HS girls stage a walkout as trans teen uses girls bathroom (1 Viewer)

[T J]

How about this - I'll stop reminding you that there's a pretty statistically strong chance that you've at least made out with someone who's not biologically female because you can't tell the difference, and you... Well, I can't think of anything I want you to do. So I guess I'll keep reminding you.

There is zero chance of this. Your statistics must apply to those you hang out with.

Really? Do you do a chromosome check on all your dates?

Ever make out with a girl who looks like this one when you were a teenager?https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/378800000312718713/2838d794772ffc32ddae913302612cca.jpeg

Trust me. I know.

 

[Mister CIA]

I'm gonna back away from this conversation. I can't muster enough care to examine my unexamined parochial sensibility.

... unless it's framed in a "mission to Mars" context. I'm pretty sure that the first locker room on Mars will not distinguish based upon any criteria because there are better things to pursue.

 

[Mister CIA]

How about this - I'll stop reminding you that there's a pretty statistically strong chance that you've at least made out with someone who's not biologically female because you can't tell the difference, and you... Well, I can't think of anything I want you to do. So I guess I'll keep reminding you.

There is zero chance of this. Your statistics must apply to those you hang out with.

Really? Do you do a chromosome check on all your dates?

Ever make out with a girl who looks like this one when you were a teenager?https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/378800000312718713/2838d794772ffc32ddae913302612cca.jpeg

Trust me. I know.

Whore!

 

[T J]

Hey Henry, I mentioned to my 9th/10th grade high school gym teacher wife this thread and she said no way in hell would a male transgender, or whatever you choose to refer to him as (it's not a she so don't go there). She said he'd have to use the nurse's clinic or guy's locker room. But definitely NOT the girls room.

 

[Mister CIA]

I said several weeks ago that with gay marriage now codified transgender rights would be the next great campaign for progressives and their allies in academia and the media. The agitations never end, even in the face of logic and natural law. Even the military is getting in on the act. How do you think such accommodations are going to work within the confines of a Navy vessel or a forward deployed fire support base?

This isn't a lifestyle, it's a mental disorder. Cross-dressers on the front line. Madness. Then again, our enemies will be laughing so hard they won't be able to fight so maybe it will all work out.

Yes, the agitation never ends....interracial marriage....women's suffrage....desegregation....is there not some tiny quarter where bigotry can be left alone to thrive and prosper? I don't have the stamina to wade through 18 pages, but I imagine the comments mostly echo the above one, if the "yes" vote is at under 20%. Not the FFA's finest moment, and I think a lot of people will eventually look back at their vote and their posts in this thread with shame.

I'll probably change my mind on this, but there will be no shame. But keep on shaming on. I'm sure you're doing someone a favor.

 

[Eminence]

I said several weeks ago that with gay marriage now codified transgender rights would be the next great campaign for progressives and their allies in academia and the media. The agitations never end, even in the face of logic and natural law. Even the military is getting in on the act. How do you think such accommodations are going to work within the confines of a Navy vessel or a forward deployed fire support base?

This isn't a lifestyle, it's a mental disorder. Cross-dressers on the front line. Madness. Then again, our enemies will be laughing so hard they won't be able to fight so maybe it will all work out.

Yes, the agitation never ends....interracial marriage....women's suffrage....desegregation....is there not some tiny quarter where bigotry can be left alone to thrive and prosper? I don't have the stamina to wade through 18 pages, but I imagine the comments mostly echo the above one, if the "yes" vote is at under 20%. Not the FFA's finest moment, and I think a lot of people will eventually look back at their vote and their posts in this thread with shame.

I'll probably change my mind on this, but there will be no shame. But keep on shaming on. I'm sure you're doing someone a favor.

I'd like to think most sane men draw the line at cutting their own wangs off and sterilizing themselves as "normal". There are a lot of crazy mental disorders out there such as people who think their limbs don't belong to them and want to cut them off. I don't think it's anybody's intention to discriminate or make people feel bad for having these disorders.

But forcing these people into the lives of the normal and sane and then telling them their bigots for not accepting their mental disorders as "normal" is heinous. Can a man or woman live a relatively normal life after taking a bunch of hormones of the opposite gender? Sure, why not. Can a man or woman live a relatively normal life after cutting off an arm that they feel doesn't belong to them? Sure, why not.

But at this point were not judging somebody by their gender or race and telling them they are unfit to live amongst the normal. At this point we are telling people who have a mental disease such as a severe personality disorder, mental ######ation, or schizophrenia that we'd prefer NOT to inconvenience the rest of society by simply cutting them out.

Just like it's not fair to bog down the learning process of the rest of the normal schoolkids with little Jimmy who has autism, it's not fair to bog down young girls with little Jimmy who has gender dysphoria. Maybe with the right medication Jimmy could be alright but as of right now, it's a distraction for all the other boys and girls. Is it fair? No. It's also not fair when anybody is born with any type of mental defect. But it's most fair to the functioning members of society to keep them separated.

 

[Henry Ford]

Hey Henry, I mentioned to my 9th/10th grade high school gym teacher wife this thread and she said no way in hell would a male transgender, or whatever you choose to refer to him as (it's not a she so don't go there). She said he'd have to use the nurse's clinic or guy's locker room. But definitely NOT the girls room.

Well, that settles it. Can't go much higher up the ladder than a freshman gym teacher.

