The transgenderism debate

 It's possible to treat schizophrenics, alcoholics, drug addicts, depression, suicide, anorexia, bulimia with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder. Therefore, it should be possible to treat transgender people with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder.

The problem is people are doing the things you listed, and your solution is to imagine that they aren;t doing these things?  That's the plan?  OK, but how do you implement this amazing plan, magic?  Wishful thinking?   Totalitarianism perhaps?

The problem is people are doing the things you listed, and your solution is to imagine that they aren;t doing these things?  That's the plan?  OK, but how do you implement this amazing plan, magic?  Wishful thinking?   Totalitarianism perhaps?

I am not a politician, so I don't know the exact steps that go into making these things happen. You asked what should be done about it, and I told you what we should do about it

However, the government does it, I don't care, as long as it gets done.

So you admit that it's just wishful thinking, you have no solution, you are just whining.

You mean a totalitarian government does it.

So you admit that it's just wishful thinking, you have no solution, you are just whining.

No, I am saying that there are these problems, and we need to stop these problems.

Are all American citizens whining when they vote for certain laws to pass? 

You mean a totalitarian government does it.

When the hell did I ever say that? 

In other words, this "largely ostracized" group doesn't appear to be killing itself because of the ostracization -- this contradicts your argument.

Except that as I have already pointed out to you, your own source disagrees...

Victimisation and mental health were key risk factors across the dimension self-harm and suicide identified through all analyses.

We're not talking about medical advice which I don't know a whole lot about, wherein I have to trust others because I don't understand much. We're talking about the highly politicized topic of transgenderism and the fact that I think the narrative from the "experts" doesn't fit the data.

If you know anything about how data works you know it can be interpreted many different ways based on many different factors. Think of a poll where 80% of respondents answer a certain way, but then they ask the same question differently and suddenly it's a 50/50 split. You need to understand the full extent of the experiment to understand the take away.

This doesn't mean we should blindly trust the conclusions of the experiments authors, but unless you have a complete understanding of what questions were asked and what methods of control were established, you're in a pretty weak position to claim you understand the data better than they do, and based on your ignorance of what the authors were even concluding, I have no reason to believe you've done any of that. And even if you did, that might be worse, because seriously, do you really have nothing better to do with yourself?

It's possible to treat schizophrenics with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder. Therefore, it should be possible to treat transgender people with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder.

 You're comparing apples to oranges.

"Transgenderism" is where a person says "this is who I am". Schizophrenia is where one person creates two or more "different people" within their own mind.

Treating a schizophrenic with dignity would mean embracing each personality as a legitimate person. The parallel to that with transgender people use to do just that which you are vehemently arguing against.

We treat schizophrenia as a serious condition because those suffering from it are either a danger to themselves or others, or because the patient does not wish to continue being subjected to their condition.

None of this applies to transgendered people. There is no evidence they are a danger to others any more than the average person regardless of how much manufactured nonsense the political right concocts, and they clearly do not wish to be treated.

The large majority of transgender people are not committing suicide, thinking about suicide or feeling bad due to victimization -- you need another explanation for the 76%.

At the end of the day, the arguments I'm making are either right or wrong.

Both transgender people and schizophrenics are humans who have mental illness -- that's apples to apples.

The large majority of transgender people are not committing suicide, thinking about suicide or feeling bad due to victimization -- you need another explanation for the 76%.

Actually I don't. This is a classic argument from ignorance fallacy. It is not my responsibility to come up with alternative explanations for why they commit suicide, it is your responsibility as the person making this claim to demonstrate that their "mental illness" is the culprit.

Cite the part of the study saying this, because I just looked again and it says this:

"Evidence demonstrated high prevalence of victimisation (36%) and mental health difficulties (39%) within these populations. Our review shows that these experiences were respectively 3.74 times and 2.67 times higher among young LGBTQ+ people than their cisgender, heterosexual counterparts."

At the end of the day, the arguments I'm making are either right or wrong.

Actually, let's be a bit more precise; the arguments you're making are either valid or invalid. That matters in how we go about assessing this because validity is merely the result of the conclusion following from the premises, but that's meaningless when it's the premises that I'm challenging you on in the first place.

Again, the point I brought up here is that the authors who actually conducted the studies are in a much better position to explain the take away because they understand the full extent of what methods and controls were used to get to their results.

So either you fully understand the controls and methods or you don't. Which is it? If I were to challenge you on any random study you cited and ask you about them would you, without having to cheat, be able to explain it?

Both transgender people and schizophrenics are humans who have mental illness -- that's apples to apples.

Taking two entirely different things and calling them the same doesn't make them the same.

I already explained the fundamental difference between these two things and why it matters here. Do you have a response to that, or are you just going to pretend I didn't explain it?

So, we do need another explanation for the 76% who aren't committing suicide and having suicidal thoughts due to victimization. 

You're attempting to contest something that isn't contestable.

I didn't call them the same. I argued that they were the same in some regard. That's what an analogy is.

