Theweakeredge

What do you think of privatizing the police?

"Puberty is a highly important time for people coming to an understanding of their gender identity. A significant fraction of individuals who are gender nonconforming in childhood may end up identifying as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or another sexual minority rather than as transgender late adolescents and adults. This is generally referred to as desistance rather than detransition. Detransition, or retransition, is generally only used to describe someone who has transitioned socially or medically into a different gender role. An example of this is someone who was assigned female, lived socially as male for many years, and then returned to living as a woman. These types of cases tend to be very rare, and are even rarer in individuals who have accessed any medical or surgical care to affirm their gender. Language is important. Many activists and allies encourage the use of retransition rather than detransition to recognize that gender is a journey that may not necessarily go in a straight line. The term detransition is often used by individuals who want to restrict access to gender affirming care out of concern that it could lead to regret.

While regret is possible, it is rare. Lack of access to affirming care has been shown to have more concrete risks.Another study looked at surgeons who offered gender affirming procedures. Looking at 46 surgeons who had worked with 22,725 patients, there were only 62 documented cases of regret (0.27%)."

” Eight percent (8%) ofrespondents reported having de-transitioned atsome point. Most of those who de-transitioneddid so only temporarily: 62% of those who hadde-transitioned reported that they were currentlyliving full time in a gender different than thegender they were thought to be at birth....Respondents who had de-transitioned cited arange of reasons, though only 5% of those whohad de-transitioned reported that they had doneso because they realized that gender transitionwas not for them, representing 0.4% of the overallsample.42 The most common reason cited forde-transitioning was pressure from a parent(36%). Twenty-six percent (26%) reported thatthey de-transitioned due to pressure from otherfamily members, and 18% reported that they detransitioned because of pressure from their spouseor partner." (pg 115)

"Of 921 eligible patients, 374 were Holocaust survivors; 135 (14.6%) had attempted suicide in the month before admission"

"At the end of 2008, there were some 233,700 Holocaust survivors in Israel. The number ofsurvivors is decreasing and the projection for 2015 is 143,900 survivors and for 2025,approximately 46,900 survivors."

General Risk Factors

Transgender people have many of the same risk factors for suicidality as found in the U.S. general population, such as depression, substance use, and housing instability. Similar to these trends in the U.S. general population, we found an elevated prevalence of suicide thoughts and attempts among USTS respondents who:

• Experienced serious psychological distress and reported heavy alcohol or illicit drug use (excluding marijuana);
  
• Reported poor general health compared to those who reported excellent health (19.9% versus 3.6% past-year suicide attempts);
  
• Reported having a disability, experienced homelessness in the past year, or had ever been arrested for any reason.
  

Unique Risk Factors

In addition to general risk factors, transgender people have additional risk factors, such as experiences of discrimination, stigma, family rejection, and lack of access to gender-affirming health care. Findings regarding these unique factors include the following:

• Experiencing discrimination or mistreatment in education, employment, housing, health care, in places of public accommodations, or from law enforcement is associated with a higher prevalence of suicide thoughts and attempts. For example, the prevalence of past-year suicide attempts by those who reported that they had been denied equal treatment in the past year because they are transgender was more than double that of those who had not experienced such treatment (13.4% compared to 6.3%).
  
• Those who reported that their spouses, partners, or children rejected them because they are transgender reported a higher prevalence of lifetime and past-year suicide attempts. Those
  
  who reported rejection by their family of origin, for example, reported twice the prevalence of past-year suicide attempts compared to those who had not experienced such rejection (10.5%compared to 5.1%).
  
• Respondents who had been rejected by their religious communities or had undergone conversion therapy were more likely to report suicide thoughts and attempts. For instance, 13.1 percent of those who had experienced religious rejection in the past year had attempted suicide in the past year; by contrast, 6.3 percent of respondents who had experienced religious acceptance in the past year attempted suicide in the past year.
  
