Quantcast
Locked: SaveJames - Liberal mom forcing her son to act like a girl?

Forums - Politics Discussion - SaveJames - Liberal mom forcing her son to act like a girl?

the-pi-guy said:

o_O.Q said:

"Even if that did make any logical sense"

trust me you aren't the only one having difficulty seeing logical consistency

"Being transgender is the opposite of cool.  It's an immense amount of stress, because a lot of people hate people for being transgendered."

and a lot of people see them as validation for their delusional ideas about equality so in some circles they are venerated

"Even still the latter doesn't follow from the former."

how does it not? if something(in this case gender) is constructed out of our social makeup then how does it not follow?

"Gender is a social construct, that doesn't mean a change in the perception of gender would cause people to change their own gender."

if gender is socially constructed then how could our collective perceptions on gender and obviously as a result our interactions also changing not have an impact?

are trying to argue that our perceptions do not impact significantly on the social makeup of a society?

"You still seem to think that people are choosing to be transgender.  No one is doing that."

how do you explain the people who detransition?

>how does it not? if something(in this case gender) is constructed out of our social makeup then how does it not follow?

Because gender and transitioning are different things.  

Just because gender is social, doesn't mean that transitioning could be trendy.

>how do you explain the people who detransition?

Because there's a difference between psychological and physical (which can include biological, legal) impressions of gender.  

Someone who was born a man can have gender dysphoria and still put on paperwork that they're male.

The point I was making, is no one is choosing to have gender dysphoria, and people without gender dysphoria are not transitioning.  

which ones?

Not relevant.  

"Just because gender is social, doesn't mean that transitioning could be trendy."

ok lets look at a hypothetical, let say transitioning was seen as trendy do you not concede that this could have a significant influence on gender since gender is socially constructed?

"Because there's a difference between psychological and physical (which can include biological, legal) impressions of gender. "

haven't you already done away with the idea that gender is physical? so I don't see why you'd focus on that distinction

I bring up detransitioning because clearly those people flipped flopped back and forth when it came to their gender, what is your explanation for that?

"The point I was making, is no one is choosing to have gender dysphoria"

gender dysphoria being what? thinking you should have the physical characteristics of the other sex?

"people without gender dysphoria are not transitioning."

I'm not understanding, if they had dysphoria shouldn't transitioning have fixed the issue? why then are some people detransitioning?



o_O.Q said:

"Just because gender is social, doesn't mean that transitioning could be trendy."

ok lets look at a hypothetical, let say transitioning was seen as trendy do you not concede that this could have a significant influence on gender since gender is socially constructed?

"Because there's a difference between psychological and physical (which can include biological, legal) impressions of gender. "

haven't you already done away with the idea that gender is physical? so I don't see why you'd focus on that distinction

I bring up detransitioning because clearly those people flipped flopped back and forth when it came to their gender, what is your explanation for that?

"The point I was making, is no one is choosing to have gender dysphoria"

gender dysphoria being what? thinking you should have the physical characteristics of the other sex?

"people without gender dysphoria are not transitioning."

I'm not understanding, if they had dysphoria shouldn't transitioning have fixed the issue? why then are some people detransitioning?

I'm not understanding, if they had dysphoria shouldn't transitioning have fixed the issue? why then are some people detransitioning?

No.  Transitioning doesn't work for everyone.  Some people find transitioning doesn't alleviate their dysphoria.  

Some people detransition, because it's doesn't help them and they're also having to deal with the stigma that people have towards people that have transitioned.  Those two facts together basically mean it's better to deal with the dysphoria without the criticism.  

>gender dysphoria being what? thinking you should have the physical characteristics of the other sex?

Gender dysphoria is a discomfort, feeling that your biological sex and identity don't match.

>haven't you already done away with the idea that gender is physical? so I don't see why you'd focus on that distinction

No.  Something being a social construct doesn't mean it's not physical.  And it doesn't mean aspects of it can't be physical.  

The value of money is a social construct.  A bunch of people basically agreed that money has some kind of value.  Yet I can still hold a dollar bill in my hand.  

There are a lot of different physical aspects that correspond to gender.

>ok lets look at a hypothetical, let say transitioning was seen as trendy do you not concede that this could have a significant influence on gender since gender is socially constructed?

A world where transitioning was seen as trendy isn't something that makes any sense to me.

