ThreePointTakedown

Tell me you've been thoroughly cooked and are woefully outmatched without telling me you've been thoroughly cooked and are woefully outmatched. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

1. Some do. Every OB/GYN takes care of pregnant people. Abortion bans affect pregnant people and how they get health care. If those OB/GYNs that do offer abortions services or specialize in risky pregnancies(hint, 100% of pregnancies elevate the risk to the pregnant person) decide that it isn't worth continue to practice in THAT state and leave then that affects how many OB/GYNs in the state. Fewer doctors in a specialty makes it harder to get care. Which affects every one in that group. THAT IS HARM. Can you cite where I made the claim that 100% of OB/GYNs provide abortion services? 2. Wharton is a pretty good source. Fact! 3. Anecdotes mean nothing to me and should mean nothing to you. If at this point you are still relying on two friends in the field then I'm sorry you are either; not serious enough to continue this conversation due to you obviously not seeking easily searchable information on the topic or seriously lacking in critical thinking skills. resources: https://www.epi.org/publication/vouchers-harm-public-schools/ https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2025/wething https://naacp.org/resources/harmful-effects-school-choice-initiatives-public-education-and-disproportionately-harmful https://www.cbpp.org/blog/to-public-schools-detriment-some-states-continue-to-increase-spending-on-private-school Date 8.6.26 4. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions/ chew on that for a bit. Not expanding medicaid in the state negatively affects the population of that state. 5. Your exact quote, 'I assume you don't have kids.' So now you are a liar. Its not difficult to just go back and reread the post. I'll just assume you're lazy and not really a liar. So I take that one back. My concern is that the public school library may be the only resource for a student and they shouldn't have books unavailable to them unless its for a good reason. Conservatives offer piss poor reasons for denying a book in a public library. I trust librarians. 6. My quote, "Because that group overwhelmingly votes for Dems" Did I say 'that poor people only vote one way'(your quote)? No I did not. Glad we could straighten that out. You're bad at this. Even with so much practice at posting on this site. I think this is why you hold the opinions that you have. Because you're lazy or stupid. Not an insult. Truth based on facts and evidence. Asking all people to get an entirely new ID not a few years after we went through the whole REAL ID thing is just dumb. Asking poor people to do it AGAIN is egregious. It is a poll tax. It is illegal. It would be harmful by potentially disenfranchising even one(y'all love that reason) voter. Requiring people to pay for a new ID would do just that. Again, it its free and automatic then I'd be ok with it. But conservatives would never suggest it let alone include it in the bill. Because the purpose is to be racist without saying the N-word out loud. So in your mind, since poor people can get to the grocery store and get EBT and (maybe) register a car that they could easily absorb an additional cost for the sole reason to participate in the voting process? The process that includes finding or ordering(which costs money) copies of documents which is an additional cost. It seems as if you think that YOU could do this with minimal effort or hassle that EVERYONE should be able to do it. Quite a privileged position to be in, congrats. I hope these resources have helped you understand how harmful your opinions have been, are, and will be in the future. Conservatives don't want to help everyone. They want to help a few people. But this can only happen by the rest being harmed. What they did was convince YOU that you are in the group that they are trying to help. They did this by convincing you that since you're doing better than THEM that you are special. So now you look down on THEM as not deserving of equality because they haven't pulled their bootstraps as hard as you or as skillfully as you. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Cue the emotional appeal. Can you prove the fetus felt anything to begin with? My turn: What about the possibility that the fetus, in this situation, would only know suffering, pain, and then death within the first hour after birth? If so, wouldn't it be more moral to put the fetus peacefully to sleep in the womb before it starts to feel pure agony and death after birth? Why would you force a pregnant person and potentially their partner to suffer through that horrific situation if it could be avoided by addressing it weeks or months in advance? And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