 

[ghostguy123]

The funny thing is, a transgender feels embarrassed because they have to go to the bathroom with "the opposite sex"...........................think about that for a minute as it relates to everyone else being subjected to members of the opposite sex using their bathroom.

The "gender roles" of the transgender are pretty irrelevant to the girls in the bathroom who have a dude with a weiner in there, regardless of what he thinks he is or was meant to be, or lives his life as, or which roles he takes on.

To beat a dead horse, bathroom use is based on gender, not sex.

Just because you repeat something doesn't make it any more true. We segregate facilities based upon genitalia. Now, sure people with a ###### could use a stall in a men's bathroom, but the trough isn't going to be quite so useful.

Oh, if the hardest math needed is statistics, then no it isn't a science.

Gotcha. Medicine isn't science. Thanks.

People get fired for insubordination right?

Well, "science" might actually classify certain behaviors such as intermittent explosive disorder, conduct disorder, and several other types of disorders that have symptoms consistent with that would be classified as insubordination.

Do these people have a valid lawsuit because "science" has actually classified them a certain way?

If the business has failed to make reasonable accommodations for a disability, yes. However, allowing employees to be clearly insubordinate or demonstrate an "explosive" personality within that meaning isn't reasonable, and I don't think any of those have been classified as disabling, but don't really know for sure. Regardless, we aren't talking about ADA stuff, here, we're talking about gender discrimination.

And back around the circle we go.

You think it is discrimination that the penises go in the boys room and the Vajs go in the girls room.

I don't. The vast majority don't. In fact, a large majority of the transgender kids I talk to don't think it is discrimination. In general they don't like it, but they sure as hell do not think it is discrimination. The kid I talked to YESTERDAY (transgender female) says "she" isn't concerned whatsoever with what bathroom "she" has to use, and fully expressed "her" understanding that "her" presence in the girls room makes most of the actual girls uncomfortable. The kinds who don't grasp this concept are on the delusional side of things and tend to have several DSM-V diagnoses going on along with the whole transgender thing.

As other have said, enjoy catering to the very few and making things crappy for everyone else, especially considering most of the transgender kinds don't even view this as any sort of big deal. But you are welcome to think they do. I will go with what the 100, maybe 200 of them have told me to my face in conversation, along with simple common sense regarding the whole situation.

 

[ghostguy123]

And all the "separation" talk has to stop. They are not being separated from anyone. They are being asked to use the bathroom meant for their current sex organs. Simple.

 

[ghostguy123]

And for anyone who says "I don't care who is in the bathroom with me, so I don't see why this is a big deal".........................if anything that is an argument for the side of penises in the boys room and Vajs in the ladies room.

If you don't care, then why should the transgenders care who is in the bathroom with them? Meaning it wouldn't matter if they have to use the correct bathroom, amirite?

 

[boots11234]

Give this issue 10 years and be ready to accept co-ed rooms with no deference to Genitalia no matter the age. Obama said he would fundamentaly change the country and he wasn't joking.

 

[ghostguy123]

I am still completely shocked doctors are providing hormone therapy for children with mental disorders. Not even talking about JUST the transgender issue, but the transgenders who have major depression, bipolar, OCD, and many other issues.

It's so ####ed up. Not enough talk about this in this thread.

 

[dparker713]

Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008)

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

Who exactly can determine someone's gender identity other than the person in question? As you've already stated, transition neither needs to be completed or even attempted. I fail to see any way to objectively determine the gender of an individual given your criteria. If that's the case, its an entirely worthless term for the purposes of the law.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I am still completely shocked doctors are providing hormone therapy for children with mental disorders. Not even talking about JUST the transgender issue, but the transgenders who have major depression, bipolar, OCD, and many other issues.

It's so ####ed up. Not enough talk about this in this thread.

This is a tough issue for me. I definitely think parents and doctors are way too quick to medicate kids these days, but when it is truly a legit issue and medication can solve it, why would we not support that?

Can you even imagine thinking you were a girl but being in a boy's body? Especially as a teen? Can you imagine how embarassing an unwanted erection would be?

 

[Henry Ford]

I am still completely shocked doctors are providing hormone therapy for children with mental disorders. Not even talking about JUST the transgender issue, but the transgenders who have major depression, bipolar, OCD, and many other issues.

It's so ####ed up. Not enough talk about this in this thread.

Maybe let the doctors provide medical diagnoses and treatment protocols.

 

[Henry Ford]

Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008)

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

Who exactly can determine someone's gender identity other than the person in question? As you've already stated, transition neither needs to be completed or even attempted. I fail to see any way to objectively determine the gender of an individual given your criteria. If that's the case, its an entirely worthless term for the purposes of the law.

Why? If someone determines he's a Christian, we have to respect his sincerely held religious beliefs. How do you objectively measure his religious beliefs?

 

[tommyboy]

Again, what would be so wrong with classifying bathroom use on sex rather than on gender? This person could biologically still use a urinal, correct?

I haven't looked under her skirt, but I'd imagine so. 17 years old is too young to have the surgery. But again, if you're going to define bathroom usage - or locker room usage - by sex and not gender, you're going to have to come up with a definition of sex that includes only the people you want in and excludes only the people you want out. And you have to find a way to determine what to do with people who don't fit either definition, and come up with a compelling reason that they get to use one bathroom or the other and other people don't.