It'd be a world where gender identity isn't something anyone cares about, so transitioning wouldn't really make sense. 



omarct said:
I believe nobody is born anything. There is no such thing as a woman born in a man's body. Adults become who they are mainly through their environment gowning up. If the mother is putting ideas on the child of being a female that together with other environmental factors may lead this child to believe so, just how if he is told he is male and should act like a male then he will do so. If he is not pushed either way by the parents(or pushed both ways) then the child will naturally take a stance depending on other environmental factors such as friends, tv shows, school environment, things he has seen or heard etc.....

Our genes broadly dictate how we look and feel,and those genes can make it so that a man feels like he is trapped in a womans body and vice versa.

We all have blueprints before being born and before developing as a fetus that dictate a lot of our lives afterwards,what you say in bolded is black and white and in my opinion nonexistent.



o_O.Q said:
SpokenTruth said:

These tend to be mutually exclusive.

you can't seriously be saying that you don't think groups of people ever conspire against other people in secret?

How in the world is that what you took from my post?



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

sundin13 said:
DarkD said:
I figured the story was made up, but I still don't agree with transitioning children. I haven't seen any evidence that transitioning people leads them to leading a happier life. I've looked up the studies and they say that they can't get a proper study off because the patients keep disappearing off the face of the earth. My assumption is suicide, but who knows.

And unlike with homosexuals, I don't believe they've proven anything genetic for this. This could simply be the kid's fascination with woman's clothing.

I personally think the father in this case is despicable if he was lying about the facts to try and push his cause. However, I also think an attempt to return the kid to normalcy should also be made since the alternative is a horrible life. And it's not because of bullies either. I'm open to evolving my point of view, but without evidence, I don't see why such drastic measures are required.

In regards to your first point about the benefits of transitioning, here ya go:

https://sdlab.fas.harvard.edu/files/sdlab/files/durwood_2017_jaacap.pdf

In regards to your second point about genetic factors, see my post above.

I've been thinking about this reply of yours and I know the study you have there has very little scientific merits.  It's too small of a sample size to say anything.  The rule for a scientific study is 

"As a general rule, any correlation that has a p-value of greater than 0.05 (p>0.05) should not be taken as evidence for anything."

https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/resources-2/what-is-a-good-study-guidelines-for-evaluating-scientific-studies/

The p value for your study is ten times what is required for your study to be declared anything but trash.  

And if I study your thing on twins I think I'll find the same thing.  In short, you haven't proven anything.  



o_O.Q said:
DarkD said:
I figured the story was made up, but I still don't agree with transitioning children. I haven't seen any evidence that transitioning people leads them to leading a happier life. I've looked up the studies and they say that they can't get a proper study off because the patients keep disappearing off the face of the earth. My assumption is suicide, but who knows.

And unlike with homosexuals, I don't believe they've proven anything genetic for this. This could simply be the kid's fascination with woman's clothing.

I personally think the father in this case is despicable if he was lying about the facts to try and push his cause. However, I also think an attempt to return the kid to normalcy should also be made since the alternative is a horrible life. And it's not because of bullies either. I'm open to evolving my point of view, but without evidence, I don't see why such drastic measures are required.

" I haven't seen any evidence that transitioning people leads them to leading a happier life."

I don't think that's the relevant issue here - religious people are statistically more likely to be happier than atheists, but despite that atheists think that what they consider to be delusion should not have an influence beyond those who willingly consent to be subjugated to it

The same thing could be said of letting children start dating at whatever age they want, but we don't because they're too young to understand anything with regards to sex.  Yes people should be free to do whatever they want as adults, but children is another story altogether. 



DarkD said:
sundin13 said:

In regards to your first point about the benefits of transitioning, here ya go:

https://sdlab.fas.harvard.edu/files/sdlab/files/durwood_2017_jaacap.pdf

In regards to your second point about genetic factors, see my post above.

I've been thinking about this reply of yours and I know the study you have there has very little scientific merits.  It's too small of a sample size to say anything.  The rule for a scientific study is 

"As a general rule, any correlation that has a p-value of greater than 0.05 (p>0.05) should not be taken as evidence for anything."

https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/resources-2/what-is-a-good-study-guidelines-for-evaluating-scientific-studies/

The p value for your study is ten times what is required for your study to be declared anything but trash.  

And if I study your thing on twins I think I'll find the same thing.  In short, you haven't proven anything.  

I'm not a social scientist so anyone with more experience in this field please correct me, but my understanding of the study in question is that the null hypothesis in this case was that socially youth and nontransgender youth have similar levels of anxiety. In this case a higher p value means that the two groups did not show significant differences in their depression which is the conclusion being made. 