1. Abortion "bans": please provide evidence/data that this affects ALL pregnant or potentially pregnant people in a negative way. Because what you are saying is ALL women or potentially pregnant women will or have had an abortion which is unequivocally false. Nope, sure didn't. Not to mention that the majority of pregnant women or women that will get pregnant do not nor will not get an abortion; thus, your whole premise is false including "it is dangerous for pregnant women to travel"...one has to assume you are not serious and only claiming that for the emotional crowd. Also, please provide a list of states where abortion is 100% banned no matter the reason. Funny part of this topic, I'm actually neutral on this topic but can't stand when people constantly claim things that are false purely for political reasons. I'm sorry I didn't explain this using smaller words. If doctors are afraid to charged with a crime they might not want to practice medicine in that state anymore. So they leave. Fewer OB/GYNs in a state puts ALL pregnant people or future pregnant people in harm. So even having those laws puts pregnant people in danger. That's a fact! 2. Mass deportations...All your claims are false as we are currently doing mass deportations and none of which is true and actually happening, and what you said is nothing more than emotional statements to get people worked up. Not to mention you are arguing with something the vast majority of people want. Explain to me what I said. I made economical points and judiciary points. All of which have happened. They are facts. Produce prices have gone up due to lack of available labor to pick them. That's a fact. Increased prices on food puts poor people, especially, in additional harm. Also people that have pretty tight budgets. They are also harmed. That's a fact 3. Vouchers...Wanting different educational options for parents and children do none of what you claim and see nothing more than emotional partisan talking points. This is why I know you have no idea of what you are trying to argue. Every single state that has expanded school vouchers have seen strains on the public school budgets. Which takes away resources from public schools. That harms public school students. That's a fact. 4. Honestly I have no idea what you are talking about and I live in a state where there is a conservative majority and I have heard nothing about what you claim. Ok, but I'm right. As an attack on the ACA conservative states initially and continue to refuse to expand medicaid in those states. If you googled it you would learn about it. But I have a feeling you don't want to see negative information about your sincerely held beliefs. But those are facts. 5. Book bans...lol. This is utterly ridiculous...first the term "book ban" is an overly emotional talking point wh n no one has banned anything. Saying certain topics probably aren't appropriate for certain age groups and/or parents have say in what subjects their kids are taught at what age seems very appropriate. I assume you don't have kids. Yes, you are an ass. This is true. I am perfectly comfortable having uncomfortable conversations with my kids. We will talk about sex and gay people and trans people and people with little to no empathy... ya know... conservative people. Conservative people are not to be feared or harmed but to understand them and help them into a better way of thinking and acting. 6. Voter ID...who and how are people "harmed" by something that is required for most adult things in our society?? Please be very specific. I thought I was pretty specific. And no, we had the conversation in a different thread that YOU DON'T NECESSARILY NEED AN ID IN SOCIETY. Poor people will be overly burdened to get a qualifying ID. Paying for transportation to the ID Office(DMV or MVD or whatever) specifically to vote IS. A. POLL. TAX. IS. ILLEGAL. If conservatives tried to argue about getting a new ID for other reasons then it would probably be fine. Didn't we just do that same thing with REAL ID? No one really had an issue because we all had years and years to do it. If they are free and delivered to everyone's house then it wouldn't be as big of a deal. But conservatives have not and will not offer to pay that bill. Because again, the harm is the purpose. Keeping a percentage of one specific group, poor people, from voting is the point. Because that group overwhelmingly votes for Dems. That's a fact. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Thanks for the opportunity. While you read these please noodle on a policy that conservatives have introduced that has helped more people than it has harmed? Abortion bans - Hurt all pregnant people, within the affected geographical area, by introducing hesitancy into the decision making of doctors. Forces doctors to leave those areas. Further harming the entire population of pregnant and potentially pregnant people. Forces pregnant people to travel, doing so while pregnant can be harmful in and of itself, to obtain needed and necessary medical care. Straining them financially which further puts them and their families in harm. Mass deportation - Punishes, mostly non-violent people, for trying to make their lives better. It also hurts the USA's economy by removing works and customers from the system. Hurting the economy forces budget cuts which harms those people that most rely on those resources to live. The current administration has and continues to detain US citizens in an effort to deport as many black and brown people as possible. That is harm. School vouchers war on public education - Conservatives want to and have worked to destroy the public school system. School voucher programs have expanded, in the face of public opposition and mounting evidence that these programs drain budgets, lack academic accountability, and predominantly serve affluent families. Public school students are harmed. With that society is harmed. Medicaid Expansion - Conservative states had refused and continue to refuse to expand medicaid so that their citizens would be able to get a base level of health care. That harms poor people in conservative states. Putting extra strain on their budget with trickles up to everyone else. Book bans - Harms students by forcing them to read only the things that conservative people are comfortable reading. Which we know is not much, if anything at all. Voter ID laws - Harm poor people by forcing them to incur additional costs to partake in the right to vote. Please, prove me wrong on any of the topics. If you can't then by default I am right. ` And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Let's follow this to the end. If we applied the 'If this thing, THAT I ALONE THINK IS BAD, happens even one time. Then we should ban it for EVERYONE,' would anything be allowed? No. Of course not. That's why we don't or definitely shouldn't listen to emotionally unregulated and chronically ignorant people about complex issues involving medical care. Injury or loss of life is tragic. But each and every solution conservatives support would allow for more people to be injured or die because they can't invest the time or energy to learn about the subject. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

No. That is not realistic. No serious person would think this is even possible considering all the variables involved. The benefits vastly outweigh the harm. And there is nothing you have provided that would change the math on whether or not the care should be available. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