Schizophrenics almost always do not wish to be schizophrenic

There are a lot of people who think CBT is a relic of the past and that ONLY pharmacology and surgical medical science has the solutions, whether it is with hormone replacement or with the surgical knife. Some also believe it's more important and necessary to fundamentally change the systemic framework of a society than engage in the archaic practice of CBT in EVERY case.

Fortunately we have seen a microcosm of such thinking with the recent "defund the police" movements and a societal shift away from behavior correctional facilities. Over the past few years, we have witnessed a growing movement advocating for the defunding of police departments and a shift away from traditional behavior correctional facilities. This has been fueled by concerns over police brutality, racial profiling, and the disproportionate incarceration of minorities. Lots of people believe that traditional law enforcement and correctional institutions are not effective in addressing the root causes of crime, and that a more "modern" approach that addresses social and economic factors is needed. I really think it is important to recognize that CBT will always play an important role in maintaining public safety and providing rehabilitation for offenders. Ultimately, the key to addressing these issues will be to find a balance between traditional law enforcement and correctional institutions and more progressive approaches that address underlying social and economic factors.

Trying to change  society to accommodate aberrant behavior in EVERY case isn't sustainable. If you are interested, you should look into the recent (short lived) formation of CHAZ/CHOP as an example of a society that went full steam in that direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWe9NQOFs4U

So, we do need another explanation for the 76% who aren't committing suicide and having suicidal thoughts due to victimization. 

Not having an explanation for something simply means we don't have an explanation. The problem is that you do have another explanation - mental illness, hence my point about argument from ignorance and the burden of proof.

I get that you posted this point in response to my point about about victimization being the explanation, but that was just an example of me offering an alternative, not an attempt to cite a full study of the underlying issues. You're the one trying to accomplish that.

You're attempting to contest something that isn't contestable.

You didn't hear a word I said, or maybe are just pretending you didn't. 76% respondents said what exactly? Do you know? No, because all you're doing is relying on the characterization of what they said by the people who actually talked to them.

Like I pointed out earlier, numbers are not always that simple. In one Harvard survey amongst self professed politically engaged individuals, 56% of respondents approved of the Affordable Care Act. Only 33% approved of Obamacare. How you ask a question matters.

So again, this doesn't mean we chuck the numbers out the window, but it does (or at least should) raise a red flag to those who draw conclusions from any study that contradict the conclusions of the people who conducted them.

I didn't call them the same. I argued that they were the same in some regard. That's what an analogy is.

In my previous post I went through why these two things are not the same. You responded with:

Both transgender people and schizophrenics are humans who have mental illness -- that's apples to apples.

You then went on to declare that we could treat them with dignity without pandering to their mental illness. So yes, you absolutely did just call them both mental illnesses and them declare them the same in that regard (apples to apples).

To reiterate my point, again, schizophrenia is where an individual contains multiple personalities, while trans people are just telling you that the one person you see is in fact who they are. These are not the same, not even close. 

There is nothing about these two conditions that are analogous to each other. You can call them both mental illnesses, but calling something a mental illness is not the same as demonstrating why your characterization matters in any meaningful way.

So, this 76% shows your "alternative" isn't correct.

When people use analogies, they never use things that are the same. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a point in an analogy.

You have ZERO explanation for these extremely elevated rates of detrimental outcomes.

So, this 76% shows your "alternative" isn't correct.

No, it doesn't. You continue to pretend that one single explanation must account for the entire variance, otherwise we can chuck it away. That's nonsense. 

Cisgender people commit suicide too, so we're talking about accounting for the difference between two, and there are likely a multitude of factors why. Even if mental illness is part of it, that still wouldn't explain all of it. These aren't all or nothing propositions.

Also, I've been allowing you to mischaracterize what I said for a while now so let's finally take a moment to address it; I never claimed "victimization" was the cause, I said trans people are the most ostracized in our society (whether they are actually the most ostracized - the part you decided to focus on - is irrelevant to my point).

Being ostracized comes in many different forms, not just "victimization" (however they are even defining it). It also means being made fun of, being talked about, being targeted, etc. This thread alone is just another example of it. Imagine living in a society where half go so far to not accept you for who you are that they cite studies where they don't even agree with is authors but use its data anyway to argue that you're mentally ill. Imagine your own family and especially your parents don't accept you for who you are to the point where they disown you. Shit, under those circumstances I might kill myself too or at the very least act out, so I guess I'm mentally ill as well.

Show me where your studies account for all of this.

When people use analogies, they never use things that are the same. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a point in an analogy.

I'm not refuting your argument on the basis that it doesn't line up perfectly, I'm refuting it on the basis that not one element of these two "conditions" are analogous to each other.

If you want to argue that "transgenderism" is a mental illness on the basis that it leads to increased suicides, bullying, etc. that's fine. We can agree or disagree on those merits but comparing any of this to schizophrenia is deeply flawed. We don't treat schizophrenics the way we do because someone called their condition a mental illness, we treat them the way we do because that's what their condition demands. Stick to arguing the condition, not the classification.