A quote from the study that this one was following up on:

"In terms of depression, transgender children’s symptoms (M = 50.1) did not differ from the population average, P = .883. In contrast, transgender children had elevated rates of anxiety compared with the population average (M = 54.2), t(72) = 4.05, P < .001"

So the children did not have differing levels of depression, but had statistically significant differences in their levels of anxiety. Basically, this study having high p-values is the reason they conclude that socially accepted transgender youth do not have differing levels of depression from cisgender youth. To throw out the study because of high p-values is to misunderstand the study itself. 



...

Torillian said:
DarkD said:

I've been thinking about this reply of yours and I know the study you have there has very little scientific merits.  It's too small of a sample size to say anything.  The rule for a scientific study is 

"As a general rule, any correlation that has a p-value of greater than 0.05 (p>0.05) should not be taken as evidence for anything."

https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/resources-2/what-is-a-good-study-guidelines-for-evaluating-scientific-studies/

The p value for your study is ten times what is required for your study to be declared anything but trash.  

And if I study your thing on twins I think I'll find the same thing.  In short, you haven't proven anything.  

I'm not a social scientist so anyone with more experience in this field please correct me, but my understanding of the study in question is that the null hypothesis in this case was that socially youth and nontransgender youth have similar levels of anxiety. In this case a higher p value means that the two groups did not show significant differences in their depression which is the conclusion being made. 

A quote from the study that this one was following up on:

"In terms of depression, transgender children’s symptoms (M = 50.1) did not differ from the population average, P = .883. In contrast, transgender children had elevated rates of anxiety compared with the population average (M = 54.2), t(72) = 4.05, P < .001"

So the children did not have differing levels of depression, but had statistically significant differences in their levels of anxiety. Basically, this study having high p-values is the reason they conclude that socially accepted transgender youth do not have differing levels of depression from cisgender youth. To throw out the study because of high p-values is to misunderstand the study itself. 

The P-value means the margin for error in the conclusions drawn.  So a .05 means it's acceptable as scientific evidence.  Anything above that makes it unacceptable.  You can still draw conclusions from it, but it will not be taken as scientific evidence unless the p-value is lower than .05.  

The study has such a bad p-value because the sample size is so small.  Only like 50 patients.  Even a sample of 1000 patients would be iffy by these standards and may not pass the p-value test.  So yea, the study doesn't mean anything.  

In fact, the conclusions with the best p-value are the conclusions that favor the conservative point of view.  "Trans reported marginally higher anxiety compared to the control group p=0.076" and "trans reported marginally higher anxiety than the national average =0.096" and finally, the only scientifically relevant fact present "parents reported their children had more anxiety than children in the control groups =0.002"

So the only facts this study brought to the table are that trans children have anxiety problems.  
Last edited by DarkD - on 26 August 2019

DarkD said:
Torillian said:

I'm not a social scientist so anyone with more experience in this field please correct me, but my understanding of the study in question is that the null hypothesis in this case was that socially youth and nontransgender youth have similar levels of anxiety. In this case a higher p value means that the two groups did not show significant differences in their depression which is the conclusion being made. 

A quote from the study that this one was following up on:

"In terms of depression, transgender children’s symptoms (M = 50.1) did not differ from the population average, P = .883. In contrast, transgender children had elevated rates of anxiety compared with the population average (M = 54.2), t(72) = 4.05, P < .001"

So the children did not have differing levels of depression, but had statistically significant differences in their levels of anxiety. Basically, this study having high p-values is the reason they conclude that socially accepted transgender youth do not have differing levels of depression from cisgender youth. To throw out the study because of high p-values is to misunderstand the study itself. 

The P-value means the margin for error in the conclusions drawn.  So a .05 means it's acceptable as scientific evidence.  Anything above that makes it unacceptable.  You can still draw conclusions from it, but it will not be taken as scientific evidence unless the p-value is lower than .05.  

The study has such a bad p-value because the sample size is so small.  Only like 50 patients.  Even a sample of 1000 patients would be iffy by these standards and may not pass the p-value test.  So yea, the study doesn't mean anything.  

In fact, the conclusions with the best p-value are the conclusions that favor the conservative point of view.  "Trans reported marginally higher anxiety compared to the control group p=0.076" and "trans reported marginally higher anxiety than the national average =0.096" and finally, the only scientifically relevant fact present "parents reported their children had more anxiety than children in the control groups =0.002"

So the only facts this study brought to the table are that trans children have anxiety problems.  