You keep saying this as if it's some sort of fatal flaw in the "let's go by sex" standard. As others have pointed out, 999 times out of 1000 there is no issue whatsoever with this standard -- males use the men's locker room and females use the women's locker room, and everybody is happy. The problem cases that you've raised -- hermaphrodites, males who lost their genitalia in an accident, etc. -- are very rare, When those situations come up, it's usually difficult for reasonable people of good will to come up with solutions that everybody can live with. "Forcing females to share a locker room with males" is generally not within the realm of what people would consider a reasonable work-around.

Except there is. You guys seem to be under the impression that intersex people are some magical unicorn that only happens once in a thousand years. Something like 1.5% of people have adrenal hyperplasia alone, whether classic congenital or late-onset congenital.

1% of the world population is schizophrenic, maybe we should change all the norms of society to accomodate them.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008)

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

Who exactly can determine someone's gender identity other than the person in question? As you've already stated, transition neither needs to be completed or even attempted. I fail to see any way to objectively determine the gender of an individual given your criteria. If that's the case, its an entirely worthless term for the purposes of the law.

Why? If someone determines he's a Christian, we have to respect his sincerely held religious beliefs. How do you objectively measure his religious beliefs?

We don't have to respect someone's beliefs.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Again, what would be so wrong with classifying bathroom use on sex rather than on gender? This person could biologically still use a urinal, correct?

I haven't looked under her skirt, but I'd imagine so. 17 years old is too young to have the surgery. But again, if you're going to define bathroom usage - or locker room usage - by sex and not gender, you're going to have to come up with a definition of sex that includes only the people you want in and excludes only the people you want out. And you have to find a way to determine what to do with people who don't fit either definition, and come up with a compelling reason that they get to use one bathroom or the other and other people don't.

You keep saying this as if it's some sort of fatal flaw in the "let's go by sex" standard. As others have pointed out, 999 times out of 1000 there is no issue whatsoever with this standard -- males use the men's locker room and females use the women's locker room, and everybody is happy. The problem cases that you've raised -- hermaphrodites, males who lost their genitalia in an accident, etc. -- are very rare, When those situations come up, it's usually difficult for reasonable people of good will to come up with solutions that everybody can live with. "Forcing females to share a locker room with males" is generally not within the realm of what people would consider a reasonable work-around.

Except there is. You guys seem to be under the impression that intersex people are some magical unicorn that only happens once in a thousand years. Something like 1.5% of people have adrenal hyperplasia alone, whether classic congenital or late-onset congenital.

1% of the world population is schizophrenic, maybe we should change all the norms of society to accomodate them.

WTF? How can all of these statistics be true? 1 in 66 kids have adrenal hyperplasia, 1 in 68 are autistic, 1% are schizophrenic, 11% have adhd, 18% are obese, 1 in 13 cant have a peanut without dying and countless others.

So do some kids just rack up all of the stats? Are there a ton of autistic, obese, peanut fearing schizophrenics out there? I hear all of these stats all the time and it is basically a 162% chance your kid is going to have serious issues. Obviously not the case unless I just happen to live in an area with great water or the numbers seem very inflated or some kids just have all the afflictions.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Good grief you're dense. Nobody is violating anyone's civil rights. It's a male that wants to use the female locker room. Period. Whose civil rights are being violated? I would love to argue against you in a court of law. LOVE to.

Please feel free. I look forward to it.Meantime, from a recent Department of Justice brief on the subject:

The term"sex" as it is used in Title IX is broad and encompasses gender identity, including transgender status. "There is no doubt that 'if we are to give Title IX the scope that its origins dictate, we must accord it a sweep as broad as its language.'" North Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell,456 U.S. 512, 521 (1982) (brackets omitted). In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the Supreme Court flatly rejected the notion that "sex" encompasses only one's biological status as male or female, concluding, instead, that sex discrimination also encompasses differential treatment based on one's failure to conform to socially-constructed gender expectations. 490 U.S. 228,250 (1989) (plurality opinion). Thus, "under Price Waterhouse, 'sex' under Title VII encompasses both sex - that is, the biological differences between men and women - and because an individual's gender identity is one aspect of an individual's sex. See, e.g., Smith v. City ofSalem, 378 F.3d 566,575 (6th Cir. 2004); Schroer v. Billington, 424 F. Supp. 2d 203,211 (D.D.C 2006) ("scientific observation may well confirm ... that sex is not a cut-and-dried matter of chromosomes") (internal citations omitted). Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008).9 Furthermore, Title IX prohibits sex discrimination based on the perception that an individual has undergone, or is undergoing a gender transition. In Schroer, the court offered the following analogy to help explain how discrimination against an individual because he or she has undertaken, or is undertaking, a gender transition is sex discrimination: Imagine that an employee is fired because she converts from Christianity to Judaism. Imagine too that her employer testifies that he harbors no bias toward either Christians or Jews but only "converts." That would be a clear case of discrimination "because of religion." No court would take seriously the notion that "converts" are not covered by the statute. Discrimination "because of religion" easily encompasses discrimination because of a change of religion. 577 F. Supp. 2d at 306. Denying Title IX's protections to a student because he has changed or is changing his sex would be "blind ... to the statutory language itself." Id. at 307; see also Lusardi v. McHugh, Appeal No. 0120133395,2015 WL 1607756, at *7-8 (EEOC Apr. 1,2015) (concluding that federal agency violated Title VII where the complainant's "transgender status was the motivation" for the agency to bar her from using the common women's restrooms); Macy, 2012 WL 1435995, at *11 (concluding that "intentional discrimination against a transgender individual because that person is transgender is, by definition, discrimination 'based on ... sex,' and such discrimination therefore violates Title VII").