I understand that those are your suggestions. The available evidence suggests that the harm would vastly outweigh the benefit if we went along with those ideas. I'm still befuddled as to why you still hold those ideas. Are you just not interested to learn about the science? Or is rejecting the science the point? Because that just makes you a bad person. Do you really hold the opinion that poor people should not be allowed to get mental health care? And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Body changes, why? Harm of use vs harm of ban. Harm due to the ban is larger. If you truly want to help trans kids you would not hold this opinion and you would not call it a fairytale. Kids see and hear adults talk about trans people and they grow up understanding that YOU do not understand or believe what they tell you as the truth of their experience. Not understanding or believing out of ignorance or bias has been the hallmark of each and every era in recent history. -Post slavery: the black community was systematically oppressed. It hurt the country but those in power were able to feel superior for 100+ years. -In the 70's and 80's gay people were stigmatized and demonized as 'abnormal'. So the chance to learn about a new virus, that quickly spread to hetero people, was sacrificed because the public and those in power had contempt for gay people and the fact that the population of people that identified as gay was growing and couldn't be contained. -Today its trans people. And the band played on. They will be given all they need. There is no chance that it goes backwards. The numbers will continue to grow. The availability of care will grow. People like you will continue to feel contempt and disgust for them and you won't be honest as to why. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075 What are the possible benefits of puberty blockers? Gender identity is the internal sense of being male, female, neither or some combination of both. Gender dysphoria is a feeling of distress that can happen when gender identity differs from a person's sex assigned at birth or from sex-related physical characteristics. Some transgender and gender-diverse people experience gender dysphoria. Others do not. For transgender and gender-diverse youth who have gender dysphoria, delaying puberty might: Improve mental well-being. Ease depression and anxiety. Improve social interactions with others. Lower the need for future surgeries. Ease thoughts or actions of self-harm. Taking puberty blockers alone, however, without other medical or behavioral treatment, might not be enough to ease gender dysphoria. What are the criteria for use of puberty blockers? In most cases, to begin using puberty blockers, a person needs to: Show a pattern of gender-nonconforming or gender dysphoria that lasts over time. Address any psychological, medical or social problems that could interfere with the treatment. Be able to understand the treatment and agree to have it. This is called informed consent. Puberty blockers are not recommended for children who have not started puberty. In most cases, youth aren't old enough to get medical treatment without a parent, guardian or other caregiver's permission. This is called medical consent. For those who haven't reached the age of medical consent, a parent, guardian or caregiver often needs to agree to the use of puberty blockers. Parent and family support and encouragement also has been shown to be an important part of boosting mental health and well-being throughout this treatment. Are the changes permanent? GnRH analogues don't cause permanent physical changes. Instead, they pause puberty. That offers a chance to explore gender identity. It also gives youth and their families time to plan for the psychological, medical, developmental, social and legal issues that may lie ahead. When a person stops taking GnRH analogues, puberty starts again. When does treatment usually start and end? In general, puberty begins around age 10 or 11, though it may start earlier or later. The effect of puberty blockers depends on when a person begins to take the medicine. GnRH analogue treatment can begin at the start of puberty to delay the development of secondary sex characteristics. In slightly later stages of puberty, the treatment may be used to stop menstruation or erections. It also may prevent further development of secondary sex characteristics. While many people take the medicine for a few years, everyone is different. After delaying puberty for several years, some teens might decide to stop taking puberty blockers. Or they may start taking hormones that match their gender identity. This is called gender-affirming hormone therapy. How is the medicine given? GnRH analogue medicine is prescribed, given and monitored by a healthcare professional who has expertise in this group of medicines. The medicine typically is given as a shot either monthly, every three months or every six months. Or it may be given as an implant placed under the skin of the upper arm. The implant usually needs to be replaced every 12 months. While taking puberty blockers, regular blood tests are needed to check the medicine's effectiveness. Regular appointments with the healthcare team to check for side effects also are important. What are the possible side effects and complications? Possible side effects of GnRH analogue treatment include: Swelling at the site of the shot. Weight gain. Hot flashes. Headaches. Mood changes. Use of GnRH analogues also might have long-term effects on: Growth spurts. Bone growth. Bone density. Fertility, depending on when the medicine is started. If people assigned male at birth begin using GnRH analogues early in puberty, they might not develop enough skin on the penis and scrotum to be able to have some types of gender-affirming surgeries in adulthood . But other surgery approaches usually are available. Those who take GnRH analogues typically have their height checked every few months. Yearly bone density and bone age tests may be advised. To support bone health, youth taking puberty blockers may need to take calcium and vitamin D supplements. It's important to stay on schedule with all medical appointments. Between appointments, contact a member of the healthcare team if any changes cause concern. What other treatments are needed? Assessment and counseling by a behavioral healthcare professional can help youth and their families as they move through the decision-making process about puberty blockers. Behavioral healthcare also is an important source of support while taking puberty blockers. Talking about a person's gender identity with teachers, school staff and staff in other organizations in which the youth is involved also may help ease social adjustment during this time. After a time of adjusting to puberty blockers and confirming gender identity, gender-affirming hormone therapy might be an option. This can develop masculine or feminine secondary sex characteristics to help better align the body with a person's gender identity. Some of the changes triggered by gender-affirming hormone therapy cannot be reversed. GnRH analogues are the most common medicines used to delay puberty. But they are not the only medicines that can be used. Talk to a member of the healthcare team for information about other treatment choices.

