Grooming Behavior
- Thread starter TMFT
- Start date
No, I’m not. I live in the real world. Not some hypothetical world. I live in the world where I trust parents. Remember that? And their doctors and their counselors. You are a hypocrite. You want to trust parents to run the schools and tell everyone what they must learn, but not to make decisions for their own child, along with their counselors and their medical doctors. Who gives you that right?
Suicide facts and myths
The threat that children may commit suicide if parents do not support their social and medical transition is not born out by the facts.www.transgendertrend.com
You are being emotionally manipulated into a stupid position.
Haha. Another hypocritical position. I’ll remind you next time you are whining about BIG GOVERNMENT.
Oh suddenly you care what Euros are doing? You don’t agree with it, so it’s garbage. Got it,
Go read the links zeke. It is not like I pulled it out of my ass. I am referencing the Euros because they already went down this path and are ahead of you other "progressives" in figuring out that the studies you guys like to point to that "support" stunting the growth of children and removing healthy body parts are pure, unadulterated horse shit.
Never mind that the reason more and more of them aren’t “making it to 18” is that for the first time in history we have adults, doctors, educators, people in positions of authority in these children’s lives who are affirming this nonsense.
Instead of doing the hard work to find out what the true issue is that is troubling the child, they’re more than happy to send the kid off on a path of living a life long contradiction.
I’d be suicidal too. Not only have my real problems not been addressed but I now have to live with the false promise that I can change myself into something I will never be and no one else will ever see me as.
Now for the rest of your dumbassery.
There is no other instance where we would let a parent remove healthy body parts and/or stunt the natural growth of a perfectly healthy child. None. If your child said, "I feel like I should be a kid forever" and you did this, people would rightly label you insane.
The world isn't black and white. I don't argue about big government. I argue about stupid government. Stupidly large government that does more harm than good. Things of that nature. I think that San Francisco with its sanctioned thievery requires more restrictive government. "Oh no, Crazy is a hypocrite because he wants more government."
You are rocking dumb arguments and emotion right now because you have a shitty losing position. Instead of going into a mental corner and thinking back through your (wrong) opinion you chose to lash out with simpleton arguments.
You can have the last word and reinforce my point that you have nothing on this topic outside of bumper sticker arguments.
The real world is in the links Zeke. Your position is stupid so you have to resort to misrepresenting and flat out mental gymnastics to try and support it. If a parent is beating their child, what gives you the right to take the child from them? You HAVE to try and play the absolutes game with my position because your position is beyond stupid, it is contemptible. I trust parents to teach their children up until the point where what they are doing is egregiously harmful. And before we go there, something like rejection of evolution isn't that.
There is no other instance where we would let a parent remove healthy body parts and/or stunt the natural growth of a perfectly healthy child. None. If your child said, "I feel like I should be a kid forever" and you did this, people would rightly label you insane.
The world isn't black and white. I don't argue about big government. I argue about stupid government. Stupidly large government that does more harm than good. Things of that nature. I think that San Francisco with its sanctioned thievery requires more restrictive government. "Oh no, Crazy is a hypocrite because he wants more government."
You are rocking dumb arguments and emotion right now because you have a shitty losing position. Instead of going into a mental corner and thinking back through your (wrong) opinion you chose to lash out with simpleton arguments.
You can have the last word and reinforce my point that you have nothing on this topic outside of bumper sticker arguments.
Going to issue that challenge again. Only one person even attempted an explanation. What reason would there possibly be to strike the line if not in preparation for making MAPS a covered sexual orientation?
I assert the slippery slope and am told I am an out of touch, stupid, white guy. So please, explain to me the error of my ways. Currently there is verbiage in the law that says MAPS are not a legitimate sexual orientation. Someone is moving to strike that. Why?
After a brain scan hope your neuroradiologist doesn't call you Sally.
From one of the legislators:
"The bill updates outdated language that incorrectly ties pedophilia to a person's sexual orientation. Nothing in the bill changes or weakens any of the crimes against children, or the state's ability to prosecute those who break the law," Minnesota House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn (DFL-Roseville) told TND in a statement. "Of course pedophilia is not a sexual orientation - which is why the language never should have been included in the statutory definition in the first place."
An interesting perspective, Crazy. You seem as emotional as anybody on this thread. And the whole protecting MAPS thing was pretty dumb. Brad is doing yeomen's work on this thread trying to engender thoughtful discussion among differing opinions and you pretty much said f-off to that. If all you want to do is rant and insult, why don't you just go out onto your front porch and howl at the moon?