• Experiences of violence, including intimate partner violence (IPV) are associated with higher prevalence of suicide thoughts and attempts. Over 30 percent of those who were physically attacked in a place of public accommodation reported attempting suicide in the past year, which is over four times the prevalence among respondents who were not similarly attacked.
  
• Those who had “de-transitioned” at some point, meaning having gone back to living according to their sex assigned at birth, were significantly more likely to report suicide thoughts and attempts, both past-year and lifetime, than those who had never “de-transitioned.” Nearly 12 percent of those who “de-transitioned” attempted suicide in the past year compared to 6.7 percent of those who have not “de-transitioned.”
  
• People who are not viewed by others as transgender and those who do not disclose to others that they are transgender reported a lower prevalence of suicide thoughts and attempts. For instance, 6.3 percent of those who reported that others can never tell they are transgender attempted suicide in the past year compared to 12.2 percent of those who reported that others can always tell they are transgender.
  
• The cumulative effect of minority stress is associated with a higher prevalence of suicidality. For instance, 97.7 percent of those who had experienced four discriminatory or violence experiences in the past year (being fired or forced to resign from a job, eviction, experiencing homelessness, and physical attack) reported seriously thinking about suicide in the past year and 51.2 percent made a suicide attempt in the past year.
  

We also found that there are some factors that are associated with lower risk of suicide thoughts and attempts for USTS respondents:

• Respondents with supportive families reported lower prevalence of past-year and lifetime suicide thoughts and attempts.
  
• Those who wanted, and subsequently received, hormone therapy and/or surgical care had a substantially lower prevalence of past-year suicide thoughts and attempts than those who wanted hormone therapy and surgical care and did not receive them.
  
• A lower proportion of respondents who lived in a state with a gender identity nondiscrimination statute reported past-year suicide thoughts and attempts than those who lived in states without such a statute.
  

 the intrinsic discomfort and experiential pain of having your sex not match your gender. 

defend against your words with SUPERIOR MORALITY AND LOGIC.

"Some experts believe rising awareness of transgender issues has led increasing numbers of transgender teens to come out, or to experiment with gender identification.

“With growing trans visibility in the United States, some youth might find it safer to come out and talk about gender exploration,” Rider said.

But differences in estimates may also reflect differences in how gender identity questions are phrased, Rider said."

the basics are that gender identity is a neurological connection between how you perceives things and your experience (how data is input, and how you interpret that data as a human) -

 what defines or distinguishes gender is your experience, unless you have a specific way of measuring neurologic connections with regard to interpreting data, it is literally the only way you can distinguish, so you know how you do that? You just ask the individual, its the same thing as being straight or gay.

Gender-affirming care

free-utilities

 First, you touch upon the need to quantify well-being in making moral judgements. The very fact that this isn't actually possible to do accurately in the real world, since the consequences of a given action can rarely be accurately quantified, already makes this an impractical standard. The vast majority of moral judgements will be made on incomplete information. This limitation means that in order to discuss the philosophical assumptions of your theory, we have to account for the otherwise unknowable variables by means of thought experiments. These aren't always going to be probable or realistic in the literal sense, but they bring the core concepts into light. It's not every day that a trolley goes haywire on a track towards some people, yet that's a common thought experiment in moral philosophy.

  Secondly, the idea of well-being as the standard of moral good, means that all moral decisions are completely context-dependent. This makes all morality both relative to the situation, and determined by the arbitrary whims of the moral actor.

1a  If one ought to act morally, then one is obligated to act morally by definition. That means that if you define moral action as actions that bring about well-being, then any action that is in one's power to bring about well-being is morally obligatory. Therefore, your proposed third option is incoherent. You're literally saying, one is obligated to do what is good, but not obligated to do what is good, by misusing the language.

1b  Further, by virtue of your claim of the obligation imposed by the second premise, your first premise is rendered null. Being morally obligated to prevent negative well-being is equal to being morally obligated to cause positive well-being (not doing what is bad=doing what is good), if there is a forced choice between doing and not doing, like in the original example.