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

I'm sure it has been asked, so please pardon me for asking again, but are your suggesting that teenage boys are allowed to self-arbitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room? ... or is there some sort of registration process, or a field guide for high school administrators?

"Self-abitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room" is a little different than determining a gender identification and living as that gender. I agree with the latter.

So a burly, manly boy with long hair in a pony tail who wears a kilt everyday to school whose hobbies include cooking, writing poetry (He's the lyricist for his band which plays sappy power ballads) and decorating, and who has a subscription to Oprah's magazine, can he get in? Let's say his name is Steven Kelly Cowan, but that 13 months ago he announced that he preferred to be called by his middle name. Some of his mates have ribbed him that folks will think he is a girl if he keeps up along the lines he's going. Kelly says that's fine with him, he refuses to deny those aspects of his personality. Kelly doesn't think that other's narrow-minded, categorical, and dichotomous thinking should limit how Kelly experiences the world.

Kelly plays football in the fall, but when the season ends he joins the cheerleading squad. They love to have him as he is powerful enough to do several spectacular lifts. He is the only outwardly male cheerleader in his district.

Last Halloween Kelly dressed as Frank N Furter.

Kelly is strongly attracted to women, as is his sister Danielle who goes by Danny and has never worn a skirt or a dress in the memory of any of her friends.

Their mom was a successful lingerie model from Holland and their dad an Aussie Rugby player of Scottish decent who was raised during his developmental years in Sweden. The family has quite a laissez faire attitude when it comes to nudity in the home.

Kelly has a fascination with gender roles in society, and is planning his senior project on that subject. Oh, he is believed to be the father of the child currently in the uterus of the head cheerleader at his High School, though that is rumor only at this point.

What gender is Kelly living as? For how long?

 

[boots11234]

Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008)

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

Who exactly can determine someone's gender identity other than the person in question? As you've already stated, transition neither needs to be completed or even attempted. I fail to see any way to objectively determine the gender of an individual given your criteria. If that's the case, its an entirely worthless term for the purposes of the law.

Why? If someone determines he's a Christian, we have to respect his sincerely held religious beliefs. How do you objectively measure his religious beliefs?

We don't have to respect someone's beliefs.

If they're Muslim we sure do. You must not have gotten the memo. Christians o hell no. Piss Christ

 

[matttyl]

Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008)

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

Who exactly can determine someone's gender identity other than the person in question? As you've already stated, transition neither needs to be completed or even attempted. I fail to see any way to objectively determine the gender of an individual given your criteria. If that's the case, its an entirely worthless term for the purposes of the law.

Why? If someone determines he's a Christian, we have to respect his sincerely held religious beliefs. How do you objectively measure his religious beliefs?

By the length of his schlong? Religion is a choice, as apparently gender is. Sex isn't, unless medical science intervenes.

 

[ghostguy123]

I am still completely shocked doctors are providing hormone therapy for children with mental disorders. Not even talking about JUST the transgender issue, but the transgenders who have major depression, bipolar, OCD, and many other issues.

It's so ####ed up. Not enough talk about this in this thread.

Maybe let the doctors provide medical diagnoses and treatment protocols.

Diagnose what? What is the diagnosis for these kids? What are they treating?

These kids are a few years removed from believing there are going to be astronauts, superheroes, and sports heroes.

There is a reason there are age limits for things such as driving, drinking, smoking, serving in the military, marriage, and many other things. So how young is too young? If your 3 year old boy likes dolls and thinks he is a girl should we just start hormone therapy and cut his weeny off right then and there?

Just wait till the first lawsuit hits where some kids with legit psychiatric issues was given hormone therapy from ages 13-18, then comes to realize he really doesn't want to be a girl any more around age 18. Well, the damage is done at that point.

Now, I am not saying the fear of lawsuits is even the major reason for me being against this. I am against it because these are kids that can barely make up their minds about anything, and who's thoughts and dreams change on a daily basis. Yet we are pumping them with hormones because the kids want to?

Now, since you mentioned to let the doctors diagnose and treat, are you now saying that this is a psychiatric illness?? And if so, do we just cater to all psychiatric illnesses at the expense of everyone else? Well, yes you are saying that, and have been saying that all along. You are so focused on one person that you fail to see the bigger picture.

We put kids with MR, autism, and other social/cognitive issues in special separate classes. Where is the uproar for that?

 

[Henry Ford]

Good grief you're dense. Nobody is violating anyone's civil rights. It's a male that wants to use the female locker room. Period. Whose civil rights are being violated? I would love to argue against you in a court of law. LOVE to.

Please feel free. I look forward to it.Meantime, from a recent Department of Justice brief on the subject:

The term"sex" as it is used in Title IX is broad and encompasses gender identity, including transgender status. "There is no doubt that 'if we are to give Title IX the scope that its origins dictate, we must accord it a sweep as broad as its language.'" North Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell,456 U.S. 512, 521 (1982) (brackets omitted). In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the Supreme Court flatly rejected the notion that "sex" encompasses only one's biological status as male or female, concluding, instead, that sex discrimination also encompasses differential treatment based on one's failure to conform to socially-constructed gender expectations. 490 U.S. 228,250 (1989) (plurality opinion). Thus, "under Price Waterhouse, 'sex' under Title VII encompasses both sex - that is, the biological differences between men and women - and because an individual's gender identity is one aspect of an individual's sex. See, e.g., Smith v. City ofSalem, 378 F.3d 566,575 (6th Cir. 2004); Schroer v. Billington, 424 F. Supp. 2d 203,211 (D.D.C 2006) ("scientific observation may well confirm ... that sex is not a cut-and-dried matter of chromosomes") (internal citations omitted). Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008).9 Furthermore, Title IX prohibits sex discrimination based on the perception that an individual has undergone, or is undergoing a gender transition. In Schroer, the court offered the following analogy to help explain how discrimination against an individual because he or she has undertaken, or is undertaking, a gender transition is sex discrimination: Imagine that an employee is fired because she converts from Christianity to Judaism. Imagine too that her employer testifies that he harbors no bias toward either Christians or Jews but only "converts." That would be a clear case of discrimination "because of religion." No court would take seriously the notion that "converts" are not covered by the statute. Discrimination "because of religion" easily encompasses discrimination because of a change of religion. 577 F. Supp. 2d at 306. Denying Title IX's protections to a student because he has changed or is changing his sex would be "blind ... to the statutory language itself." Id. at 307; see also Lusardi v. McHugh, Appeal No. 0120133395,2015 WL 1607756, at *7-8 (EEOC Apr. 1,2015) (concluding that federal agency violated Title VII where the complainant's "transgender status was the motivation" for the agency to bar her from using the common women's restrooms); Macy, 2012 WL 1435995, at *11 (concluding that "intentional discrimination against a transgender individual because that person is transgender is, by definition, discrimination 'based on ... sex,' and such discrimination therefore violates Title VII").

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

I'm sure it has been asked, so please pardon me for asking again, but are your suggesting that teenage boys are allowed to self-arbitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room? ... or is there some sort of registration process, or a field guide for high school administrators?

"Self-abitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room" is a little different than determining a gender identification and living as that gender. I agree with the latter.

So a burly, manly boy with long hair in a pony tail who wears a kilt everyday to school whose hobbies include cooking, writing poetry (He's the lyricist for his band which plays sappy power ballads) and decorating, and who has a subscription to Oprah's magazine, can he get in? Let's say his name is Steven Kelly Cowan, but that 13 months ago he announced that he preferred to be called by his middle name. Some of his mates have ribbed him that folks will think he is a girl if he keeps up along the lines he's going. Kelly says that's fine with him, he refuses to deny those aspects of his personality.Kelly plays football in the fall, but when the season ends he joins the cheerleading squad. They love to have him as he is powerful enough to do several spectacular lifts. He is the only outwardly male cheerleader in his district.

Last Halloween Kelly dressed as Frank N Furter.

Kelly is strongly attracted to women, as is his sister Danielle who goes by Danny and has never worn a skirt or a dress in the memory of any of her friends.

Their mom was a successful lingerie model from Holland and their dad an Aussie Rugby player of Scottish decent who was raised during his developmental years in Sweden. The family has quite a laissez faire attitude when it comes to nudity in the home.

Kelly has a fascination with gender roles in society, and is planning his senior project on that subject. Oh, he is believed to be the father of the child currently in the uterus of the head cheerleader at his High School, though that is rumor only at this point.

What gender is Kelly living as? For how long?

Should probably ask Kelly.

 

[Henry Ford]

I am still completely shocked doctors are providing hormone therapy for children with mental disorders. Not even talking about JUST the transgender issue, but the transgenders who have major depression, bipolar, OCD, and many other issues.

It's so ####ed up. Not enough talk about this in this thread.

Maybe let the doctors provide medical diagnoses and treatment protocols.

Diagnose what? What is the diagnosis for these kids? What are they treating?

These kids are a few years removed from believing there are going to be astronauts, superheroes, and sports heroes.

There is a reason there are age limits for things such as driving, drinking, smoking, serving in the military, marriage, and many other things. So how young is too young? If your 3 year old boy likes dolls and thinks he is a girl should we just start hormone therapy and cut his weeny off right then and there?

Just wait till the first lawsuit hits where some kids with legit psychiatric issues was given hormone therapy from ages 13-18, then comes to realize he really doesn't want to be a girl any more around age 18. Well, the damage is done at that point.

Now, I am not saying the fear of lawsuits is even the major reason for me being against this. I am against it because these are kids that can barely make up their minds about anything, and who's thoughts and dreams change on a daily basis. Yet we are pumping them with hormones because the kids want to?

Now, since you mentioned to let the doctors diagnose and treat, are you now saying that this is a psychiatric illness?? And if so, do we just cater to all psychiatric illnesses at the expense of everyone else? Well, yes you are saying that, and have been saying that all along. You are so focused on one person that you fail to see the bigger picture.

We put kids with MR, autism, and other social/cognitive issues in special separate classes. Where is the uproar for that?

We put kids with ID/IDD (where the #### do you still call it MR?), autism, and other social/cognitive issues in special separate classes in a public school as an accommodation, requiring individual educational plans among other things. It's not to "save" the rest of society.We don't "cater" to people who have any illness or disorder, we accommodate them.

And really? You're a nurse who has worked with hundreds of transgender kids and you can't think of a diagnosis for a kid who feels dysphoria related to gender? Or what the potential treatments are? Definitely should leave it to the doctors.

 

[Henry Ford]

And just to clarify - no, I don't personally think everyone who transitions from male to female has a psychiatric illness.