You have ZERO explanation for these extremely elevated rates of detrimental outcomes.

Complete nonsense. I've given you explanations that are quite frankly common sense, you reject them outright because I haven't produced a study showing them to you.

So since common sense is apparently invalid in this conversation let me provide the exact same thing I've been saying in the form of a study:

The suicide attempt rate among transgender persons ranges from 32% to 50% across the countries. Gender-based victimization, discrimination, bullying, violence, being rejected by the family, friends, and community; harassment by intimate partner, family members, police and public; discrimination and ill treatment at health-care system are the major risk factors that influence the suicidal behavior among transgender persons.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/

Now you can go on and study the various factors at play here and stop pretending I've produced nothing.

You finally posted a study lol. Only took you like 20 posts.

It's not integral to the argument you're making here, but just shows that you don't have anything to back the claim you're making.

(2) Transgender people who self-report not experiencing discrimination still have these elevated risks of suicide Suicidality-Transgender-Sep-2019.pdf (ucla.edu)

(3) Suicidal transgender people also typically don't cite bullying as a reason for their attempts at suicide

Do I really need to explain to you why anecdotal evidence and "common sense" doesn't cut it compared to studies?

So, the left-wing solutions to transgenderism, at least in those regards, doesn't help the transgender condition in any significant way.

It's not integral to the argument you're making here, but just shows that you don't have anything to back the claim you're making.

It’s not my claim we’re discussing here, it’s yours. I never came on here claiming transgender people are not mentally ill, I am refuting your claim that they are as insufficient. You need to understand how the burden of proof works.

(2) Transgender people who self-report not experiencing discrimination still have these elevated risks of suicide Suicidality-Transgender-Sep-2019.pdf (ucla.edu)

(3) Suicidal transgender people also typically don't cite bullying as a reason for their attempts at suicide

Once again, you’re searching for the one drop that’s going to fill up the whole bucket, then arguing that if none of them accomplished it it’s proof there’s no water.

No one thing is going to account for the entire gap between trans and cisgender suicide rates.

If you want to prove transgenderism is a mental illness you need certain controls in place to ensure your results are definitive. None of your studies have done this because that’s not even the topic they are studying. This is why nearly every single one you’ve cited ends with a disclaimer saying “more research is needed”.

Do I really need to explain to you why anecdotal evidence and "common sense" doesn't cut it compared to studies?

No, you need to explain how studies that aren’t studying the topic you’re asserting, who don’t agree with your conclusions, and who haven’t ruled out all alternative explanations proves your explanation to be the correct one.

So, the left-wing solutions to transgenderism, at least in those regards, doesn't help the transgender condition in any significant way.

And yet you aren’t pretending to have nor are even seeking a solution to this problem, so your attack on “left wing solutions” (an absurd term here) rings quite hollow, especially as you sit here arguing these people are mentally ill and their own decisions regarding their own identity should be disregarded, because that’s really going to help people recover from suicidal thoughts…

We're both making positive cases that have burden of proof. I'm arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness.

We're both making positive cases that have burden of proof. I'm arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness.

Do you think being gay is a mental illness?

I don't currently know. I haven't done as much research on it. 

I don't currently know. I haven't done as much research on it. 

That’s like saying you don’t know if smoking cigarettes is bad for your health because you haven’t done much research on it.

We discussed as to why suicide rates for transgender people were so high, you gave the alternative explanation of "victimization". You didn't give any data/evidence/studies to back this claim

We're both making positive cases that have burden of proof. I'm arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness. You're arguing that we should respect their gender identity

It's the dozen-odd studies combined that make the case, not individual studies analyzed in isolation.

The numbers from the can simply be looked at and we can draw numerical conclusions from that.

We discussed as to why suicide rates for transgender people were so high, you gave the alternative explanation of "victimization". You didn't give any data/evidence/studies to back this claim

That’s because the claim came from your own studies. You know this, I even quoted the passage.

We're both making positive cases that have burden of proof. I'm arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness. You're arguing that we should respect their gender identity

Agreed, and this is the whole problem here. What I’m arguing for is a matter of common sense and basic human decency, so asking me to provide studies to prove my point is absurd. I can’t “prove” to you that people benefit from compassion. If you haven’t figured that out yet you have very serious issues and there’s really nothing left for me to argue about you with on that nor would I really care to.

You on the other hand, are arguing for a medical classification for something the medical community doesn’t accept should be classified as you believe. That comes with a very steep burden, so putting yourself on some high horse because you provided studies and I didn’t is ridiculous.

It's the dozen-odd studies combined that make the case, not individual studies analyzed in isolation.

100 invalid arguments doesn’t add up to one valid point.

The numbers from the can simply be looked at and we can draw numerical conclusions from that.

Numerical data is only as useful as the controls and methods used to obtain it. Once again, not one of your studies were even set up to explore the question of whether transgenderism is a mental illness, so no controls were put in place capture any data that would confirm or deny that hypothesis.

you are appealing to authority which is a logical fallacy.