You want all kids to be barred from talking to a professional about the things that are going on in their lives? If that is the case, please explain in detail as to WHY, because that seems needlessly punitive? And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

I don't necessarily disagree. I think therapy is the NECESSARY(that's probably the reason) first step in gender affirming care. Having a doctor document the insistent, persistent, and consistent details of the situation is key to ensure treatment is moving in the right direction. Sometimes therapy is all that is needed. Sometimes more is needed. Much the same as all the rest of health care. Sometimes the first/simplest form of treatment does the trick. I hope you're not attempting to stigmatize therapy. It has benefits for a myriad of people and situations where a diagnosed mental illness is not presented. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

I don't think anyone is saying you MUST. Just saying that you SHOULD. Because its considerate and is a minimal effort to support a community that is marginalized and at elevated risk of violence and self-harm. If you don't want to and you voice those opinions publicly you have agreed to abide by the consequences. Outside of that, STFU and stew in silence. The science is done. There are diagnosis. There is treatment. The treatment regiment varies person to person. So a broad brush approach is nonsensical from the jump. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Cats and dogs can't ask you to call them something else. If they did and you didn't, you'd be the asshole in that situation too. You are choosing to be an asshole. You get nothing from this protest. No freedom is being won by this defiance. You are going out of your way to harm a person that is struggling with something you have chosen to misunderstand and mock. You want these people to be further harmed by your actions. That IS bigotry and bordering on HATE. Your unreasonable intolerance of something you see as 'abnormal' is the crown jewel of bigotry. Congrats. You're a bigot. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

I'm trying not to make an assumption as to what you are are referring to. But this statement isn't all that specific. Care to put some more detail into this so we all better understand you? And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

This is an interesting development. You two seem to enjoy thinking about me being with a trans person. This is great. Is this why you feel so disgusted with trans people and want to keep them from getting health care? You want to make ME unhappy by punishing someone you think is close to me. Or do you feel left out? You can join us. We're not a close minded group. They have found the courage to step out and embrace who they really are and live their lives. And that terrifies you because you can't find the courage to do the same. You can. I believe in you. You can find a new and accepting community. Its probably not as far away as you think. They would appreciate you and celebrate your unique qualities. Its a scary thought. Leaving behind all your friends and family and the support network you've created. But if they can do it, so can you. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Quote

Is a medical professional the same as a medical organization or association? Again, you are trying to find an outlier that agrees with your idea in the hopes to prove that the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence against you is wrong. Doesn't work that way. I'm sorry you hold so firm to your wrong belief despite so much evidence against it. Where else in your life do you utilize this same practice? 99% of experts agree on the truth of a thing but you are smarter than they are by agreeing with the 1%. How are you still alive? I have a guess. You don't. You agree with them when it comes to YOUR health and safety. But when it comes to taking care of other people is when you, for SOME reason, you decide to ignore the science and the data. Its almost as if you are so overwhelmingly bias or prejudiced that your brain won't allow you to agree with science and data. Forcing you to admit that you are unable to critically examine this subject and agree with bigots and transphobes rather than the science. I'd be embarrassed if I held the same opinions as bigots and transphobes. But you don't seem to be as bothered by that. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

https://glaad.org/medical-association-statements-supporting-trans-youth-healthcare-and-against-discriminatory/ My words: They all agree with me and disagree with you! BOOM! "Every major medical association and leading world health authority supports health care for transgender people and youth. They are also increasingly speaking out against the disinformation being spread by opponents of this care. Below are excerpts from 30+ organizations’ statements." American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry American Academy of Dermatology American Academy of Pediatrics American Academy of Physician Assistants American Medical Association American Nurses Association American Association of Clinical Endocrinology American Association of Geriatric Psychiatry American College Health Association American College of Nurse-Midwives American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists American College of Physicians American Counseling Association American Heart Association American Medical Student Association American Psychiatric Association American Psychological Association American Society of Plastic Surgeons American Society for Reproductive Medicine American Urological Association Endocrine Society Federation of Pediatric Organizations GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality The Journal of the American Medical Association National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health National Association of Social Workers Ohio Children’s Hospital Pediatric Endocrine Society Pediatrics (Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics ) and Seattle Children’s Hospital Texas Medical Association Texas Pediatric Society United States Professional Association for Transgender Health (USPATH) World Health Organization (WHO) World Medical Association World Professional Association for Transgender Health And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Not sure what point this is trying to make. But I think any one underage is not a prostitute. They are a slave.