But psychiatrists have a name for a condition where someone "feels" that one's gender identity differs from one's biological sex. One of the sets of treatment for that is to make one's body match one's feelings. That's for doctors to determine. And if doctors are treating someone with medical procedures, I personally think it should be for some kind of medical reason - and when kids as young as you're referring to get medical treatment like this it had better be for a medical reason or I agree they shouldn't do it at all, ever. I fully agree that truly elective surgery or hormone treatments should be reserved for adults.

 

[ghostguy123]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

 

[Henry Ford]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

 

[ghostguy123]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

 

[Henry Ford]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues. Are you arguing that these kids do or do not have a mental health issue? Because if they do not, they're irrelevant to your point. And if they do, they're bolstering mine.

 

[ghostguy123]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

So what is the diagnosis and medical reason a 14 year old gets hormone therapy in these cases?

 

[ghostguy123]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues.

In some cases sure.

In some cases they learn just fine but are simply too disruptive in class. Not even necessarily for "bad" behaviors. Just behaviors that distract the class, and are removed for it. That is the ONLY reason.

You dont deal with this stuff much I take it. Well clearly you do not.

 

[ghostguy123]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues. Are you arguing that these kids do or do not have a mental health issue? Because if they do not, they're irrelevant to your point. And if they do, they're bolstering mine.

If you say so.

 

[Henry Ford]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

So what is the diagnosis and medical reason a 14 year old gets hormone therapy in these cases?

Gender dysphoria disorder is a psychiatric condition, treatment for which can include hormone therapy and/or full transitional surgery. You don't deal with this stuff much, I take it. Well, clearly you do not.

 

[Henry Ford]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues.

In some cases sure.

In some cases they learn just fine but are simply too disruptive in class. Not even necessarily for "bad" behaviors. Just behaviors that distract the class, and are removed for it. That is the ONLY reason.

You dont deal with this stuff much I take it. Well clearly you do not.

And what does that have to do with the discussion of why people with mental disorders are put in special classes with IEPs?

 

[ghostguy123]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues.

In some cases sure.In some cases they learn just fine but are simply too disruptive in class. Not even necessarily for "bad" behaviors. Just behaviors that distract the class, and are removed for it. That is the ONLY reason.

You dont deal with this stuff much I take it. Well clearly you do not.

And what does that have to do with the discussion of why people with mental disorders are put in special classes with IEPs?

Some of them do not need to be put in special classes because they learn just fine in regular classes. They are removed because they hinder the other kids.

If you do not see any relevance to the topic at hand then you are blind.

And for some of the kids i am speaking about, the special classes actually hinder their learning since the classes are not as good as the regular classes.

 

[ghostguy123]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

So what is the diagnosis and medical reason a 14 year old gets hormone therapy in these cases?

Gender dysphoria disorder is a psychiatric condition, treatment for which can include hormone therapy and/or full transitional surgery. You don't deal with this stuff much, I take it. Well, clearly you do not.

Psychiatric condition. Correct.

A psych condition with very little research regarding outcomes for this stuff. Cant wait to see what this will look like 10 years from now with mass suicides from these kids who regret the decisions they made to have hormone therapy at age 13.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Good grief you're dense. Nobody is violating anyone's civil rights. It's a male that wants to use the female locker room. Period. Whose civil rights are being violated? I would love to argue against you in a court of law. LOVE to.

Please feel free. I look forward to it.Meantime, from a recent Department of Justice brief on the subject:

The term"sex" as it is used in Title IX is broad and encompasses gender identity, including transgender status. "There is no doubt that 'if we are to give Title IX the scope that its origins dictate, we must accord it a sweep as broad as its language.'" North Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell,456 U.S. 512, 521 (1982) (brackets omitted). In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the Supreme Court flatly rejected the notion that "sex" encompasses only one's biological status as male or female, concluding, instead, that sex discrimination also encompasses differential treatment based on one's failure to conform to socially-constructed gender expectations. 490 U.S. 228,250 (1989) (plurality opinion). Thus, "under Price Waterhouse, 'sex' under Title VII encompasses both sex - that is, the biological differences between men and women - and because an individual's gender identity is one aspect of an individual's sex. See, e.g., Smith v. City ofSalem, 378 F.3d 566,575 (6th Cir. 2004); Schroer v. Billington, 424 F. Supp. 2d 203,211 (D.D.C 2006) ("scientific observation may well confirm ... that sex is not a cut-and-dried matter of chromosomes") (internal citations omitted). Consequently, discrimination on the basis of gender identity is "literally" discrimination on the basisof sex. Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293,306-07 (D.D.C. 2008).9 Furthermore, Title IX prohibits sex discrimination based on the perception that an individual has undergone, or is undergoing a gender transition. In Schroer, the court offered the following analogy to help explain how discrimination against an individual because he or she has undertaken, or is undertaking, a gender transition is sex discrimination: Imagine that an employee is fired because she converts from Christianity to Judaism. Imagine too that her employer testifies that he harbors no bias toward either Christians or Jews but only "converts." That would be a clear case of discrimination "because of religion." No court would take seriously the notion that "converts" are not covered by the statute. Discrimination "because of religion" easily encompasses discrimination because of a change of religion. 577 F. Supp. 2d at 306. Denying Title IX's protections to a student because he has changed or is changing his sex would be "blind ... to the statutory language itself." Id. at 307; see also Lusardi v. McHugh, Appeal No. 0120133395,2015 WL 1607756, at *7-8 (EEOC Apr. 1,2015) (concluding that federal agency violated Title VII where the complainant's "transgender status was the motivation" for the agency to bar her from using the common women's restrooms); Macy, 2012 WL 1435995, at *11 (concluding that "intentional discrimination against a transgender individual because that person is transgender is, by definition, discrimination 'based on ... sex,' and such discrimination therefore violates Title VII").