  Therefore, either your argument is incoherent, or it is exactly what I said.

  If one is morally obligated to bring about well-being, then it only follows that it should be the most well-being possible, whatever the context. 

  In the original example, you claimed that the doctor is morally prohibited from harvesting the organs from the one, for the sake of the well being of the five. But because you only have enough time to do one or the other, these are the only two options: to harvest the healthy organs, or don't harvest the healthy organs. Both options represent a moral choice. You claim that one is morally prohibited from harvesting the organs on the grounds that it would produce negative well being for the healthy man. But that choice will result, with certainty, in the suffering and deaths of the five dying people, who you, as their surgeon, are responsible for. This example clearly shows that well-being is not sufficient as a standard of morality.

  To avoid this problem, you claimed that numbers don't matter.

 So, Let me ask you a different question.

  Suppose a man has planted a nuclear bomb in a city of a million people. You know for certainty that he will tell you where it is in time to stop it only if you torture the information out of him. If you do not torture him, then a million people will certainly die.

Are you:

A) Morally obligated to torture the man

B) Morally permitted, but not obligated, to torture the man

C) Morally prohibited from torturing the man

…?

  At what point do numbers start to matter?

_____

this statement ignores basic ethics. That is, that an ought is a moral obligation that one has the ability to actually do:

"Ought implies can, in ethics, the principle according to which an agent has a moral obligation to perform a certain action only if it is possible for him or her to perform it. (https://www.britannica.com/topic/ought-implies-can)"

"As an auxiliary verb expressing duty or moral obligation (the main modern use, attested from late 12c.), it represents the past subjunctive.(https://www.etymonline.com/word/ought)"

Ethics can be seen as the foundation of wonder and analytic thought. First, existentialists accept wonder and deemphasize analysis, though phenomenologists tend to be more open to wonder and analytic thinking. Logical positivists and linguistic analysts see wonder as reducible to logic. Existentialists and phenomenologists are comfortable with ethics associated with wonder and analysis. Positivists and analysts deny ethics as an irreducible field of study. Ethicists would look at wonder to see if people need drugs in order to achieve states of euphoria or peace. Additionally, ethicists would take the same view about computers and analytic method.

A fetus cannot feel pain, they are ony reacting to stimuli.  A heel prick from a needle used for amniocentesis, for example, can result in the fetus recoiling, much as an adult would to a painful pinprick.

Studies have shown, however, that the recoil is more of a reflex controlled by the “lower brain” (which is involved with more base functions like breathing than with consciousness) or the spinal cord and does not necessarily reflect an experience of pain. In fact, the same response can be seen in anencephalic infants, who are born missing large parts of the brain. As the JAMA review explains: “[F]lexion withdrawal from tactile stimuli is a noncortical spinal reflex exhibited by infants with anencephaly and by individuals in a persistent vegetative state who lack cortical function.”

Put another way, the experience of pain is different from what is known as nociception. Nociception refers to the body’s ability to perceive harm — this can be achieved below the level of consciousness, as with reflexes. A paper published in 2001 in the journal Bioethics explains the difference: “[W]hile nociception is neural activity, pain is an unpleasant feeling. It follows that while pain requires some level of consciousness, nociception does not.”

Consider the following syllogism about how Italian explorer Christopher Columbus came into possession of America. 

p1. Columbus landed on American soil for the first time in 1942, which was already inhabited by indigenous people. 

p2. Columbus took possession of America, regardless of the inhabitants. 

c1. Thus the presence of inhabitants do not prohibit one from possessing land. 

Using this conclusion. 

p1. I travel to America right now. 

p2. The presence of inhabitants do not prohibit one from possessing land

c1. I possess America

p1. Columbus landed on American soil for the first time in 1942, which was already inhabited by indigenous people. 

p2. Columbus took possession of America, regardless of the inhabitants.