Can you provide evidence to back up that claim? Cuz every reputable medical organization... in the world... agrees that gender affirming care has overwhelmingly beneficial outcomes. This includes surgery, both top and bottom. If you are just concerned that some 'kids' are getting surgery unnecessarily. I'll agree that could possibly happen. Because health care is not 100% efficacious. But even among people that regret their treatment. There is no single reason that is shared across the board. Reasons could vary greatly. The most frequently reported reason is that friends and family do not accept them and they detransition as a result of the stress of the new dynamic. We can all agree THAT sucks. But not because of the treatment itself. If we give them the benefit of the doubt; doctors(in the USA) take an oath to do no harm and parents/guardians are typically motivated by the best interest of the child. If these things are true and each person approaches this situation wanting to help the child as best they can. How can you still think that kids are being harmed by gender affirming care in such numbers as would support a ban altogether? I'm sorry if my questions make you feel like you need to defend yourself by lashing out. But if it is really happening I think we would all like to know. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Agreed. You just need to provide evidence that they fall under into that category. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Once again you are assigning a strawman motive that you still have no evidence for. Why can't you make your case before attempting to deliver the verdict? Shaming kids about this subject makes it less likely they will tell someone about possible 'grooming' from the people in their lives that are most likely to do it... a relative. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/learning-sex-education-can-save-kids-from-groomers-rcna26931 All history aside, if you really cared about this topic you would try to educate yourself and not give the same knee jerk reaction you have to everyone that you feel is a perceived enemy. No one wants to hurt kids. At least there is no evidence to make that point clear and making outlandish claims don't really help if there really was a problem. Abstinence-only sex ed doesn't work. Its harmful. It leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy, later unwanted pregnancy, and higher rates of STI's. None of these are good. Not to mention that kids are more likely to communicate questionable behavior, and adults are more likely to take it serious, if they can do so using the correct terminology and are not shamed into thinking it was their fault. Yelling 'groomer' at the top of your lungs does nothing to help kids if that is your real intent. Yes, it helps politically if THAT is your goal. But we can both agree its a pretty shitty thing to do if you are not 100% sure. Some resources for you: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6283686/ https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/planned-parenthood-new-hampshire-action-fund/blog/preventing-sexual-violence-through-comprehensive-sex-education https://siecus.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/If-Then-Sexual-Assault-Final.pdf https://honestlyokc.org/sex-education-is-child-abuse-prevention/ https://www.unesco.org/en/health-education/cse I know this might be beating a dead horse but I would strongly encourage you to reconsider where and from whom you get your information and why you have so much trust in the sources that you do. Because your opinions on this and many other topics are not only wrong and outdated but harmful. They seem based in bias or worse and if you really do want to help, that's great but try not to let your need/want to help let you get twisted around into doing the opposite. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX

Thank you for your honest and measured responses my comments. The OP made specific reference to “wingers” (I believe it was) trying to control people’s “personal lives”. I am not sure exactly what that means but my response was a generalized statement that these wingers weren’t making your private life a big deal before and they certainly didn’t bring it to the public. This also had some context to previous statements of theirs that I don’t recall at the moment. I completely agree that people should treat everyone with love, care and decency while not controlling how they identify or interact with the world. However, what you just did there is the equal half of the issue I referenced. “If you don’t address me by the pronouns I’ve designated for you use then you’re an asshole.” The only one controlling anyone in this scenario is that person. I’m willing to meet you half way and say this is an equal parts problem…both sides can/have handled it poorly at times and to horrible degrees. It seems as if you're saying that the social repercussions, like being called out as insensitive or an asshole, for purposefully ignoring the pronoun correction someone has offered is the fault of the trans person for insisting that they be referred to by the correct pronoun(s). If that is the case. I'm having a hard time squaring that circle. If someone tells you that you've called them by the wrong name and corrects you. You ARE an asshole by maliciously calling them by the wrong name moving forward. If that bothers you then just don't do it or you will get a reputation as being an asshole. Sucks to suck but you literally brought it on yourself. Ignorance is no longer a viable excuse. (again not YOU necessarily just a generic person that doesn't seem very nice) I don’t think the majority of people think that trans people are “icky”. I think the two most likely scenarios are they are uncomfortable in a situation that they don’t understand and the mental health stigma associated with it. We’ve come a long way since gay and lesbians hit the scene so to say “icky”…I’m not buying that. It discredits just how much progress has been made as a society. I agree, but a minority of people DO think trans people are 'icky'. Or more accurately they have contempt for trans people or feel disgusted by them. They are taught to feel these things by friends, family, and their algorithm, towards trans people in addition to other groups. That they are less deserving of dignity and gov't resources. Making it easier to see them as less than human and to justify treating them as problems to be fixed rather than people to be supported. Building is harder than destroying. They feel threatened. Trans people call into question many norms in society. Anticipating even tiny changes in what is considered 'normal' are considered threats to the status quo. The status quo has worked well for conservatives and they are not interested, even scared of, changing things because they might not have it so well on the other side. Change is inherently painful and conservatives tend to vehemently resist change of any kind. Especially social change. Seriously, who does it hurt to call someone by the pronouns they prefer? No one. So why push back so hard I commented specifically on the claims that the administration does not care about kids…however the OP contextualized that I don’t remember but as far as children go the administration has enacted executive orders and things to protect children from like I said…going under the knife, taking life altering medicines etc. As far as the EO, if that is in fact a direct quotation, I think that is poorly worded to say the least. With that said the intent of that EO was not to address the health and well being of trans or whether the government cares about its citizens within that grouping. It was to say their focus is the organizations and hot button societal issues won’t be entertained in this space. We can agree or disagree about their reasoning but it does not say they don’t care about those individuals. It does not say that out right. But the actions that follow the order DOES. Firing members of the military that are trans gender and cancelling gender affirming care for veterans on a whim does say tell me that they DO NOT care about these people or what they have done in service to the country. Those are not children. They should be allowed to receive the health care they've earned with their service. Kids going under the knife is exactly the same argument as voter ID. The numbers of 'children' getting gender affirming surgery is vanishingly small to begin with. But always in consultation with one or more doctors over quite a long period of time leading up to it. They are not sudden decisions. Let alone the regret rate. Everything has a regret rate. Winning the lottery has a regret rate. That is not how we determine necessary health care initiatives. These bans will not effect rich people. So we have decided to torture poor kids and their parents by not allowing them to get the health care that they need. Kids will die and parents will lose their children because the people that find trans people 'icky' are ok with these laws because they can rationalize it but do not consider how desperate some families are for this care. We have testimonies for days about the negative impacts gender affirming care has had in detransitioned people, there is a lot of evidence in the mental health field that indicates problems with treatment and/or whether that treatment was even necessary. Honestly you educated on a lot of these things so to outright evidence exist is a bit shocking and disingenuous. A fraction of a fraction of a still smaller fraction of people feel they may have been misdiagnosed and now have trauma. That is tragic. Of a group that is made up of <4% of the population(<100% of THAT group feel they need gender affirming care) <3% of those that seek out gender affirming care have regrets. Which means 1/10th of 1% of the whole population has regretted gender affirming care. That is not a good enough reason for me to prevent the option for this care. I'm curious if you are ok with such a tiny population affecting the whole? I don't think there is 'a lot of evidence... indicates problems with treatment.... even necessary'. Every professional medical association in the country agrees that this care IS necessary and effective. Here and Here Not that evidence doesn't exist. Of course there is evidence against it. But its not reliable. That is the issue. If the evidence is not reliable there is no reason to believe it. My links should outweigh any anecdotal evidence you might find. If it doesn't I would love to know why? See this is something that blows my mind….the people that criticize the Federal government the most want to give the most power to the government and not the states. While I from time to time criticize Big Brother but am relatively resigned to see things as they are want nothing more than the states to have as much power, control and abilities as they can. That is why we elect locally and have representatives in the first place right? Why shouldn’t we expect all these people we elect to ACTUALLY do their jobs to the best of their abilities, represent our interest as we voted and address the needs we have (and they are intimately aware of) so that we don’t need to rely on a government that should be primarily concerned with keeping us safe from external threats? All the things you’re addressing CAN be addressed by good local leadership. Not sure if I addressed everything but my reasoning behind my statements… I think the point is that health care treatment options shouldn't change from state to state. Health care is too important to individual and societal health to allow for such varieties. Whether or not an area as the need or financial ability to provide certain care is one thing. But to BAN anything in the realm of health care is wrong. The process by which science based health care options are developed helps to ensure the efficacy, effectiveness, and necessity of the treatments. To ban something that has been tested and retested and retested again because 'its just common sense' is ignorant and cruel. But they don't see it as cruel because they have rationalized doing it because the group is too small to really matter and are made up of people they feel is ok to mistreat in such a way.