So, the gender of an individual is an entirely subjective determination?

I'm sure it has been asked, so please pardon me for asking again, but are your suggesting that teenage boys are allowed to self-arbitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room? ... or is there some sort of registration process, or a field guide for high school administrators?

"Self-abitrate whether or not they are allowed to go into the female locker room" is a little different than determining a gender identification and living as that gender. I agree with the latter.

So a burly, manly boy with long hair in a pony tail who wears a kilt everyday to school whose hobbies include cooking, writing poetry (He's the lyricist for his band which plays sappy power ballads) and decorating, and who has a subscription to Oprah's magazine, can he get in? Let's say his name is Steven Kelly Cowan, but that 13 months ago he announced that he preferred to be called by his middle name. Some of his mates have ribbed him that folks will think he is a girl if he keeps up along the lines he's going. Kelly says that's fine with him, he refuses to deny those aspects of his personality.Kelly plays football in the fall, but when the season ends he joins the cheerleading squad. They love to have him as he is powerful enough to do several spectacular lifts. He is the only outwardly male cheerleader in his district.

Last Halloween Kelly dressed as Frank N Furter.

Kelly is strongly attracted to women, as is his sister Danielle who goes by Danny and has never worn a skirt or a dress in the memory of any of her friends.

Their mom was a successful lingerie model from Holland and their dad an Aussie Rugby player of Scottish decent who was raised during his developmental years in Sweden. The family has quite a laissez faire attitude when it comes to nudity in the home.

Kelly has a fascination with gender roles in society, and is planning his senior project on that subject. Oh, he is believed to be the father of the child currently in the uterus of the head cheerleader at his High School, though that is rumor only at this point.

What gender is Kelly living as? For how long?

Should probably ask Kelly.

Kelly states privacy is extremely important to him, or her. He does not believe he should be forced to make public declarations as to his or her gender. He or she is clear that he or she would prefer to use the women's facilities and that this would be a psychological comfort. Kelly also mentions that further inquiry would be pressing for health care and diagnostic information that in Kelly's opinion should not have to be turned over to receive the accommodation of changing and showering in the girls locker room.

 

[Henry Ford]

And yes, MANY kids have IEPs for strictly behavioral purposes and are removed from the regular classes due to how disruptive they are. That is the ONLY reason they are removed in some cases.

... as an accommodation because otherwise they'd be removed from the school completely for behavioral issues.

In some cases sure.In some cases they learn just fine but are simply too disruptive in class. Not even necessarily for "bad" behaviors. Just behaviors that distract the class, and are removed for it. That is the ONLY reason.

You dont deal with this stuff much I take it. Well clearly you do not.

And what does that have to do with the discussion of why people with mental disorders are put in special classes with IEPs?

Some of them do not need to be put in special classes because they learn just fine in regular classes. They are removed because they hinder the other kids.

If you do not see any relevance to the topic at hand then you are blind.

And for some of the kids i am speaking about, the special classes actually hinder their learning since the classes are not as good as the regular classes.

Help me out. My understanding is that we are talking about reasonable accommodations for a learning/social disability (ID/IDD, autism, etc) which is significantly different from a behavioral disorder requiring separation. I agree that some children are placed in LD programs as a result of behavioral disorders, but that's as opposed to expelling the kid. Reasonable accommodation, in my opinion. And roughly everyone else's.

 

[ghostguy123]

One kid i dealt with was 16. A boy who believed he was a girl and wanted a sex change.

Problem was, the kid would not talk to anyone. Not the nurses or doctors. Nobody. Never did. The hormone therapy was given anyway at the word of the kids mother. This kid had several other psych issues, like many others do, yet they went along with it anyway.

Was a really jacked up form of munchausens that the doctors fed into

 

[Henry Ford]

Kelly states privacy is extremely important to him, or her. He does not believe he should be forced to make public declarations as to his or her gender. He or she is clear that he or she would prefer to use the women's facilities and that this would be a psychological comfort. Kelly also mentions that further inquiry would be pressing for health care and diagnostic information that in Kelly's opinion should not have to be turned over to receive the accommodation of changing and showering in the girls locker room.

Fascinating case study. However, Kelly is incorrect. In order to assert his or her rights under the law, Kelly will have to be willing to - at the least - provide a reasonable basis for the facility's determination that Kelly is entitled to use those facilities, which would probably have to at the least take the form of a declaration of determination of a non-birth-sex gender. None of the other behaviors Kelly has engaged in overtly assert a gender identity. At the very least, from a practical standpoint, Kelly will have to make a declaration in Court before ever being able to overturn any ban on Kelly using the facilities.

 

[ghostguy123]

I dont know who this kelly person is but if in high school with a weeny, mens room. If not, ladies room

 

[Henry Ford]

One kid i dealt with was 16. A boy who believed he was a girl and wanted a sex change.

Problem was, the kid would not talk to anyone. Not the nurses or doctors. Nobody. Never did. The hormone therapy was given anyway at the word of the kids mother. This kid had several other psych issues, like many others do, yet they went along with it anyway.

Was a really jacked up form of munchausens that the doctors fed into

That's a messed up situation. Assuming all of this is the whole story, in a few years, if the kid has issues with what was done, that's the kind of medical malpractice case I'd take. Here's a question - if the kid never talked to doctors or nurses, how do you know the kid wanted the sex change and identified as a girl?