Alright I'll try this once more. The P-value in these studies is an attempt to show a statistically significant difference between the groups investigated. Larger p-values mean there are not statistically significant differences for that value. There is no way that the statement "these two groups have similar depression levels" could be proven by a low p-value because a low p-value would show a difference between the two groups. The fact that the two groups had high p-values for the measured value of depression is the reason they conclude the two groups have the same level of depression. If the p-value had been low then they would conclude that the two groups are different. There is no way to conclude the two groups are the same with a low p-value, it's just not how the analysis works.

That is my reading on how the studies are designed, if you have more information on this than I I'd be interested in hearing it, but simply repeating the idea that only conclusions with low p-values are valid is meaningless. p-value is not "the error in the conclusions drawn", but a means of showing whether a null hypothesis has been disproven. If the null hypothesis is that the two groups are the same, and your p-value is high this means that the two groups are not different to a statistically significant degree. This is what the study stated. 

So, given my reading of the study, what are your credentials to be discrediting the analysis of experts in their field? Because I'm pretty sure these guys understand P-values much better than you or I. 

Here's some info to back up my interpretation:

https://www.biochemia-medica.com/assets/images/upload/xml_tif/Marusteri_M_-_Comparing_groups_for_statistical_differences.pdf

Last edited by Torillian - on 26 August 2019

...

the-pi-guy said:

o_O.Q said:

"Just because gender is social, doesn't mean that transitioning could be trendy."

ok lets look at a hypothetical, let say transitioning was seen as trendy do you not concede that this could have a significant influence on gender since gender is socially constructed?

"Because there's a difference between psychological and physical (which can include biological, legal) impressions of gender. "

haven't you already done away with the idea that gender is physical? so I don't see why you'd focus on that distinction

I bring up detransitioning because clearly those people flipped flopped back and forth when it came to their gender, what is your explanation for that?

"The point I was making, is no one is choosing to have gender dysphoria"

gender dysphoria being what? thinking you should have the physical characteristics of the other sex?

"people without gender dysphoria are not transitioning."

I'm not understanding, if they had dysphoria shouldn't transitioning have fixed the issue? why then are some people detransitioning?

I'm not understanding, if they had dysphoria shouldn't transitioning have fixed the issue? why then are some people detransitioning?

No.  Transitioning doesn't work for everyone.  Some people find transitioning doesn't alleviate their dysphoria.  

Some people detransition, because it's doesn't help them and they're also having to deal with the stigma that people have towards people that have transitioned.  Those two facts together basically mean it's better to deal with the dysphoria without the criticism.  

>gender dysphoria being what? thinking you should have the physical characteristics of the other sex?

Gender dysphoria is a discomfort, feeling that your biological sex and identity don't match.

>haven't you already done away with the idea that gender is physical? so I don't see why you'd focus on that distinction

No.  Something being a social construct doesn't mean it's not physical.  And it doesn't mean aspects of it can't be physical.  

The value of money is a social construct.  A bunch of people basically agreed that money has some kind of value.  Yet I can still hold a dollar bill in my hand.  

There are a lot of different physical aspects that correspond to gender.

>ok lets look at a hypothetical, let say transitioning was seen as trendy do you not concede that this could have a significant influence on gender since gender is socially constructed?

A world where transitioning was seen as trendy isn't something that makes any sense to me.

It'd be a world where gender identity isn't something anyone cares about, so transitioning wouldn't really make sense. 

"No.  Something being a social construct doesn't mean it's not physical.  And it doesn't mean aspects of it can't be physical.  

The value of money is a social construct."

money itself like our biological bodies is physical but the perception of money's value like our perception of who is female and who is male is intangible since it exists in our consciousness

when you people say that gender is a social construct you are appealing to the latter to invalidate the use of the former for differentiation and obviously it causes you to run into trouble constantly 

"There are a lot of different physical aspects that correspond to gender."

like what? clothing?

"It'd be a world where gender identity isn't something anyone cares about, so transitioning wouldn't really make sense. "

I don't get the idea that right now anybody other than like less than 1% of the population cares or knows about "gender identity"

as an understatement, the average person is not questioning their gender so i'd say we live in your imagined era where people generally don't care about gender identity right now

"Gender dysphoria is a discomfort, feeling that your biological sex and identity don't match."

you could've just said "yes"

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 26 August 2019