I asked about this at old farts coffee this morning. My neuroradiologist friend says you look at the connections between the two hemispheres. He believes this has an accuracy of 80%. He also said any scientific discussion of this topic is verboten.
I learned on OANN tonight, apparently Uncle Mark didn't eat enough green vegetables when it was growing up. It could have turned its whole existence.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I'm not sure I understand what she was trying to say? It sounded like she was saying that her suicidal daughter was also emotionally manipulating her and her family (very common in such situations), and she was not going to give into it, that she had to be strong for her daughter (50 second mark).
Is that she said she wouldn't let her daughter's manipulation tear her or the family apart that you have a problem with? In some treatment programs for mental disorders, the treatment providers actually separate out the illness from the person and have the patient and the loved ones discuss it as such. So it wouldn't be uncommon for someone to say to the mentally ill person "This is the bipolar/anorexia/etc. talking. I'm not going to give into it. It will not win. I'm doing this for you." That might be what she's referring to when she says she wouldn't do anything to save her--that she wouldn't give in to the manipulation (because some will use that threat to try to get what the disease wants).
Or are you taking issue with the fact she is implying a trans kid can be "saved" if the parents are just strong enough? Or that she's comparing her daughter's suicidal issues with trans kids?
Here's the person trying to explain her comments:
At a press conference Monday, Seekins-Crowe claimed that social media took her comments out of context and that she has faced death threats.
“I would not let [Crowe] do things that were destructive to her behavior because she needed help,” the Billings representative said. “I did everything for my daughter. It was a struggle, but we made it together.”
We don't know the behavior at issue--it could have been cutting, not eating, etc.
Daughter of Montana lawmaker addresses her mom’s comments about anti-trans youth bill
State Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe previously suggested that she would've rather risked her daughter's suicide than helped her transition.
I'm not sure I understand what she was trying to say? It sounded like she was saying that her suicidal daughter was also emotionally manipulating her and her family (very common in such situations), and she was not going to give into it, that she had to be strong for her daughter (50 second mark).
Is that she said she wouldn't let her daughter's manipulation tear her or the family apart that you have a problem with? In some treatment programs for mental disorders, the treatment providers actually separate out the illness from the person and have the patient and the loved ones discuss it as such. So it wouldn't be uncommon for someone to say to the mentally ill person "This is the bipolar/anorexia/etc. talking. I'm not going to give into it. It will not win. I'm doing this for you." That might be what she's referring to when she says she wouldn't do anything to save her--that she wouldn't give in to the manipulation (because some will use that threat to try to get what the disease wants).
Or are you taking issue with the fact she is implying a trans kid can be "saved" if the parents are just strong enough? Or that she's comparing her daughter's suicidal issues with trans kids?
Here's the person trying to explain her comments:
At a press conference Monday, Seekins-Crowe claimed that social media took her comments out of context and that she has faced death threats.
“I would not let [Crowe] do things that were destructive to her behavior because she needed help,” the Billings representative said. “I did everything for my daughter. It was a struggle, but we made it together.”
We don't know the behavior at issue--it could have been cutting, not eating, etc.
Daughter of Montana lawmaker addresses her mom’s comments about anti-trans youth bill
State Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe previously suggested that she would've rather risked her daughter's suicide than helped her transition.www.reckon.news
I honestly don't know why she brought the story up considering her daughter isn't trans, although it sounds like she is gay by the story you linked (she talked about having a partner), although i think it's rather dangerous to compare one situation to the next considering no two situations are the same.
I don't want to speculate on why she was suicidal in the first place.
If you think the defense that TMFT posted is actually a good defense, that is on you. The law makers that tried to squeak that one through even had to walk it back.
You don't like my posts, skip on by. I am giving this stupidity the gravitas it deserves.
IDK, when I found that quote by the legislator echoing pretty much what I said, I felt pretty comfortable with my assumption of a defense.
I hadn't even given thought to what he added about how the pedophilia language in a sexual orientation bill was troubling because it creates a false equivalency with orientation/trans issues with child molestation. Thought that was interesting.
I wouldn't expect to convince you of anything, your mind is pretty squarely made up. Not sure why you asked the question in the first place when any answer anyone gives is automatically going to be dismissed by you. But so it goes.
Don't sweat it, T. Crazy is determined to be furiously outraged, so he's going to froth and rant and find boogeymen around every corner because respectfully disagreeing about an issue and discussing it thoughtfully is beyond him at this point.
Wow.
The false equivalency is saying trans issues are similar to gay issues.They are nowhere near the same.
