science.

Deflect some more.. it's all you got.

I posted the science backed by medical experts... not opinions... OOPS

Yup... all you have is a character assassination... LOL

Joradn peterson doesn’t count since he lost his license.

Not who I was referring to... LOL

Well we’d know if you’d use their names or cite a damn source.

Yes... Google is hard

Apparently control c control v is harder.

Ever tried Hey Siri?

Apparently you haven’t because you never asked her how to copy paste.

You know the statement is true.

You have read all of the dissenting opinions on the subject with the goal of dismantling them.

Problem with that aim is the fact YOU are not a noted psychiatrist.

Why should anyone value your opinion over another or their own?

That hasn’t stopped conservatives from arguing about Covid being fake/planned/not a big deal nor vaccines being fake/ineffective/conspiracy to kill us all.

My breaks over with I’ll get back to you when I can.

Nor has it stopped the incorrect from arguing that it is not.

Truth will likely be somewhere near the middle.

We will know long before the next "the end is nigh" climate cult prediction date has come and gone.

Guess you missed the part where the CDC finally admitted it isn't any worse than the flu...

They have to deflect when they can't disprove a comment...

They never admitted it was similar to the flu they said it has now become endemic to the point it will be seasonal now akin to the flu.

Because that’s what happened after the 1918 pandemic as the seasonal flu we experience now is an evolved version of that original virus.

Yes... and you still can't refute the truth... LOL

Google is known to bury the truth in their search results, hoping nobody will find it to dispute their official narrative

I read something in a meme or comment, didn't pay enough attention to the name of the author....anyway said something like
"Consensus is not science".

The "official narrative" is propaganda.

The truth must be buried.

When burial proves insufficient, eliminated, erased, never to be spoken of again.