XX chromosomes thats it 2 seconds. Sorry, but not even close. What about people with XX+Y or XXX or XYY or XXYY(they have two X's, do they count) or XXXY(they have an extra X, are they even more of a 'woman'?) or XXXX(same question) or XXXXY or XXXXX. Can any of these be 'women'? (btw the answer is Yes. If you say 'No' its just you wanting to not admit to losing. You're in a corner and I think you know it. That's why you are running away as quickly as you can.) Your definition is shit. Your opinions on this topic are shit. You are not a very good thinker. No wonder why you run away as soon as you can. These things all happen. And if you are going to say, 'They are an anomaly, they don't count.' Then you need a reason. Not just, 'Nu uh.' Because that's what a toddler says. Are you smarter than a toddler? Then chromosomes were never your criteria. Because they disprove your 'chromosomes' argument. This is lazy thinking. You were convinced or tricked, probably by someone you respect or revere. You trusted them without actually looking into it much if at all. But still refuse to believe they and you could be wrong. You are. You are going about in a world with a wrong and harmful idea. I have given you the correct information. You should take some time to think on it. Read about it. Do a little bit more than scratch the surface. Because this idea and the actions that it empowers are actively harming people. You might not care about the group that it is harming and I have a feeling that is true. I do care about this group of people. But you should really consider holding ideas that don't harm people. Just a thought. I’d runaway too if I made such embarrassing comments as you’ve made. Scurry away. I’ll start the clock for when you just can’t help yourself and jump back into another conversation you are ill equipped to finish. Again.

Why is that?

All evidence to the contrary. You even sited an example and proves this hypothesis wrong. An anomaly that needs scientific medical interference to happen does not give you membership to the group. Yes, this is your opinion. Without evidence to back it up it is as easily dismissed as you've tried to dismiss my 'opinions' that I, however, did back up with facts. See the difference? Because you received medical assistance to carry a fetus, it does not make you a biological woman And you feel this is true because...? Those things in a vacuum, I would agree, could be interpreted as trying to 'protect' people. Protecting them from That would be the question. Because they don't like trans people as a whole. At this point I consider this your opinion. Why is it you conveniently left out the language from the EO that highlights how disgusted the administration is with regard to trans people? Could it be that it made my point in a way that you can't refute? I think it is. How are you using the phrase Woman, when you take it upon yourself to include non-biological women and anomalies? There is no such thing as 'biological woman'. If I am wrong please correct me by offering your working definition of woman that would include all others you consider 'biological women' and exclude the sited anomaly? If you cannot then by default they fall under the umbrella of 'woman'. How long do you require to complete this assignment? Remember if you fail to do it or even attempt it, then by default you agree with me. Trans men and women ARE men and women! . Children don't know what's best for them always. each case is different. Statewide and community-wide systems with federal overlook can assimilate and adjust easier than a federal mandate. I believe that's what we had. Dislike it as much as you wanted. If you didn't believe it should be done or offered then you are under no obligation to participate with the treatment yourself. You would likely be a horrible steward to a child suffering from something that could be treated. There was no mandate that people be given treatment. Just that it was available as an option and that if doctors, guardians, and patients agreed to the treatment that they could receive the treatment. Now, it seems, there are some states that refuse to make these treatments available. THAT. IS. WRONG! It will lead to harm and death among their constituents. But they will be, almost exclusively, within one small group. That group, they have decided, is not deserving(there's that word again) of being treated with equality, dignity, or compassion. Because they are looked on as less-than or abnormal. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX i look forward to your response. This could be promising.

I’m sorry. I know that was a lot.