I don’t think there is any doubt that pedophilia is an orientation as that term is defined—-as being attracted to a type of person and wish to have a relationship with such person.
I know people go to great lengths to deny that pedophelia is an orientation but that denial just doesn’t hold up to a pedophile who cannot overcome the attraction to kids.
I understand that sexual child abuse can be opportunistic and not the product of an orientation ,(same for same sex acts) but that doesn’t change anything. Pedophiles cannot be “cured” any more than a homosexual can be cured.
I'm as liberal as they come. Kids should not be getting sex change drugs or operations. Kids need to be kids. Given time to develop physically and emotionally. Parents needs to be supportive of kids being... Kids. Not a gender.
I'm glad the conservatives on this board believe therapy is needed. I agree! I can't wait for them all to vote for universal healthcare to cover said mental health care. Thanks guys and gal.
I'm glad the conservatives on this board believe therapy is needed. I agree! I can't wait for them all to vote for universal healthcare to cover said mental health care. Thanks guys and gal.
You think kids are paying attention to the words when freaks are reading books to them? Sick ass
No, I have no bumper sticker arguments. I have friends and teachers who actually deal with real actual trans people. Not some hypothetical boogeyman like the GOP likes to make them. And they work very hard, along with their parents, counselors, and medical doctors to make the best decisions to help save the lives of those kids. The government shouldn’t be telling parents what to do to help their children.
At what age do you think they should be able to take hormone therapy? 18? I agree about surgery but not so sure about hormones.
Oh boy Zeke has a “friend” now. She must really be on the ropes in this one.
Someone failed to teach you what it really means to be kind as you keep proclaiming. Or you’re just being disingenuous…😉
This stance is horseshit and illogical. If you believe not fully affirming increases the chances of suicide then you need to fully affirm. That includes surgery. You don’t get to split the baby on this one coward. Pick a position.
If you are talking kids, I don’t believe you. There is no way to know if a kid is “actual trans”.
Well it has to be at least 18 legally. You'd hope the parents and child would be close enough to have honest conversations about maturity. I know That's not always the case.
I keep my hair short and either cut it myself or my wife cuts it every 2 or 3 weeks. I shave regularly and keep the nose and ears trimmed.
It pretty easy for a guy to cut his own hair with electric clippers and a #1 or #2 guard. Saves some money and get cuts more often. I recommend.
It pretty easy for a guy to cut his own hair with electric clippers and a #1 or #2 guard. Saves some money and get cuts more often. I recommend.
I wish it were that simple. Kids don’t have decision-making skills. Moreover, they are way too susceptible to the power of suggestion, especially from trusted adults and peers.
There are good reasons why child abuse by an adult “in a position of trust” is an aggravating factor.
Last edited:
If you're talking about sex changes I'd say physical abuse. Left alone to progress without intervention Most trans are really just gay.
“The government shouldn’t be telling parents what to do to help their children”
Should the government be paying to help these parents children?
We have a conundrum
When we look back at history and some of the issues that have developed in the last 30 years, there will no doubt be some significant attention given to the massive impact that female emergence into the workforce created. To your point, I would think most of us are supportive of women being able to participate in the economy, politics, etc., but the enormous transition from staying at home and caring for kids has impacted the following in a significant, and likely negative, way:
- Employment - with most having dual incomes, the amount of jobs took a while (decades) to catch up with the demographics that allowed for such a low unemployment rate. Now, we have few additional women left to add to the workforce, which means, any lack of supply can only be made up for via immigration
- Demographics - part of the baby boomer curve was created because baby boomers decided to start having dual incomes and willingly had less children (for a variety of reasons). Women now are far more ambitious than ever, which again, is not a bad thing. But, as a result, our birth rates have never been lower and are likely to continue falling significantly over the next couple of decades
- Working Class - no need to rehash the males that have been left behind (or at least feel that way)
- Education Costs - women are seeking and to your point, outperforming in education. That has created a signficant strain and imbalance on supply and demand generally in education, but most particularly in the higher levels (post-secondary). No question government subisidization of student loans is a major contributor too, but we've basically more than doubled the amount of college seekers, even ignoring the increasing trend/push to receiving post-secondary education
- Mental health decline
- % of population identifying as LGTBQ
Sorries I found the winner, winner, chicken dinner. I really, really wanna see this come to fruition. Since Charlize dresses her boy in a dress she needs a makeover and Megyn would kick her silly. I used to like Charlize. No respect anymore man she is sick in the brain. Hollywood is the devils residence.
Similar threads