 

[dparker713]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

So what is the diagnosis and medical reason a 14 year old gets hormone therapy in these cases?

Gender dysphoria disorder is a psychiatric condition, treatment for which can include hormone therapy and/or full transitional surgery. You don't deal with this stuff much, I take it. Well, clearly you do not.

How many other delusions is the treatment for said delusion to make it reality?

 

[Henry Ford]

So you agree that kids shouldnt get hormone therapy yet you just told me to leave it to the doctors. Which is it?

No, I agree that unless there's a medical reason kids shouldn't get hormone therapy. Which is why we should leave it to the doctors to diagnose and treat.

So what is the diagnosis and medical reason a 14 year old gets hormone therapy in these cases?

Gender dysphoria disorder is a psychiatric condition, treatment for which can include hormone therapy and/or full transitional surgery. You don't deal with this stuff much, I take it. Well, clearly you do not.

How many other delusions is the treatment for said delusion to make it reality?

Good point. It's almost like the treatment is a result of not identifying the gender dysphoria as a "delusion."

 

[ghostguy123]

One kid i dealt with was 16. A boy who believed he was a girl and wanted a sex change.

Problem was, the kid would not talk to anyone. Not the nurses or doctors. Nobody. Never did. The hormone therapy was given anyway at the word of the kids mother. This kid had several other psych issues, like many others do, yet they went along with it anyway.

Was a really jacked up form of munchausens that the doctors fed into

That's a messed up situation. Assuming all of this is the whole story, in a few years, if the kid has issues with what was done, that's the kind of medical malpractice case I'd take. Here's a question - if the kid never talked to doctors or nurses, how do you know the kid wanted the sex change and identified as a girl?

We didnt know. Thats why it was so messed up. Like i said, they went on the word of the mother.

And frankly, in adolescenty psychiatry, MUCH of the diagnosis is based on what the parents say, if not all of it.

Adolescent psychiatry is easily the most inexact science of any known science.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Hopefully recognizing the civil rights of individuals will make us stronger as a society. I fear, sometimes, that we can go too far, that we glorify the individual to the point where perhaps they feel so sovereign that they have no connection or obligation to perhaps the only society on earth that would grant them their civil rights. I wonder whether we are strengthening the metal of society by testing it, tempering it, or whether we are stressing the fabric leading to inevitable failure.

I am getting along in years. Perhaps that makes me more reticent to accept change. Perhaps my personality will not allow me to see this trend as progress. Then again, perhaps I will.

 

[Henry Ford]

One kid i dealt with was 16. A boy who believed he was a girl and wanted a sex change.

Problem was, the kid would not talk to anyone. Not the nurses or doctors. Nobody. Never did. The hormone therapy was given anyway at the word of the kids mother. This kid had several other psych issues, like many others do, yet they went along with it anyway.

Was a really jacked up form of munchausens that the doctors fed into

That's a messed up situation. Assuming all of this is the whole story, in a few years, if the kid has issues with what was done, that's the kind of medical malpractice case I'd take. Here's a question - if the kid never talked to doctors or nurses, how do you know the kid wanted the sex change and identified as a girl?

We didnt know. Thats why it was so messed up. Like i said, they went on the word of the mother.

And frankly, in adolescenty psychiatry, MUCH of the diagnosis is based on what the parents say, if not all of it.

Adolescent psychiatry is easily the most inexact science of any known science.

Then whoever ordered the treatment should arguably be divested of his/her license.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Kelly states privacy is extremely important to him, or her. He does not believe he should be forced to make public declarations as to his or her gender. He or she is clear that he or she would prefer to use the women's facilities and that this would be a psychological comfort. Kelly also mentions that further inquiry would be pressing for health care and diagnostic information that in Kelly's opinion should not have to be turned over to receive the accommodation of changing and showering in the girls locker room.

Fascinating case study. However, Kelly is incorrect. In order to assert his or her rights under the law, Kelly will have to be willing to - at the least - provide a reasonable basis for the facility's determination that Kelly is entitled to use those facilities, which would probably have to at the least take the form of a declaration of determination of a non-birth-sex gender. None of the other behaviors Kelly has engaged in overtly assert a gender identity. At the very least, from a practical standpoint, Kelly will have to make a declaration in Court before ever being able to overturn any ban on Kelly using the facilities.

More or less as I had gathered from your many postings. Sometimes explicit hypotheticals can help in conceptualizing matters, so I thought I would have constructing one. The exercise was done for others as much or more than for me.

 

[Henry Ford]

Hopefully recognizing the civil rights of individuals will make us stronger as a society. I fear, sometimes, that we can go too far, that we glorify the individual to the point where perhaps they feel so sovereign that they have no connection or obligation to perhaps the only society on earth that would grant them their civil rights. I wonder whether we are strengthening the metal of society by testing it, tempering it, or whether we are stressing the fabric leading to inevitable failure.

I am getting along in years. Perhaps that makes me more reticent to accept change. Perhaps my personality will not allow me to see this trend as progress. Then again, perhaps I will.

I think you're doing fine, but what do I know?

Personally, I think society in general is steel, not silk. That the shifting and changing nature of the social contract requires that it be steel, and that it as we hammer it into new shapes, allow it to cool, and test it we will find it as strong as ever, if not moreso. Or that the curtains can be replaced, the rod remains.