Thanks for your input. Anomalies can be used in a few ways. If an argument relies on 100% or 0% occurrences of that thing then one single anomaly proves it incorrect. Is the person bad or evil that they held a position and it was proven to be incorrect by an anomaly? No. If a topic is based more on averages like crime rates and background characteristics. Then an anomaly doesn't help your point one way or the other. You just need to know how an anomaly could help or hurt your argument. What if, when presented with information that proves their opinion to be wrong, they refuse to acknowledge it or to incorporate it into a new and different idea/opinion? At this point I would consider them a bad person or at the very least they are so traumatized that they don't realize how harmful they are being to themselves and those around them by continuing the practice. They should really consider getting help to unpack the reasons for not wanting to be smarter and be a better thinker. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Thanks for the book report. What point are you trying to make? People with XY and XX chromosomes can get pregnant, carry to term, and deliver a healthy baby. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX 100% agree. Say less. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Interesting take on the subject. What do you mean by 'bring it into the public sphere'? What is being brought out? I disagree that 'no one's trying to control these people'. I think that's exactly what is happening. Firstly, I don't think accidentally misgendering someone is the issue. That's happened since time immemorial. Its the active and sometimes aggressive misgendering that is the issue. We call each other by name sometimes. If we call someone by the wrong name, we get corrected, we apologize if you are decent human being, then we try to call that person by the name they have informed us that they prefer. Swap name for pronoun in that scenario. What's the problem? Why can't we all just try to not be assholes? Secondly, I think that trans issues and trans people make others feel icky. Similar to gay and lesbian people from decades ago. They offended people by flaunted their sexuality in public by holding hands or kissing their partner. This disgusted some people. So much so that it pushed them to become violent to gay and lesbian people. Similarly to trans individuals today. They can't cope with the fact that these people exist. They don't understand and don't want to understand their lives and what they go through on a daily basis. But find them disgusting and objectionable and offensive. They get on board with laws banning gender affirming care. Not because of the data or the science but on vibes. If they can't actively harm trans people they choose to passively harm them because they are icky and abnormal. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX All evidence to the contrary. You even sited an example and proves this hypothesis wrong. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Those things in a vacuum, I would agree, could be interpreted as trying to 'protect' people. Protecting them from what would be the question. Because they don't like trans people as a whole. As can be gleaned from this text from EO 14183 'Armed Forces have been afflicted with radical gender ideology to appease activists unconcerned with the requirements of military service like physical and mental health, selflessness, and unit cohesion. So I would be hard pressed to agree that they are doing anything with, for, or to trans people out of concern for their wellbeing. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is decimating vaccine science and declared that gender-affirming care as being unsafe. They are not following science or their own procedures in order to harm trans people. Also there is no evidence that children are actively being harmed. If you have some, I would be interested to see it. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Is this your version of 'I think I can'? Cuz that's what it seems like. If you keep saying that to yourself then it will be true? (spoiler alert) Its not. I have a feeling that you just living in a world that continues to prove you wrong on this issue(which it will) will be excruciating to you. So I am fine with you yelling at clouds because you are actively seeing how wrong you are on this subject, on a daily basis. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Yes. States have the flexibility on some issues, sure. Some things should NOT be up to states. Living in different states should not offer you different freedoms. Everyone gets an education, yes. What that education entails, is up to the states. If you want a better or different education you can move or pay for private school. Commerce: similar rules to deter fraud across the board. Some are stricter than others. Health care: what is and is not allowed or offered should not vary state to state. The number of providers might vary or not exist due to lack of need but if procedures or medicines with proven efficacy are banned or criminalized. That is wrong. That is ignorant. That is purposefully harmful. Because rich people will always have the resources to get those things that are banned in different states. So that means we, as a society, have agreed to torture and punish poor people that can't move to a state to temporarily acquire what should be available to everyone. Not sure what you mean by 'responsible'. Do you mean paying for things? Because I don't think that's the issue. Having a federal law protecting the basic freedoms is the issue. BTW, churches or religious organizations own plenty of hospitals in states where certain medical procedures are free and legal yet still refuse to offer them to their patients. Many in the realm of child birth. I don't need to tell you that sometimes complications in this area have few treatments and they are quite time sensitive. Sorry I don't mean to yell at or make it seem like I'm attacking you. This subject is... a lot. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Old man, yells at clouds. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Interesting take. How are you using the phrase 'biological men'? Are we talking about chromosomes or visible physical features or what? And please don't say 'its common sense' or 'you already know what I mean'. Because that means you don't know and if you don't know then your first statement translates to 'The simple fact is a thing I can't explain can't give birth to a child'. Which I totally agree with. But is not really useful in conversation. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX Ok. That's fair. What do you mean by 'aren't living up to their part'? How are you determining what their 'part' is? And at what point would you say someone is 'relying' on big government? Is it total funds or time or something else? People do care. But they are also bias. Too many people refuse to help the whole group because a few MIGHT, in their mind, get something they don't deserve. As if they get to determine who deserves what. Where the counter idea is that the benefit of helping everyone is worth a small percentage possibly taking advantage. One is born out of ignorance, intolerance, and bigotry. The other is born out of compassion, empathy, and understanding. Take health care for instance. Who takes advantage of universal health care? Poor people? No. They tend to fall into the group that is 'undeserving' of nice things. Its rich people that take advantage, so far as we've seen in our system today. Insurance fraud happens a lot. Sometimes on a massive scale. A senator from FL was CEO of a company that was fined a huge amount for committing insurance fraud for years. Its not poor people scamming EBT or food stamps that make up the bulk of fraud. And once again.... HAPPY PRIDE XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX